Outline of Chapter 12:

         vv.     1–7           Men who Came to David at Ziklag

         vv.     8–15         Men who Came to David when in the Stronghold in the Wilderness

         vv.    16–18         Men who Came to David when in the Stronghold of Engedi

         vv.    19–21         Men who Came to David when Returning to Ziklag

         vv.    22–38         Supporters from all over Israel Come to David in Hebron

         vv.    39–40         David’s Inaugural Party in Hebron

Charts, Short Doctrines and Maps:

         Introduction         Integrating 1Chronicles 12 with the Book of Samuel

         Introduction         1Chronicles 12 Summarized by Keil and Delitzsch

         Introduction         1Chronicles 10–12 Presented Topically

         v.       1              Wasn’t David out of Fellowship in Ziklag?

         v.       2              The Sentence Structure of 1Chronicles 1:1–3

         v.       3              The Joash’s of Scripture

         v.       3              The Jehu’s of Scripture

         v.       4              The Jeremiah’s of Scripture

         v.       4              The Jahaziel’s of Scripture

         v.       4              The Johanan’s of Scripture

         v.       4              The Jozabad’s of Scripture

         v.       5              The Meanings of the Names of David’s Men in 1Chron. 12:5

         v.       6              The Meanings of the Names of David’s Men in 1Chron. 12:6

         v.       6              The Elkanah’s of Scripture

         v.       6              The Jesiah’s of Scripture

         v.       6              The Azareel’s of Scripture

         v.       7              The Zebadiah’s of Scripture

         v.       8              The Strongholds of David

         v.       8              A Summary of the Doctrine of ׳Ârak^e

         v.       9              The Obadiah’s of Scripture

         v.       9              The Eliab’s of Scripture

         vv.    10–11         The Attai’s of Scripture

         vv.    10–11         The Eliel’s of Scripture

         vv.    13–14         The Gadites and the Meanings of their Names

         v.      20              The Men from Manasseh

         v.      20              The Jediael’s of Scripture

         v.      20              The Michael’s of Scripture

         v.      20              The Elihu’s of Scripture

         v.      20              The Options of the Men from Manasseh

         v.      22              Why 1Chronicles 12:22 Should be Associated with vv. 23–40

         v.      27              The Jehoiada’s of Scripture

         v.      27              The Joiada’s of Scripture

         v.      28              The Zadok’s of Scripture

         v.      28              Were Levites Military Types?

         v.      29              Why the Tribe of Benjamin had the Fewest Men Show up to Support David

         v.      32              Commentators on the Tribe of Issachar, Who Knew what Israel Should Do

         v.      37              Barnes’ Observations Concerning Those Who Came to David in Hebron

         v.      37              The Time Line of 2Samuel 1–5 and 1Chronicles 12:23–37

         v.      37              A Summary of 1Chronicles 12

         v.      37              Theories on How Many Men Actually Showed up to Support David

I ntroduction: It is difficult to determine how one should teach the Bible and in what order should one go. It is most typical for a good pastor to simply choose a book and teach it from beginning to end. In this way, you get the full impact of the book itself. However, what I think I will do is make an attempt to teach much of the Old Testament in chronological order. Therefore, as we go through the books of Samuel and Kings, we will stop now and again to examine a psalm, or to venture into the book of 1Chronicles.

The first third of 1Chron. 12 tells us who came to David while he was in Ziklag, which is Philistine-controlled territory, and David lived there with the blessing of Philistine king, Achish, King of Gath. We have spent a great deal of time in 1Sam. 27 examining David and determining that he was both out of God’s geographical will and, much of the time, out of fellowship. In fact, at no point in 1Sam. 27:1–30:5 could we point to David and say, “He’s back in fellowship here.” Still, men came to David while he was encamped in Ziklag, and that is what the first half of this chapter is all about.

The second half of this chapter has these men going into Hebron with David, to be inaugurated king over Judah.

Now I have seen this chapter organized in virtually the same way by almost every exegete (some disagree on the placement of v. 22); but very few try to explain the arrangement. Selman tries to explain this as a building momentum, but given that David's mighty men are all named at the end of 1Chron. 11, that he had almost universal support in 1Chron. 11:1–3; that it seems somewhat odd to then say, “Oh, by the way, here are the ones who supported David over the years” naming some, but not others. Then the order of presentation seems odd as well; first Ziklag (1Sam. 27), then David when on the run from Saul (1Sam. 23), and then back to Ziklag (1Sam. 29). To me, the order seems sort of random (which does not mean that there is a problem; there is nothing wrong with the order being random, as we do have a human author). Those named in this chapter seem to be random as well. Now, the latter half of this chapter names all 12 tribes and those who came from these tribes to support David; but in the first half, we have a few men from this tribe, and then a few men from that tribe named, and only 5 tribes are named as well. The only conclusion that I can come to is, these are key men in David’s army. A lot of those who came to David are simply malcontents. However, here we have specific men who came to David who were great leaders and men of great integrity.

One of the other minor problems which I will discuss further as we go along is, it appears as though some, if not all, of these men in the first half of this chapter were not simply malcontents, but high-ranking officers from Saul’s army. This means, at some point in time, for some reason, they had to leave Saul’s army. This also means that, sometime after this, they had to hook up with David. How can men of great integrity and military ability just walk away from Saul’s army and maintain this integrity? Also to be discussed...

Although it is clear that portions of Chronicles are taken directly from the book of Samuel (e.g., 1Chron. 10:1–12a), it is also clear that there is a great deal of information culled from other sources (our chapter, for instance). Whereas, we can match much of this chapter with portions of the narrative of the book of Samuel, the source material for 1Chron. 12 was clearly not from Samuel.

