1st Kings Chapter 2 verse 9 Holy Bible

ASV 1stKings 2:9

Now therefore hold him not guiltless, for thou art a wise man; and thou wilt know what thou oughtest to do unto him, and thou shalt bring his hoar head down to Sheol with blood.
read chapter 2 in ASV

BBE 1stKings 2:9

But do not let him be free from punishment, for you are a wise man; and it will be clear to you what you have to do with him; see that his white head goes down to the underworld in blood.
read chapter 2 in BBE

DARBY 1stKings 2:9

And now hold him not guiltless; for thou art a wise man, and thou shalt know what thou oughtest to do to him; but bring his hoar head down to Sheol with blood.
read chapter 2 in DARBY

KJV 1stKings 2:9

Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; but his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood.
read chapter 2 in KJV

WBT 1stKings 2:9

Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do to him; but his hoary head do thou bring down to the grave with blood.
read chapter 2 in WBT

WEB 1stKings 2:9

Now therefore don't hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man; and you will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his gray head down to Sheol with blood.
read chapter 2 in WEB

YLT 1stKings 2:9

and now, acquit him not, for a wise man thou `art', and thou hast known that which thou dost to him, and hast brought down his old age with blood to Sheol.'
read chapter 2 in YLT

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerse 9. - Now therefore [lit., "and now." Possibly the "now" is a note of time in apposition to the "day" of ver. 8, or rather the time of David's oath. "I then unadvisedly swam unto him, but now the law must have its course." Probably it is merely inferential, - quae cum ita sint] hold him not guiltless [rather, thou shalt not leave him unpunished (Vatablus, Gesen., Bahr, al.); cf. Exodus 20:7; Jeremiah 30:11]; for thou art a wise man [φρόνιμος rather than σοφός (LXX.) Gesen. renders here, "endued with ability to judge." David clearly desires that wisdom and justice, not malice or passion, should be Solomon's guide], and knowest what thou oughtest to [lit., shalt or shouldest] do to him; but [Heb. and] his hoar head [mentioned, not maliciously, but with the idea that punishment, which had been long delayed, must overtake him nevertheless. The age of Joab and Shimei would make the Divine Nemesis the more conspicuous. Men would "see that there was a God that judgeth in the earth"] bring thou down to the grave with blood. The Auth. Version here needlessly alters the order of the original, which should be followed wherever it can be (and it generally can) without sacrifice of idiom and elegance. In this case the alteration, by the slight prominence it gives to "hoar head" and to "blood," gives a factitious harshness to the sentence. The Hebrew stands thus: "And thou shalt bring down his hoar head with blood to Sheol." This order of the words also exhibits somewhat more clearly the sequence of thought, which is this: "Thou art wise, therefore thou knowest what by law thou shouldest do. What thou shalt do is, thou shalt bring down," etc. It is clear from these words that if David was actuated by malice, by a "passionate desire to punish those who had wronged him" (Plumptre, Dict. Bib., art. "Solomon"), or by "fierce and profound vindictiveness" (Stanley, "Jewish Church," vol. 2. p. 135), he was profoundly unconscious of it. If it was "a dark legacy of hate" (ibid.) he was bequeathing to Solomon, then he stands before us in these last hours either as an unctuous hypocrite, or as infatuated and inconsistent to the last degree. That the man who, in his opening words (ver. 3), enjoined upon his son, in the most emphatic manner, a strict and literal obedience to the law of Heaven, should in these subsequent words, delivered almost in the same breath, require him to satiate a long-cherished and cruel revenge upon Joab and Shimei (the latter of whom he had twice delivered from death), is an instance of self contradiction which is almost, if not quite, without parallel. But as I have showed elsewhere, at some length, it is a superficial and entirely erroneous view of David's last words, which supposes them to have been inspired by malice or cruelty. His absorbing idea was clearly this, that he had not "kept the charge of the Lord;" that he, the chief magistrate, the "revenger to execute wrath," by sparing Joab and Shimei, the murderer and the blasphemer, both of whose lives were forfeited to justice, had failed in his duty, had weakened the sanctions of law, and compromised the honour of the Most High. He is too old and too weak to execute the sentence of the law now, but for the safety of his people, for the security of his throne, it must be done, and therefore Solomon, who was under no obligation to spare the criminals his father had spared, must be required to do it. Of the Jewish king it might be said with a special propriety, "Rex est lex loquens," and seldom has the voice of law spoken with greater dignity and fidelity than by David in this dying charge. To say, as Harwood does, (Lange, American Trans., p. 32) that "nothing but sophistry can justify his [David's] charge to Solomon, not to let the unfortunate man [Shimei] die in peace," merely shows how imperfectly the writer has entered into the spirit of the theocratic law, that law under which David lived, and by which alone he could be governed and govern others.

Ellicott's Commentary