¹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

² sn The phrase the City of David refers here to the fortress of Zion in Jerusalem, not to Bethlehem. See 2 Sam 5:7.

³ tn Heb “Then Solomon convened the elders of Israel, the heads of the tribes, the chiefs of the fathers belonging to the sons of Israel to Jerusalem to bring up the ark of the covenant of the Lord from the City of David (it is Zion).”

⁴ sn This festival in the seventh month was the Feast of Tabernacles, see Lev 23:34.

⁵ sn The seventh month would be September-October in modern reckoning.

⁶ tn Heb “the tent of assembly.”

sn See Exod 33:7-11.

⁷ tn Heb “and they carried the ark of the Lord…. The priests and the Levites carried them.”

⁸ tn Heb “And King Solomon and all the assembly of Israel, those who had been gathered to him, [were] before the ark, sacrificing sheep and cattle which could not be counted or numbered because of the abundance.”

⁹ tn The word “assigned” is supplied in the translation for clarification.

¹⁰ sn These poles were used to carry the ark. The Levites were to carry it with the poles on their shoulders. See Exod 25:13-15; 1 Chr 15:15.

¹¹ tn Heb “they could not be seen outside.”

¹² sn Horeb is another name for Mount Sinai (cf. Exod 3:1).

¹³ tn Heb “in Horeb where.”

¹⁴ tn Heb “and when the priests went from the holy place.” The syntactical relationship of this temporal clause to the following context is unclear. Perhaps the thought is completed in v. 14 after a lengthy digression.

¹⁵ tn Heb “Indeed [or “for”] all the priests who were found consecrated themselves without guarding divisions.”

¹⁶ tn Heb “like one were the trumpeters and the musicians, causing one voice to be heard, praising and giving thanks to the Lord, and while raising a voice with trumpets and with cymbals and with instruments of music, and while praising the Lord.”

¹⁷ tn Heb “and the house was filled with a cloud, the house of the Lord.”

¹⁸ tn Heb “were not able to stand to serve.”

¹⁹ tn The words “O Lord” do not appear in the Hebrew text, but they are supplied in the translation for clarification; Solomon addresses the Lord in prayer at this point.

²⁰ tn Heb “turned his face.”

²¹ tn Heb “and he blessed all the assembly of Israel, and all the assembly of Israel was standing.”

²² tn The Hebrew text reads, “fulfilled by his hand,” but the phrase “by his hand” is somewhat redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

²³ tn The Hebrew text reads, “promised by his mouth,” but the phrase “by his mouth” is somewhat redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

²⁴ tn Heb “saying.”

²⁵ tn Heb “to build a house for my name to be there.” Here “name” is used by metonymy for the Lord himself, and thus the expression “to be there” refers to his taking up residence there (hence the translation, “a temple in which to live”). In this case the temple is referred to as a “house” where the Lord himself can reside.

²⁶ tn Heb for my name to be there.” See also the note on the word “live” in v. 5.

²⁷ tn Heb “and it was with the heart of David my father to build a house for the name of the Lord God of Israel.”

sn On the significance of the Lord’s “name,” see the note on the word “live” in v. 5.

²⁸ tn Heb “Because it was with your heart to build a house for my name, you did well that it was with your heart.”

²⁹ tn Heb “your son, the one who came out of your body, he will build the temple for my name.”

³⁰ sn 1 John 4:1-6. These verses form one of three units within 1 John that almost all interpreters consider a single unit and do not divide up (the other two are 2:12-14 and 15-17). The subject matter is so clearly different from the surrounding context that these clearly constitute separate units of thought. Since the Holy Spirit is not the only spirit active in the world, the author needs to qualify for the recipients how to tell if a spirit comes from God. The “test” is the confession in 4:2.

³¹ tn According to BDAG 255 s.v. δοκιμάζω 1 the verb means “to make a critical examination of someth. to determine genuineness, put to the test, examine.”