Ideally speaking, you have just completed my exegesis of 1Sam. 23, 27, 29 or of 2Sam. 1, and you have come to this book and chapter next as per my suggestion at the end of those chapters. However, if you did not, then let me give you a brief summary of what has happened to date. First of all, I should clear the air about the book of Chronicles: this is a book composed around the 5^th century b.c., long after many of these events took place. God apparently motivated someone to gather the existing genealogical records and historical accounts which existed at that time, and to record the divine viewpoint of the history of Israel. Since we are looking back so far, and since the thinking of most Israelite authors is not chronological, there is no reason to think that the order of these chapters is chronological. As you have seen so far in this book, Chronicles is clearly not chronological. However, generally speaking, it is. That is, what happens ten chapters later is generally a later event. However, two adjacent chapters may not be in chronological order. The first half of this chapter precedes and is coterminous with 1Chron. 10, while the second half of this chapter follows 1Chron. 10 (but precedes 1Chron. 11). However, the first and second halves of this chapter are related topically, which is a typical way for Jewish authors to organize their material.

Why is there a chapter like this? Why is there a chapter which is, essentially, a list of names, of men who have come to David, which the barest of narrative information? There are a couple of reasons: (1) this honors these men who risked their lives to join up with David and then risked their lives again and again to fight for Israel’s freedom and security. However, just as importantly, (2) the Bible presents these military men as heroes. One of the biggest myths in modern history is that Jesus was this long-haired, hippie peacenik-protester wandering around doing good things for everyone and standing in clear opposition to the military, the establishment, big oil, the government and all things big. In Scripture, those in the military are presented as heroes—brave and selfless men who fight to protect their homeland. This does not mean that these men lack old sin natures—however, nowhere does the Bible present the notion that military men are evil and pro-war, and that those who avoid military service and protest the war are good and peace-loving. In fact, do you recall the verse which reads And your sin will find you out? Do you know what sin is being referred to in context? Pacifism and desertion—those are the sins referred to in that passage. You may or may not agree with what we find in Scripture, and that is your right. However, don’t ever try to use Scripture or the words of Jesus to justify an anti-war stance in all situations.

Men who Came to David at Ziklag

1Samuel 27:6–12

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient Texts:

Masoretic Text                       And these the ones going in unto David to Ziklag, still restraining from faces of Saul ben Kish. And the these in the mighty men helpers of the war:...

Septuagint                              And these are they that came to Sikelag, when he yet kept himself close because of Saul the son of Kis; and these were among the mighty, aiding him in war.

Significant differences:           There is a difficult verb in the Hebrew, which sounds as though David was forcefully restrained from seeing Saul; however, he chose be become an ex-patriot. The Greek seems to have trouble with that same verb. Apart from that verb, the Greek translation is essentially equivalent to the Hebrew.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Some time earlier, David had gone to live in the town of Ziklag to escape from King Saul. While David was there, several brave warriors joined him to help fight his battles.

The Message                         These are the men who joined David in Ziklag; it was during the time he was banished by Saul the son of Kish; they were among the Mighty Men, good fighters.

NJB                                        These are the men who rallied to David at Ziklag while he was still being kept away from Saul son of Kish; they were among the champions, the warriors.

NLT                                        The following men joined David at Ziklag while he was hiding from Saul son of Kish. They were among the warriors who fought beside David in battle.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         These are the men who came to David at Ziklag when he was banished by Saul, son of Kish. They were among the soldiers who went into battle with David.

HCSB                                     The following were the men who came to David at Ziklag while he was still banned from the presence of Saul son of Kish. They were among the warriors who helped him in battle.

JPS (Tanakh)                         The following joined David at Ziklag while he was still in hiding from Saul son of Kish; these were the warriors who gave support in battle;...

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       Now these are the men who came to David at Ziklag, while he could not move about freely because of Saul the son of Kish. And they were among the mighty men who helped him in war.

LTHB                                     And these were those coming to David to Ziklag, while banned from the face of Saul the son of Kish. And they were among the mighty ones, helping the battle;...

Young's Updated LT              And these are those coming in unto David to Ziklag, while shut up because of Saul son of Kish, and they are among the mighty ones, helping the battle,...

What is the gist of this verse? What is going to be given in this chapter is a list of those who came to David. The first partial list will be of some who came to David while he was exiled in Ziklag.

Translation: And these [are] the ones who went to David [while he was] in [lit., to, for] Ziklag,... As you will recall, David chose to leave Israel because Saul continued to pursue him. He went to the king of Gath, who let David stay in an area called Ziklag, which is pretty far south of Gath, a border city between Judah and Philistine territory. Apparently, David’s location was known to many. One might draw an analogy here to the gospel of Jesus Christ: most people could figure out how to know more about God; that is, they know where they could go if they had an interest. However, it is apparent that many just do not have the interest. Almost any person could have found David; however, the key was, whether or not they had any interest in knowing him.

Although God originally granted the city of Ziklag to Israel, it is apparent that it was under the control of the Philistines during the time of David and it is very likely that the control of this city was rather fluid. As I have pointed out in previous studies, ancient peoples did not tend to own large contiguous tracts of land; they tended to own cities and the land around the city; and often, a city might be controlled by 2 or more major powers (or they might have established some sort of an equilibrium). Given this, it is not difficult to imagine various groups of people going in and out of Ziklag without causing any sort of an incident. That is, 30 Israelites could ride into town, settle in with David, and not cause Philistia to declare war on Israel. Besides, Achish had given David permission to set up shop in Ziklag.

I want you to notice that, throughout 1Samuel, David nowhere goes out and solicits men to join with him; he does not send out letters of requests to various elders suggesting that they support him or send men to him. David did not get involved in any sort of self-promotion, nor did he make any attempts to take men who should be serving under Saul. God brought these men to David; God inspired these men to come to David. Throughout this chapter, we are going to have a list of men who have come to David, as well as huge numbers from each tribe which will come to David when he begins to rule in Hebron. However, nowhere do we read that David calls upon these men to join him—God moves them to show their support for David.

