2 Samuel 2:17

2:17 Now the battle was very severe that day; Abner and the men of Israel were overcome by David’s soldiers. ¹ 

2 Samuel 3:1

3:1 However, the war was prolonged between the house of Saul and the house of David. David was becoming steadily stronger, while the house of Saul was becoming increasingly weaker.

2 Samuel 8:6

8:6 David placed garrisons in the territory of the Arameans of Damascus; the Arameans became David’s subjects and brought tribute. The Lord protected ²  David wherever he campaigned. ³ 

2 Samuel 18:7-8

18:7 The army of Israel was defeated there by David’s men. ⁴  The slaughter there was great that day – 20,000 soldiers were killed. 18:8 The battle there was spread out over the whole area, and the forest consumed more soldiers than the sword devoured that day.

2 Samuel 19:2

19:2 So the victory of that day was turned to mourning as far as all the people were concerned. For the people heard on that day, “The king is grieved over his son.”

2 Samuel 21:15

Israel Engages in Various Battles with the Philistines

21:15 Another battle was fought between the Philistines and Israel. So David went down with his soldiers ⁵  and fought the Philistines. David became exhausted.

2 Samuel 21:18

21:18 Later there was another battle with the Philistines, this time in Gob. On that occasion Sibbekai the Hushathite killed Saph, who was one of the descendants of Rapha.

2 Samuel 23:11

23:11 Next in command ⁶  was Shammah son of Agee the Hararite. When the Philistines assembled at Lehi, ⁷  where there happened to be an area of a field that was full of lentils, the army retreated before the Philistines.

[2:17]  ¹ tn Heb “servants.” So also elsewhere.

[8:6]  ² tn Or “delivered.”

[8:6]  ³ tn Or “wherever he went.”

[18:7]  ³ tn Heb “servants” (also in v. 9).

[21:15]  ⁴ tn Heb “his servants.”

[23:11]  ⁵ tn Heb “after him.”

[23:11]  ⁶ tn The Hebrew text is difficult here. The MT reads לַחַיָּה (lachayyah), which implies a rare use of the word חַיָּה (chayyah). The word normally refers to an animal, but if the MT is accepted it would here have the sense of a troop or community of people. BDB 312 s.v. II. חַיָּה, for example, understands the similar reference in v. 13 to be to “a group of allied families, making a raid together.” But this works better in v. 13 than it does in v. 11, where the context seems to suggest a particular staging location for a military operation. (See 1 Chr 11:15.) It therefore seems best to understand the word in v. 11 as a place name with ה (he) directive. In that case the Masoretes mistook the word for the common term for an animal and then tried to make sense of it in this context.