³² sn Test the spirits. Since in the second half of the present verse the author mentions “false prophets” who have “gone out into the world,” it appears highly probable that his concept of testing the spirits is drawn from the OT concept of testing a prophet to see whether he is a false prophet or a true one. The procedure for testing a prophet is found in Deut 13:2-6 and 18:15-22. An OT prophet was to be tested on the basis of (a) whether or not his predictive prophecies came true (Deut 18:22) and (b) whether or not he advocated idolatry (Deut 13:1-3). In the latter case the people of Israel are warned that even if the prophet should perform an authenticating sign or wonder, his truth or falsity is still to be judged on the basis of his claims, that is, whether or not he advocates idolatry. Here in 1 John the idea of “testing the spirits” comes closer to the second OT example of “testing the prophets” mentioned above. According to 1 John 4:2-3, the spirits are to be tested on the basis of their christological confession: The person motivated by the Spirit of God will confess Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh, while the person motivated by the spirit of deceit will not confess Jesus and is therefore not from God. This comes close to the idea expressed by Paul in 1 Cor 12:3 where the person speaking charismatic utterances is also to be judged on the basis of his christological confession: “So I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, ‘Jesus is cursed,’ and no one can say ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except by the Holy Spirit.”

³³ tn The phrase “to determine” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied for clarity.

³⁴ tn “False prophets” refers to the secessionist opponents (compare 2:19).

³⁵ tn There is no subordinating conjunction following the ἐν τούτῳ (en toutw) here in 4:2, so the phrase could refer either (1) to what precedes or (2) to what follows. Contextually the phrase refers to what follows, because the following clause in 4:2b-3a (πᾶν πνεῦμα ὃ ὁμολογεῖ ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν…ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν, καὶ πᾶν πνεῦμα ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν), while not introduced by a subordinating conjunction, does explain the preceding clause beginning with ἐν τούτῳ. In other words, the following clause in 4:2b-3a is analogous to a subordinate clause introduced by an epexegetical ἵνα (Jina) or ὅτι (Joti), and the relationship can be represented in the English translation by a colon, “By this you know the Spirit of God: Every Spirit that confesses Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, but every Spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God.”

³⁶ tn Or “acknowledges.”

³⁷ tn This forms part of the author’s christological confession which serves as a test of the spirits. Many interpreters have speculated that the author of 1 John is here correcting or adapting a slogan of the secessionist opponents, but there is no concrete evidence for this in the text. Such a possibility is mere conjecture (see R. E. Brown, Epistles of John [AB], 492). The phrase may be understood in a number of different ways, however: (1) the entire phrase “Jesus Christ come in the flesh” may be considered the single object of the verb ὁμολογεῖ (Jomologei; so B. F. Westcott, A. Brooke, J. Bonsirven, R. E. Brown, S. Smalley, and others); (2) the verb ὁμολογεῖ may be followed by a double accusative, so that both “Jesus Christ” and “come in the flesh” are objects of the verb; the meaning would be “confess Jesus Christ as come in the flesh” (so B. Weiss, J. Chaine, and others). (3) Another possibility is to see the verb as followed by a double accusative as in (2), but in this case the first object is “Jesus” and the second is “the Christ come in the flesh,” so that what is being confessed is “Jesus as the Christ come in the flesh” (so N. Alexander, J. Stott, J. Houlden, and others). All three options are grammatically possible, although not equally probable. Option (1) has a number of points in its favor: (a) the parallel in 2 John 7 suggests to some that the phrase should be understood as a single object; (b) option (2) makes “Jesus Christ” the name of the preincarnate second Person of the Trinity, and this would be the only place in the Johannine literature where such a designation for the preincarnate Λόγος (Logos) occurs; and (c) option (3) would have been much clearer if Χριστόν (Criston) were accompanied by the article (ὁμολογεῖ ᾿Ιησοῦν τὸν Χριστόν, Jomologei Ihsoun ton Criston). Nevertheless option (3) is preferred on the basis of the overall context involving the secessionist opponents: Their christological views would allow the confession of the Christ come in the flesh (perhaps in the sense of the Spirit indwelling believers, although this is hard to prove), but they would have trouble confessing that Jesus was (exclusively) the Christ incarnate. The author’s failure to repeat the qualifying phrases (Χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα, Criston en sarki elhluqota) in the negative repetition in 4:3a actually suggests that the stress is on Jesus as the confession the opponents could not or would not make. It is difficult to see how the parallel in 2 John 7 favors option (1), although R. E. Brown (Epistles of John [AB], 492) thinks it does. The related or parallel construction in John 9:22 (ἐάν τις αὐτὸν ὁμολογήσῃ Χριστόν, ean ti" auton Jomologhsh Criston) provides further support for option (3). This is discounted by R. E. Brown because the verb in John 9:22 occurs between the two accusative objects rather than preceding both as here (Epistles of John [AB], 493 – although Brown does mention Rom 10:9 as another parallel closer in grammatical structure to 1 John 4:2). Brown does not mention the textual variants in John 9:22, however: Both Ì⁶⁶ and Ì⁷⁵ (along with K, ˹³ and others) read ὁμολογήσῃ αὐτὸν Χριστόν (Jomologhsh auton Criston). This structure exactly parallels 1 John 4:2, and a case can be made that this is actually the preferred reading in John 9:22; furthermore, it is clear from the context in John 9:22 that Χριστόν is the complement (what is predicated of the first accusative) since the object (the first accusative) is αὐτόν rather than the proper name ᾿Ιησοῦν. The parallel in John 9:22 thus appears to be clearer than either 1 John 4:2 or 2 John 7, and thus to prove useful in understanding both the latter constructions.