It is interesting what a writer says and does not say. The writer of Chronicles mentions these various places where David stayed or traveled through (e.g., Ziklag in vv. 1, 19–20) or the wilderness strongholds, which would be in the region along the Dead Sea (vv. 8, 16); however, the circumstances which explain David’s reason for being there are left out. There are a handful of things which I recall about studying the history of California, as I was raised there; it is possible that those who would read Chronicles were familiar, to some degree, with these details of David’s pre-king years. The writer of Samuel, on the other hand, gives us a great many historical details, without so many statistics, like a person writing news-history. He writes so close to the time of the event, so as to record a great many details and dialogue, to inform. The writer of Chronicles seems to be almost obsessed with statistics, yet rarely gives us many human historical details. Therefore, in the book of Chronicles, we would expect the places where David stayed to be mentioned, but not necessarily the circumstances or the events which go along with him staying there.

Translation: ...still confined [or, being restrained] from the presence of Saul ben Kish. I think that there must be a better translation for this verb, but I am not sure what it would be. Most translations sound too much like David is in Ziklag due to the order of Saul. However, David is in Ziklag by his own choice. He has willingly become an ex-patriot. Of course, this was encouraged by Saul’s actions, but not as a matter of Saul’s decree. If one was to understand this verb to mean constrained of one’s own volition, that would give a better sense of the matter. David himself chose to go to Ziklag; God did not guide him there and Saul did not make it impossible for him to live in Israel (1Sam. 27:1).

Translation: Now these [are] the mighty men, who helped David in the war [lit., helpers of the war]:... David was often at war, defending Israel from her enemies. Because of this, he had a very helpful, honorable and dedicated military staff.

I need to mention this final phrase helpers of the war; the men who came to David are said to be helpers of the war. David is not at war with Saul; however, he is attacking a variety of tribes from his southerly position. David had been attacking the Geshurites, the Girzites and the Amalekites (we’ve discussed these groups in more detail in 1Sam. 27:8). It is his war against these groups of people that this phrase alludes to. David is aware that God wanted the heathen groups removed from the land of Israel, but David, being out of fellowship, is using that as a rationalization for what he is doing. Primarily, he is supporting his troops by raiding the nearby peoples. God has not told David to do this. Although, there is the possibility that David, while in fellowship, could have been directed by God to do this—that is, you can do the same thing in or out of fellowship, and the spiritual impact is different. For instance, you can give your church a thousand dollars, but if you are out of fellowship, it has no spiritual impact; you can be in fellowship and give your church a thousand dollars, and that can have real spiritual impact. The key is what is in your soul.

So, what should David be doing at this time? We really don’t know. Had he asked God for guidance (after all, he is traveling with the High Priest and the Ephod of God), we would know. It is possible that God would have David and his mention function in eastern Israel or in northern Israel. It is possible that David’s actions in these areas would have avoided the 7 year conflict of 2Sam. 2–4 (compare 2Sam. 5:5). Interestingly enough, R. B. Thieme Jr. suggests that we will be able to go to the hall of records in heaven and see what could have been, had we been in fellowship more often. Since God knows all of the options, the possibilities, and the results from our every action and from our every choice, this seems possible; it is an interesting concept nonetheless.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Latin Vulgate                          ...bending the bow, and using either hand; in hurling stones with slings, and shooting arrows: of the brethren of Saul of Benjamin.

Masoretic Text                       ......armed ones of a bow—right-handed ones and left-handed ones—in the stones and in the arrows in the bow. From brothers of Saul, from Benjamin,...

Peshitta                                  They held the bows with their left hand and the swords with their right, and their bows were filled with arrows, but David was unwilling to slay Saul, because he was the chief, the prince of the tribe of Benjamin.

Septuagint                              ...and [using] the bow with the right hand and with the left, and slingers with stones, and [shooters] with bows. Of the brothers of Saul of Benjamin,...

Significant differences:           The Hebrew seems to have a verb which is ignored in the Greek: armed ones. The Greek adds in slingers with, but then leaves out arrows. Although the differences are marked, the amount of difference that they actually make is minimal. At least the English which came from the Latin (the Douay-Rheims Bible) also seems to add a few words in this verse.

The Hebrew is quite difficult to put together into a complete, flowing thought. The Peshitta, however, has a complete thought, with some significant differences. This speaks of David’s men, but also of David choosing not to kill Saul. Given the difficulty of the Hebrew, this could have been some logical insertions based on their own imagination or upon manuscripts which we do not have access to.

I should mention that, there remains only a tiny fragment from the book of Chronicles found with the Dead Sea Scrolls. This fragment contains all of a couple verses.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Several of these warriors were from King Saul's own tribe of Benjamin. They were experts at using a bow and arrows, and they could shoot an arrow or sling a stone with either hand.

The Message                         They were armed with bows and could sling stones and shoot arrows either right- or left-handed. They hailed from Saul's tribe, Benjamin.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         They were armed with bows and could sling stones or shoot arrows with either their right or their left hands. They were Saul's relatives, from the tribe of Benjamin.

HCSB                                     They were archers who, using either their right or left hand, could throw stones with a sling or shoot arrows with a bow. They were Saul's relatives from Benjamin:...

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       They were bowmen and could shoot arrows and sling stones with either the right or the left hand; they were Benjaminites, Saul's kinsmen.

LTHB                                     ...right and left-handed, armed with bows, with stones, and with arrows, with the bow from the brothers of Saul, of Benjamin.

Young's Updated LT              ...armed with bow, right and left handed, with stones, and with arrows, with bows, of the brothers of Saul, of Benjamin.

