Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 2 Samuel 8:18 Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the Cherethites and the Pelethites; and David's sons were chief ministers. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 2 Samuel 8:18 Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was [head] over both the Cherethites and Pelethites [the king's bodyguards]; and David's sons were chief [confidential] advisers (officials) [to the king]. [1 Chr 18:17] |
Bible Question:
"...David's son were chief ministers." The Hebrew also has the meaning of "priest(s)". According to Amplified 2015 Translator's Notes:Even though the Hebrew word for priests is used in this verse, David's sons would not serve as priests because they were from the tribe of Judah, not Levi. The ancient rabbis interpreted the statement to mean that the sons enjoyed some priestly privileges. I also think it unlikely that David would assign his sons to the office of priest for they are not of Levi tribe. Interestingly, my newest revised Chinese Union Version discarded the word "chief ministers"in their old version and use "priests" instead. I guess we might not get a definite answer as to whether they really took the priestly office or it is just an exaggerated expression by the author about their honorable status. Now my question: Taken the Amplified 2015 Translators' note into consideration, anywhere in the Bible mentions about any priestly privileges enjoyed by David's sons? Thank you and Shalom Azure |
Bible Answer: Azure, Very astute observation. Yes, there is a passage that might hint, but nowhere is this really answered for us. Yet I am persuaded the answer is evident in the larger story line of scripture. The answer: we see minor glimpses of God's anointed blurring the lines between the role of king and priest. In Matthew 12 Jesus is challenged concerning activity on the Sabbath. One of his line of reasonings involves David having a very strange right to eat the bread of the presence. This was something only priests could do. Then Jesus explains that somebody greater than David is present. Now unfortunately Jesus does nothing to explain why David has that authority, or even precisely what that authority is. But the line of logic DEPENDS upon David having that authority. So here, as well in a rare few other instances we see glimpses of a blurring between king and priest. In Zechariah 6 we see one of high priestly descent given a crown. In Genesis we see Adam portrayed as both a royal and priestly figure. Meaning we see the original role that God intended for his king was also a priestly role. And on it goes. Neither in Matthew, nor in regards to Davids sons does scripture ever explain this to us, nor does it explain why blurring these roles is routinely rejected and yet in a few instances God annoints somebody in such a way that the roles get blurred, regardless of how we might long for it to do so. It is one of several riddles that the Old Testament leaves us with. What we can be sure of is that this is pointing towards the same person all the Old testament was pointing to. We are seeing small glimpses that God's purpose for his messianic king will also involve a priestly role. This puzzling thread in scripture, for which we have no explanation, is pointing onward to the true messianic king whom is also our high priest as well, Jesus. I wish there were much more scripture to point to, but I hope this helps. In Christ, Beja |
Up | Down View Branch | ID# 243691 | ||
Questions and/or Subjects for 2 Sam 8:18 | Author | ||
|
azurelaw | ||
|
Beja | ||
|
EdB |