44:2 “The Lord God of Israel who rules over all 1 says, ‘You have seen all the disaster I brought on Jerusalem 2 and all the towns of Judah. Indeed, they now lie in ruins and are deserted. 3 44:3 This happened because of the wickedness the people living there did. 4 They made me angry 5 by worshiping and offering sacrifice to 6 other gods whom neither they nor you nor your ancestors 7 previously knew. 8 44:4 I sent my servants the prophets to you people over and over 9 again warning you not to do this disgusting thing I hate. 10 44:5 But the people of Jerusalem and Judah 11 would not listen or pay any attention. They would not stop the wickedness they were doing nor quit sacrificing to other gods. 12
3 tn Heb “Behold, they are in ruins this day and there is no one living in them.”
4 tn Heb “they.” The referent must be supplied from the preceding, i.e., Jerusalem and all the towns of Judah. “They” are those who have experienced the disaster and are distinct from those being addressed and their ancestors (44:3b).
5 tn Heb “thus making me angry.” However, this is a good place to break the sentence to create a shorter sentence that is more in keeping with contemporary English style.
6 tn Heb “by going to offer sacrifice in serving/worshiping.” The second לְ (lamed) + infinitive is epexegetical of the first (cf. IBHS 608-9 §36.2.3e).
10 tn Heb “sent…over again, saying, ‘Do not do this terrible thing that I hate.’” The indirect quote has been used to shorten the sentence and eliminate one level of embedded quotes.
sn This refers to the worship of other gods mentioned in the previous verse.
11 tn There appears to be a deliberate shift in the pronouns used in vv. 2-5. “You” refers to the people living in Egypt who are being addressed (v. 2) and to the people of present and past generations to whom the
12 tn Heb “They did not listen or incline their ear [= pay attention] by turning from their wickedness by not sacrificing to other gods.” The לְ (lamed) + the negative + the infinitive is again epexegetical. The sentence has been restructured and more idiomatic English expressions have been used to better conform with contemporary English style but an attempt has been made to retain the basic relationships of subordination.