What is the gist of this verse? David’s men are said to be capable of using their left or right hands; then we seem to have a sudden mention of the brothers of Saul of Benjamin, which does not seem to go anywhere. I have interpreted this final phrase as belonging to the verses which follow (and we have a similar phrasing in 1Chron. 12:8, 19, 25, 29, which would justify my interpretation).

In the Latin, the men of David carry a bow in one hand and their slings and stones in another.

In the Syriac, we are told that David chose not to go after Saul, despite the fact that David had a tremendous personal army.

Translation: ...armed with bows—[shooting] both right-handed and left-handed—[and] with stones [to sling] and with arrows for their [lit., in] bows. Getting specific with the Hebrew here is quite difficult. You notice that I had to add several words and change one in order to get this to make sense in the English. It is not clear whether David had individual groups of men, some of whom were left-handed; others of whom were right-handed; or whether many could use either hand; or whether some shot the bow with one hand and threw stones with a sling using the other. However, although we cannot tie down these kinds of details, it is clear that these men are extremely adept in the art of war.

Interestingly enough, there are several references in Scripture to the Benjamites being handy with the bow, and being able to use either hand (Judges 3:15 1Chron. 8:40 2Chron. 14:8). Now, if you want to get technical, this does not mean that they were ambidextrous, which means one does not have a preference for either hand; they were simply skilled in using either hand. I used to write on the board with either hand, but I was definitely left-handed.

James Freeman suggests that these might have represented two types of bows, one for slinging stones and another for arrows. The bow for slinging stones is, insofar as I know, unknown to us; however, as Freeman points out, they may have paved the way for another invention, 250 years later, of a heavier instrument of a similar character used in sieges.

Translation: From the relatives of Saul, [men] of Benjamin,... As mentioned, there is a significant difference between the Syriac and the Hebrew at this point. In the Hebrew, this appears to be tied to the verses which follow; in the Syriac, this statement stands on its own in its own. In the Syriac, David is said not to go after Saul’s life, as he is the anointed of God. The Syriac reads: David was unwilling to slay Saul, because he was the chief, the prince of the tribe of Benjamin.

Gill comments on these men who have come to David: They were of the tribe of Benjamin, of which Saul was, and so his brethren; and they might be, at least some of them, his relations and kinsmen; who observing the unreasonableness of Saul's enmity to David, and detesting his cruelty, and sensible of the innocence of David, and of the service he had done his country; and perhaps not being ignorant of his divine right and title to the kingdom, went over to him, to comfort, strengthen, and assist him.

At this point, we are going to begin a list of names, men who were loyal to David; men who came to David when David was persona non grata in Israel and pursued by Saul. These are men who will be with David throughout his administration as king, first over Judah, and then over a united Israel. As we go through these names, realize that God the Holy Spirit placed the names of these men here. God the Holy Spirit recognizes the faithfulness and the honor of these men, and pays homage to them. Once in a great while, you may find your name in the newspaper—perhaps it is one of those very local, free papers thrown on your lawn, and you are one name of 60 on a football team, or those who made all A’s, or of those who were never absent for a school year. Even though the recognition may be fleeting and inconsequential, it is nice to find, and many of us cut these articles out (unlike one of my younger brothers, who simply cut his name out of the paper) and save them. This is the eternal Word of God. This text stands forever. These men are recognized here by God the Holy Spirit, and they will stand recognized forever.

Application: You may wonder, what does this have to do with me? It is simple. In the Church Age, every believer has access to God the Holy Spirit; every believer has a place in God’s plan; every believer can play a position on the winning football team; and every believer potentially can find their name inscribed eternally. In the Old Testament, it was not this way. There were several dozen men who were given the Holy Spirit; several dozen men who could make a difference in the world; however, in the Church Age, every single believer in Jesus Christ is given the opportunity to make a difference and to stand forever as a testament of grace.

Application: I’ve used this illustration before, but it is worth repeating. In junior high and high school, I was not at all athletic. I was too tall, extremely skinny, weak, and terrifically uncoordinated. So, when playing tag football during P.E. in 7^th grade, and Ed Nagle tells me in the huddle that I am going out for a pass, I was surprised, but I did it. I caught the pass over the goal line and still recall that time to this day; and still recall being chosen and being successful. I caught the pass because Ed threw it right into my hands. It was not a matter of some great catch or exceptional ability on my part; he put the pass right into my hands, and, surprisingly enough, I held onto it. It is over 40 years later and that is one of the few moments from junior high which I recall. This was P.E., so there was no recognition, no plaque, no name in the paper; but it was an exuberant moment in my life, one which stayed with me. Each time God throws you a pass, pretty much, all you need to do is turn around and catch it. You obviously need to know something about the plan of God, and the more you know, the greater your function can be in His plan. So bear in mind, if you are filled with the Spirit and if you are growing, God will throw you the ball now and again.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       ...the head Ahiezer and Joash, sons of Shemaah the Gibeathite; and Jeziel and Pelet, sons of Azmaveth; and Beracah and Jehu the Annethothite.

Septuagint                              ...the chief was Achiezer, and Joas son of Asma the Gabathite, and Joel and Jophalet, sons of Asmoth, and Berchia, and Jeul of Anathoth,...

Significant differences:           Most of the differences in the name can be attributed to the differences between Greek and Hebrew. Jophalet and Pelet may actually reflect a difference of spelling, however.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Their leaders were Ahiezer and Joash, the sons of Shemaah from Gibeah. Here is a list of those men from Benjamin: Jeziel and Pelet the sons of Azmaveth; Beracah and Jehu from Anathoth...

The Message                         The first was Ahiezer; then Joash son of Shemaah the Gibeathite; Jeziel and Pelet the sons of Azmaveth; Beracah; Jehu the Anathothite;...