³⁸ tn The καί (kai) which begins 4:3 introduces the “negative side” of the test by which the spirits might be known in 4:2-3. Thus it is adversative in force: “every spirit that confesses Jesus as Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, but every Spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God.”

³⁹ tn Or “does not acknowledge.”

⁴⁰ tc A number of variants are generated from the simple τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν (ton Ihsoun), some of which turn the expression into an explicit object-complement construction. ᾿Ιησοῦν κύριον (Ihsoun kurion, “Jesus as Lord”) is found in א, τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν (ton Ihsoun Criston, “Jesus as Christ”) is read by the Byzantine minuscules, τὸν Χριστόν (“the Christ”) is the reading of 1846, and ᾿Ιησοῦν without the article is found in 1881 2464. But τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν is well supported by A B Ψ 33 81 1739 al, and internally best explains the rise of the others. It is thus preferred on both external and internal grounds.

⁴¹ tn “Spirit” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

⁴² sn Them refers to the secessionist opponents, called “false prophets” in 4:1 (compare 2:19).

⁴³ tn “But” supplied here to bring out the context. The conjunction is omitted in the Greek text (asyndeton).

⁴⁴ tn The phrase ἐκ τούτου (ek toutou) in 4:6, which bears obvious similarity to the much more common phrase ἐν τούτῳ (en toutw), must refer to what precedes, since there is nothing in the following context for it to relate to, and 4:1-6 is recognized by almost everyone as a discrete unit. There is still a question, however, of what in the preceding context the phrase refers to. Interpreters have suggested a reference (1) only to 4:6; (2) to 4:4-6; or (3) to all of 4:1-6. The last is most likely, because the present phrase forms an inclusion with the phrase ἐν τούτῳ in 3:24 which introduces the present section. Thus “by this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit” refers to all of 4:1-6 with its “test” of the spirits by the christological confession made by their adherents in 4:1-3 and with its emphasis on the authoritative (apostolic) eyewitness testimony to the significance of Jesus’ earthly life and ministry in 4:4-6.

⁴⁵ sn Who or what is the Spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit in 1 John 4:6? (1) Some interpreters regard the “spirits” in 4:6 as human spirits. Although 4:1a is ambiguous and might refer either to human spirits or spiritual beings who influence people, it is clear in the context that (2) the author sees behind the secessionist opponents with their false Christology the spirit of the Antichrist, that is, Satan (4:3b), and behind the true believers of the community to which he is writing, the Spirit of God (4:2). This is made clear in 4:4 by the reference to the respective spirits as the One who is in you and the one who is in the world.

⁴⁶ tn This ὅτι (Joti) is causal, giving the reason why the readers, as believers, ought to love one another: because love comes from God. The next clause, introduced by καί (kai), does not give a second reason (i.e., is not related to the ὅτι clause), but introduces a second and additional thought: Everyone who loves is fathered by God and knows God.