REB                                       The foremost were Ahiezer and Joash, the sons of Shemaah of Gibeah; Jeziel and Pelet, men of Bethazmoth [lit., sons of Azmoth]; Berakah and Jehu from Anathoth;...

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Ahiezer was the leader, then Joash (they were the sons of Shemaah from Gibeah), Azmaveth's sons Jeziel and Pelet, Beracah and Jehu from Anathoth,...

HCSB                                     Their chief was Ahiezer son of Shemaah the Gibeathite. Then there was his brother Joash; Jeziel and Pelet sons of Azmaveth; Beracah, Jehu the Anathothite;...

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       The chief was Ahiezer, then Joash, both sons of Shemaah of Gibeah; also Jeziel and Pelet, the sons of Azmaveth; Beracah, Jehu of Anathoth,...

WEB                                      The chief was Ahiezer; then Joash, the sons of Shemaah the Gibeathite, and Jeziel, and Pelet, the sons of Azmaveth, and Beracah, and Jehu the Anathothite,...

Young's Updated LT              The head is Ahiezer, and Joash, sons of Shemaab the Gibeathite, and Jeziel, and Pelet, sons of Azmaveth, and Berachah, and Jehu the Antothite,...

What is the gist of this verse? Several men are named who came to David while he was in Ziklag.

Translation: ...the chief [being] Ahiezer and Joash, sons of Shemaah the Gibeathite;... Most interpret this verse such that Ahiezer is a leader, of sorts. The CEV recognizes all these men as leaders, which does make more sense. There are two men named Ahiezer in Scripture; one who is found mentioned several times in the first 10 chapters of Numbers; and then there is Ahiezer ben Shemmah, who is named only here. Given the context, he is probably an archer who once served under Saul. Given what Saul did and Saul’s continual pursuit of David, this man left Saul and joined up with David. I am reminded of recent current events, where a couple of cartoons which portrayed the false prophet Mohammed with a bomb strapped to his back was published by the Danes. Large groups of Muslims all over the world protested, to the point of attacking western and European embassies, killing several people in the process. I recall one comment was, “I really don’t know much about Islam or why these people are so upset over a cartoon; however, given their behavior, whatever it is they are for, I am against.” This describes the attitude of Ahiezer. He has observed Saul, recognized that whoever Saul is against probably has some true merit; and so he joins up with David.

Their father, Shemaah, is also listed. We have two sons, both of whom aligned themselves with the right man in history, David. This does not happen by accident; this is a tribute to the training which they received from their father, who is mentioned but once in Scripture. The family was from Gibeah. They could have chosen local pride over what is right. You may recall that has been a big problem for the men of Benjamin—apart from any reason, they often find themselves lining up behind this man or that simply because he is from the tribe of Benjamin. These two young men, taught well by their father, did not. They knew what was right and what was wrong; it was clear that King Saul was way out of line in his actions; so they chose to align themselves with David, even though he is living as an ex-pat in Ziklag.

Gibeah, by the way, is Saul’s hometown, so it is possible that some of these men are actually even related to Saul.

Translation: ...and Jeziel and Pelet, sons of Azmaveth;... We may reasonably assume, because of the context, that Jeziel and Pelet are also both former soldiers under Saul. The context indicates that these men are from Benjamin. Their father is Azmaveth, and these three are named only here. There is another Pelet (ben Jahdai) named in 1Chron. 2:47.

There are 4 or 5 different men named Azmaveth. It is possible that this Azmaveth later becomes a part of David’s military elite force, named in 2Sam. 23:31 and 1Chron. 11:33. However, whether this is the same man or not, he still raised two boys who were able to distinguish between right and wrong, a wonderful feat for any father.

Application: Here, the father who trained and raised his children right, shares in the glory, and has his name immortalized forever.

Translation: ...and Beracah and Jehu, Annethothites [i.e., men of Anathoth];... Beracah is a valley in the Judæan wilderness (2Chron. 20:26) and also the name of this man here, who is not found again in Scripture. Beracah means blessing.

Anathoth was a city of Benjamin, originally given over to the Levites; and the native place of Jeremiah the prophet. Again, we are dealing with men from Benjamin who probably know Saul and have therefore separated themselves from him.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       ...and Ishmaiah the Gibeonite, a mighty man in the thirty and over the thirty; and Jeremiah and Jahaziel and Johanan and Jozabad, the Gederathite;...

Septuagint                              ...and Samaias the Gabaonite a mighty man among the thirty, and over the thirty; and Jeremia, and Jeziel, and Joanan, and Jozabath of Gadarathiim,...

Significant differences:           No significant differences.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       ...Ishmaiah from Gibeon, who was the leader of the Thirty Warriors; Jeremiah, Jahaziel, Johanan, and Jozabad from Gederah;...

The Message                         ...Ishmaiah the Gibeonite, a Mighty Man among the Thirty, a leader of the Thirty; Jeremiah; Jahaziel; Johanan; Jozabad the Gederathite;...

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         ...Ishmaiah from Gibeon (one of the thirty fighting men and one of their leaders), Jeremiah, Jahaziel, Johanan, and Jozabad from Gederah,...

HCSB                                     ...Ishmaiah the Gibeonite, a warrior among the Thirty and a leader over the Thirty; Jeremiah, Jahaziel, Johanan, Jozabad the Gederathite;...

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       Ishmaiah of Gibeon, a mighty man among the thirty and a leader over the thirty; Jeremiah, Jahaziel, Johanan, Jozabad of Gederah,...

MKJV                                     ...and Ismaiah the Gibeonite, a mighty man among the thirty, and over the thirty, and Jeremiah, and Jahaziel, and Johanan, and Josabad the Gederathite,...

Young's Literal Translation     ...and Ishmaiah the Gibeonite, a mighty one among the thirty, and over the thirty, and Jeremiah, and Jahaziel, and Johanan, and Josabad the Gederathite.

What is the gist of this verse? Ishmaiah is given some prominence as a great man among the 30 and over the 30. There are 4 other men named who came to David, all from Gederah.

Translation: ...and Ishmaiah the Gibeonite—a mighty man of the 30... We are still dealing with men from the tribe of Benjamin. Gibeon, as we have studied, is a city in Benjamin. You may recall that we differentiated between Geba, Gibeah and Gibeon when we studied 1Sam. 13:15. This is a rather difficult differentiation, as they are located within a few miles of one another, all in Benjamin, and they all have the same root. It appears as though there are 30 great soldiers who come to David, of which Ishmaiah is one.

Translation: ...as well as over 30;... What appears to be the case is, Ishmaiah is also the head of these 30 great men. Gill understands this in the same way—that Ishmaiah brings 30 men with him, over which he is head. Keil and Delitzsch see this differently—they see Ishmaiah is one of David’s 30 heroes from 1Chron. 11, and that he was over these men, even though he is not named in that chapter. They suggest that he is not listed in 1Chron. 11 because he had died prior to this list being compiled.

Translation: ...and Jeremiah, Jahaziel, Johanan and Jozabad, [all] inhabitants of Gederah;... Since there are so many Jeremiah’s in Scripture, I will list them below:

As noted in previous times, there is no j in the Hebrew (or the Greek, for that matter); often, a y is transliterated as a j in the English. Yah is seen as an abbreviation for Jehovah; which explains the translations of these names. Similarly, El is an abbreviated form of Elohim, and is therefore often rendered God. Jahaziel means El sees; seen of El; Johanan means Jah has been gracious, Jah has given grace; and Jozabad means Yah has bestowed, Yah has endowed; Yah has given. You will note that the parents of these men were all thinking about Jesus Christ, the God of Israel, when they gave birth.

I’m sure that is more than you wanted to know about men with the same name.

Gederah is a city which belongs to Judah, but is near the border of Benjamin and Judah. Gill tells us Joram speaks of it as belonging to the country of the city Aelia or Jerusalem. As far as I know, the gentilic adjective is found only here and the city is named only in Joshua 15:36.

Keil and Delitzsch write: Gedera [is] a city of the tribe of Judah in the Shephelah, which, according to Van de Velde (Reise, ii. S. 166), was probably identical with the village Ghedera, which lies to the left of the road Tel-es-Safieh to Akir, about an hour to the south-west of Jabne. In any case, it corresponds well with the statements of the Onom. Some may assume that we are speaking in this context of men coming from both Judah and Benjamin, given that Gederah is a Judæan city. Not necessarily the case, according to Keil and Delitzsch: Bertheau imagines we must conclude that the men of Judah are enumerated as well as the Benjamites. But this conclusion is not valid; for from the very beginning, when the domains and cities were assigned to the individual tribes under Joshua, they were not the exclusive possession of the individual tribes, and at a later period they were still less so. In course of time the respective tribal domains underwent (in consequence of wars and other events) many alterations, not only in extent, but also in regard to their inhabitants, so that in Saul's time single Benjamite families may quite well have had their home in the cities of Judah.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       Eluzai and Jerimoth and Bealiah and Shemariah and Shephatiah the Haruphite.

Septuagint                              ...Azai and Arimuth, and Baalia, and Samaraia, and Saphatias of Charaephiel,...

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       ...Eluzai, Jerimoth, Bealiah, Shemariah, and Shephatiah from Haruph;...

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Eluzai, Jerimoth, Bealiah, Shemariah, and Shephatiah from Haruph,...

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       Eluzai, Jerimoth, Bealiah, Shemariah, Shephatiah the Haruphite;...

LTHB                                     Eluzai, and Jerimoth, and Bealiah, and Shemariah, and Shephatiah the Haruphite;...

Young's Literal Translation     Eluzai, and Jerimoth, and Bealiah, and Shemariah, and Shephatiah the Haruphite;.

What is the gist of this verse? 5 Haruphites are mentioned as coming from the tribe of Benjamin to David.

Translation: Eluzai, Jerimoth, Bealiah, Shemariah and Shephatiah, [all] Haruphites. There is a patriarch named in Neh. 7:24 10:19 named Hariph (or Haruph). In a parallel passage in Ezra 2:18, he is called Jorah. It is possible that these men are from this same particular clan.

Application: Never underestimate the power of a good spiritual upbringing. By the names of these men, it is apparent that their parents presented the gospel to them, and taught them Bible doctrine. This doctrine stayed in their souls and, when the time came to show spiritual discernment, they were able—they left King Saul and joined with David. Only when you give you child the proper spiritual upbringing can they possibly know what to do and what direction to go in when they become adults.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       Elkanah and Isshiah [or, Jesiah] and Azarel and Joezer and Jashobeam, the Koraheem.

Peshitta                                  ...Elkanah, Josiah, Azariel, Shebnah, Asaph,...

Septuagint                              ...Helcana, and Jesuni, and Ozriel, and Jozara, and Sobocam, and the Corites,...

Significant differences:           Instead of rendering the final gentilic adjective as a descriptor for those who came before (as has been done on all previous verses), the LXX lists them as a group, included in David’s mighty men. The Latin is in agreement with the Hebrew. The Syriac lists 5 names, the final two of which do not really match up with the Greek or Hebrew.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

The Message                         ...Elkanah; Isshiah; Azarel; Joezer; Jashobeam; the Korahites;...

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Elkanah, Isshiah, Azarel, Joezer, and Jashobeam (Korah's descendants),...