⁴⁷ tn As in 2:23 and 3:4, the author uses πᾶς (pas) with the present articular participle as a generalization to describe a category of people.

sn From the author’s “either/or” perspective (which tends to see things in terms of polar opposites) the use of a generalization like everyone who presents a way of categorizing the opponents on the one hand and the recipients, whom the author regards as genuine Christians, on the other. Thus everyone who loves refers to all true Christians, who give evidence by their love for one another that they have indeed been begotten by God and are thus God’s children. The opposite situation is described in the following verse, 4:8, where (although everyone [πᾶς, pas] is omitted) it is clear that a contrast is intended.

⁴⁸ tn The verb γεννάω (gennaw) in this context means to be fathered by God and thus a child of God. The imagery in 1 John is that of the male parent who fathers children (see especially 3:9 and 5:1).

⁴⁹ tn The author proclaims in 4:8 ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν (Jo qeo" agaph estin), but from a grammatical standpoint this is not a proposition in which subject and predicate nominative are interchangeable (“God is love” does not equal “love is God”). The predicate noun is anarthrous, as it is in two other Johannine formulas describing God, “God is light” in 1 John 1:5 and “God is Spirit” in John 4:24. The anarthrous predicate suggests a qualitative force, not a mere abstraction, so that a quality of God’s character is what is described here.

⁵⁰ tn Once again there is the problem of determining whether the phrase ἐν τούτῳ (en toutw) refers (1) to what precedes or (2) to what follows. This is the first of 5 uses of the phrase in the present section (4:9, 10, 13, 17; 5:2). In this case (as also in the next two instances) there is a ὅτι (Joti) clause following which is related and which explains (i.e., which is epexegetical to) the phrase ἐν τούτῳ. Thus the meaning here is, “By this the love of God is revealed in us: that God has sent his only Son into the world in order that we might live through him.”

⁵¹ tn In terms of syntax the force of the genitive τοῦ θεοῦ (tou qeou) may be (1) objective, (2) subjective, or (3) both. The phrase occurs for the first time in the letter in 2:5. Here in 4:9 the epexegetical ὅτι (Joti) clause which follows makes it clear that this is a subjective genitive, emphasizing God’s love for us rather than our love for God, because it describes God’s action in sending his Son into the world.

⁵² tn This phrase is best understood as the equivalent of a dative of sphere, but this description does not specify where the love of God is revealed with regard to believers: “in our midst” (i.e., among us) or “within us” (i.e., internally within believers). The latter is probable, because in the context the concept of God’s indwelling of the believer is mentioned in 4:12: “God resides (μένει, menei) in us.”

⁵³ sn Although the word translated one and only (μονογενής, monogenhs) is often rendered “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological bird called the Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus alone in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (τέκνα θεοῦ, tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 18; 3:16, 18).

⁵⁴ tn Once again there is the (by now familiar) problem of determining whether the referent of this phrase (1) precedes or (2) follows. Here there are two ὅτι (Joti) clauses which follow, both of which are epexegetical to the phrase ἐν τούτῳ (en toutw) and explain what the love of God consists of: first, stated negatively, “not that we have loved God,” and then positively, “but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.”

⁵⁵ tn The two ὅτι (Joti) clauses are epexegetical to the phrase ἐν τούτῳ (en toutw) which begins the verse.

sn What is important (as far as the author is concerned) is not whether we love God (or say that we love God – a claim of the opponents is probably behind this), but that God has loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice which removes believers’ sins. This latter point is similar to the point made in 2:2 and is at the heart of the author’s dispute with the opponents, because they were denying any salvific value to Jesus’ earthly life and ministry, including his death on the cross.

⁵⁶ sn As explained at 2:2, inherent in the meaning of the word translated atoning sacrifice (ἱλασμός, Jilasmos) is the idea of turning away the divine wrath, so that “propitiation” is the closest English equivalent. God’s love for us is expressed in his sending his Son to be the propitiation (the propitiatory sacrifice) for our sins on the cross. This is an indirect way for the author to allude to one of the main points of his controversy with the opponents: the significance for believers’ salvation of Jesus’ earthly life and ministry, including especially his sacrificial death on the cross. The contemporary English “atoning sacrifice” communicates this idea more effectively.