HCSB                                     Elkanah, Isshiah, Azarel, Joezer, and Jashobeam, the Korahites;...

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       Elkanah, Isshiah, Azarel, Joezer, and Jashobeam, the Korahites;...

LTHB                                     Elkanah, and Jesaiah, and Azarael, and Joezer, and Jashobeam the Korhites;...

Young's Literal Translation     ...Elkanah, and Jesiah, and Azareel, and Joezer, and Jashobeam the Korhites,...

What is the gist of this verse? 5 Korahites are added to the list of David’s mighty men.

Translation: Elkanah, Isshiah [Jesiah], Azarel, Joezer and Jashobeam, [all] Korahites. We cannot dogmatically assert who or what these Korahites are in this passage. We can reasonably assume that they are probably in the priestly line, and that these are Levites who have settled in Benjamin.

Application: A parent whose primary focus is on God will raise honorable and discerning children.

There is only one Joezer named in Scripture, the man we find here. There are either 1 or 2 men who serve under David with the name Jashobeam. He is listed as one of David’s 30 heroes in the previous chapter (1Chron. 11:11) and again in 1Chron. 27:2. There is also a man by the name of Jeshebeab in 1Chron. 24:13, although it is unclear whether there is any relationship or not between the names (they would not be the same person, however).

These men are called Korahites, and Gill tells us that these would be related to a Korah in the tribe of Benjamin rather than the Levite Korah. However, there is no reason to assume that there was not some mixture of the tribes. You may recall my discussions of Elkanah, the father of Samuel, in 1Sam. 1–2, and how I theorized that he was possibly a Levite (of half-Levite) or that his wife might have been half-Levite, which would explain their willingness to give their first son wholly over to the service of Jehovah.

Whereas, Gill was dogmatic that these were not the Levite Korahites, Keil and Delitzsch are just as dogmatic in the opposing position: The Korahites, in 1Chron. 12:6 are, without doubt (cf. Delitzsch, Ps. S. 300), descendants of the Levite Korah, one division of whom David made guardian of the thresholds of the tent erected for the ark of the covenant on Zion, because their fathers had been watchers of the entrance of the camp of Jahve, i.e., had in that earlier time held the office of watchers by the tabernacle; see on 1Chron. 9:18. The names Elkanah and Azareel are thoroughly Levitic names, and their service in the porter's office in the holy place may have roused in them the desire to fight for David, the chosen of the Lord. But there is no reason why we should, with Bertheau, interpret the words as denoting descendants of the almost unknown Korah of the tribe of Judah (1Chron. 2:43), or, with the older commentators, refer it to some other unmentioned Benjamite who bore this name. The explanation of the connection existing between these Levitic Korahites and the Benjamites, which is presupposed by the mention of them among the Benjamites, may be found in the fact that the Levites received no tribal domain of their own, and possessed only cities for dwelling in the domains of the other tribes, with whom they were consequently civilly incorporated, so that those who dwelt in the cities of Benjamin were properly reckoned among the Benjamites. At the partition of the land under Joshua, it is true, only the priests received their cities in Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin; while, on the contrary, the Kohathites, who were not priests, among whom the Korahites were, received their cities in the tribal domain of Ephraim, Dan, and half–Manasseh (Joshua 21:9–26). But when the tabernacle was transferred from Shiloh to Nob, and afterwards to Gibeon, the Korahite doorkeepers must, without doubt, have migrated to one of the Levitic cities of Benjamin, probably for the most part to Gibeon, and who were reckoned among the Benjamites. If this be so, there remains no cogent reason for supposing that in our register, besides the Benjamites, men out of other tribes are also introduced. With that there falls away at once Bertheau's further conclusion, that the author of the Chronicle has considerably abridged the register, and that from 1Chron. 12:4 onwards men of Judah also are named, the list of whom must certainly (?) have been originally introduced by special superscription similar to those in 1Chron. 12:8, 16, 19. His further reason for his conjecture – namely, that our register makes use of the qualificative epithets, “the Gibeathite,” “the Anathothite,” etc., only in a few special cases–is of no force whatever; for we are not justified in assuming that we may expect to find here, as in the register in 1 Chron 11:26–47, such qualificatives after every individual name. The character of our register cannot be arrived at by a comparison with the list of David's heroes in 1 Chron 11; it should rather be sought for by comparing it with the succeeding list, whose contents are of a similar kind with its own. David's chosen corps of thirty heroes was much more important for the history of his reign, than the lists of the men who joined themselves to him and fought on his behalf before he ascended the throne. For that reason the thirty heroes are not only mentioned by name, but their descent also is told us, while that more detailed information is not given with regard to the others just mentioned. Only the names of the Gadites and Manassites are mentioned; of the Benjamites and men of Judah, who came to him in the mountain fastness (1Chron. 12:16–18), the name of only one, Amasai, is given; while of the Benjamites who came to Ziklag, 1Chron. 12:3–7, such qualificative statements are made in reference to only a few individuals, and in these cases the object probably was to distinguish them from other well–known persons of the same name.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And Joelah and Zebadiah, sons of Jeroham from the Gedor.

Septuagint                              ...and Jelia and Zabadia, sons of Iroam, and the men of Gedor.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

The Message                         ...and Joelah and Zebadiah, the sons of Jeroham from Gedor.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         ...and Joelah and Zebadiah, Jeroham's sons from Gedor.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       And Joelah and Zebadiah, the sons of Jeroham of Gedor.

Young's Updated LT              And Joelah, and Zebadiah, sons of Jeroham of Gedor.

What is the gist of this verse? Two more men’s names are given, both sons of Jeroham of Gedor.

Translation: Joelah and Zebadiah, [who are] sons of Jeroham from Gedor. Joelah means may he profit; and Zebadiah means Yah has given. The parents, in the first case, prayed for their son to be successful; and, in the second, gave thanks to God for their son. Their father is named may he be compassionate—probably named by his mother (but still a nice name).

There are possibly as many as 4 cities named Gedor; and whether any of them are equivalent to Geder (or Gederah) is unknown. This city may possibly found only here or here and Joshua 15:58 (but, that would place it in Judah, and it appears as though we are still in Benjamin). We discussed Geder at some length in Joshua 12:13; however, we could come to few, if any, conclusions. We discussed Gedor in Joshua 15:58 and were unable to come to any real conclusions as well (that Gedor is located in Judah). Given the name and its meaning, it is very likely that several cities had this particular name. I should add that, for some border cities, it is unclear who had control of the city. That is, a border city of Judah and Benjamin might have a significant number of inhabitants from both tribes. Therefore, it is not impossible that these men of Benjamin came from the Gedor named in Joshua 15:58.

Keil and Delitzsch comment: Gedor is mentioned, a city in the mountains of Judah, to the westward of the road which leads from Hebron to Jerusalem (see on Joshua 15:58); and from that fact Bertheau imagines we must conclude that the men of Judah are enumerated as well as the Benjamites. But this conclusion is not valid; for from the very beginning, when the domains and cities were assigned to the individual tribes under Joshua, they were not the exclusive possession of the individual tribes, and at a later period they were still less so. In course of time the respective tribal domains underwent (in consequence of wars and other events) many alterations, not only in extent, but also in regard to their inhabitants, so that in Saul's time single Benjamite families may quite well have had their home in the cities of Judah.

Since we are about to enter into some narrative, let me remind you that we are a verse off here; this is v. 9 in the Hebrew, but v. 8 in the Greek and English.

Men who Came to David when in the Stronghold in the Wilderness

1Samuel 23:14

In matching this passage with its parallel passage in 1Samuel, I am making an educated guess; here, we have a clear reference to David’s stronghold in the wilderness; in 1Sam. 23:14, we read: And David stayed in the wilderness in the strongholds, and remained in the hill country in the wilderness of Ziph. Saul sought him every day, but God did not deliver David into his hand. Whether this properly matches us to 1Sam. 23:14 is unknown, as we have several places mentioned throughout 1Sam. 23, several of which are contenders for this wilderness stronghold. Furthermore, where the word stronghold occurs in Samuel, it is always in the plural (1Sam. 23:14, 19, 29). In other words, in our passage, we are speaking of a specific fortress or stronghold in the wilderness; and in 1Sam. 23, there are several hiding places where David stayed. So matching these passages is a reasonable theory, but nothing more than that.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And from the Gadite, have separated themselves unto David to the fortress wilderness-ward mighty men of the army—men of warfare to the battle; organizers [or, valued] of the large shield and spear; and faces of lion their faces and as gazelles upon the mountains to hurry.

Septuagint                              And from Gaddi these separated themselves to David from the wilderness, strong mighty men of an array of war, bearing shields and spears, and their faces were as the face of a lion, and they were nimble as roes upon the mountains in speed.

Significant differences:           The word fortress is not found in the Greek or the Latin, but it is found in the Hebrew and Syriac. The participle bearing in the Greek appears to be an over-simplification of the Hebrew word that it translates (in the Syriac, it is rendered could handle and in the Latin holding). Apart from these two minor differences, there are no significant differences between these texts.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Men from the tribe of Gad also joined David at his fortress in the desert and served as his warriors. They were also brave soldiers--fierce as lions and quick as gazelles. They were always prepared to fight with shields and spears.

The Message                         There were some Gadites there who had defected to David at his wilderness fortress; they were seasoned and eager fighters who knew how to handle shield and spear. They were wild in appearance, like lions, but as agile as gazelles racing across the hills.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Some men left Gad to join David at the fortified camp in the desert. They were warriors, trained soldiers, able to fight with shields and spears. They looked like lions and were as fast as gazelles on the hills.

HCSB                                     Some Gadites defected to David at his stronghold in the desert. They were fighting men, trained for battle, expert with shield and spear. Their faces were like the faces of lions, and they were as swift as gazelles on the mountains.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       From the Gadites there went over to David at the stronghold in the wilderness mighty and experienced warriors, expert with shield and spear, whose faces were like the faces of lions and who were swift as gazelles upon the mountains:...

WEB                                      Of the Gadites there separated themselves to David to the stronghold in the wilderness, mighty men of valor, men trained for war, that could handle shield and spear; whose faces were like the faces of lions, and they were as swift as the roes on the mountains;...

Young's Updated LT              And of the Gadites there have been separated unto David, to the fortress, to the wilderness, mighty of valour, men of the host for battle, setting in array target and buckler, and their faces the face of the lion, and as roes on the mountains for speed:...

What is the gist of this verse? Men who are experienced in war come to David from the Gadites, across the Jordan. These are more than sympathizers; these are extremely valuable military men.

Translation: And from the Gadites, [certain men] have separated themselves to David, to [his] fortress in the wilderness... The subject for this verb actually does not occur until later in this verse. Therefore, I have inserted the subject certain men. The Gadites chose to remain on the east side of the Jordan. They helped their brothers secure the rest of Israel, but they liked the land east of the Jordan for ranching, and they, with the tribe of Reuben and half of the Manassehites, made their home east of the Jordan. These men had to leave their ranches, their families, their flocks, and their allegiance to Saul in order to join up with David. This was a risk and an inconvenience, to say the least.

David had a fortress or a stronghold in the wilderness, and these men came to him at this fortress, which is mentioned several times in 1Samuel (actually, in 1Samuel, the text speaks of fortresses or strongholds). What I envision is David staying at the famous Masada; however, that would only be conjecture; and, furthermore, it does not appear as though David remained at any particular place for any amount of time.