⁵⁷ tn Grk “and.” The Greek conjunction καί (kai) introduces the apodosis of the conditional sentence.

⁵⁸ tn This is a first-class conditional sentence with εἰ (ei) + aorist indicative in the protasis. Reality is assumed for the sake of argument with a first-class condition.

sn The author here assumes the reality of the protasis (the “if” clause), which his recipients, as believers, would also be expected to agree with: Assuming that God has loved us in this way, then it follows that we also ought to love one another. God’s act of love in sending his Son into the world to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins (v. 10) ought to motivate us as believers to love one another in a similar sacrificial fashion. The author made the same point already in 1 John 3:16. But this failure to show love for fellow believers is just what the opponents are doing: In 1 John 3:17 the author charged them with refusing to love their brothers by withholding needed material assistance. By their failure to love the brothers sacrificially according to the example Jesus set for believers, the opponents have demonstrated again the falsity of their claims to love God and know God (see 1 John 2:9).

⁵⁹ sn An allusion to John 1:18.

⁶⁰ tn The phrase “God resides in us” (ὁ θεὸς ἐν ἡμῖν μένει, Jo qeo" en Jhmin menei) in 4:12 is a reference to the permanent relationship which God has with the believer. Here it refers specifically to God’s indwelling of the believer in the person of the Holy Spirit, as indicated by 4:13b. Since it refers to state and not to change of status it is here translated “resides” (see 2:6).

⁶¹ tn The phrase “his [God’s] love is perfected (τετελειωμένη ἐστίν, teteleiwmenh estin) in us” in 4:12 is difficult. First it is necessary to decide whether αὐτοῦ (autou), which refers to God, is (1) subjective (God’s love for us) or (2) objective (our love for God). It is clear that a subjective genitive, stressing God’s love for us, is in view here, because the immediate context, 4:11a, has believers as the objects of God’s love (ὁ θεὸς ἠγάπησεν ἡμᾶς, Jo qeo" hgaphsen Jhma"). The entire phrase ἡ ἀγάπη αὐτοῦ ἐν ἡμῖν τετελειωμένη ἐστίν (Jh agaph autou en Jhmin teteleiwmenh estin) then refers to what happens when believers love one another (note the protasis of the conditional sentence in 4:12, ἐάν ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους [ean agapwmen allhlou"]). The love that comes from God, the love that he has for us, reaches perfection in our love for others, which is what God wants and what believers are commanded to do (see 3:23b).

⁶² tn Again whether the referent of the phrase ἐν τούτῳ (en toutw) (1) precedes or (2) follows is a problem. This time there are two ὅτι (Joti) clauses which follow. The first is an indirect discourse clause related to γινώσκομεν (ginwskomen) and giving the content of what believers know: “that we reside in him and he in us.” The second ὅτι clause is epexegetical (or explanatory) to the ἐν τούτῳ phrase, explaining how believers know that they reside in God and God remains in them: “in that he has given us of his Spirit.”

sn By this we know. According to the author of 1 John, the Father’s giving of the indwelling Holy Spirit to the believer is one means of providing assurance to the believer of his relationship to God. This is what was also stated in 1 John 3:24b in essentially identical terms.

⁶³ tn Grk “in him.” Context indicates that the pronoun refers to God (see 4:12).

⁶⁴ sn The genitive of his Spirit here, like the phrase in 3:24, probably reflects a partitive nuance, so that the author portrays God as ‘apportioning’ his Spirit to individual believers. This leads to the important observation that the author is not particularly interested in emphasizing (1) the ongoing interior witness of the Holy Spirit (which is what the passage is often understood to mean) but is emphasizing (2) the fact that God has given the Spirit to believers, and it is this fact that gives believers assurance of their relationship to God. In other words, it is the fact that the Holy Spirit has been given to believers, rather than the ongoing interior testimony of the Holy Spirit within the believer, which is the primary source of the believer’s assurance.

⁶⁵ tn Because σωτῆρα (swthra) is the object complement of υἱόν (Juion) in a double accusative construction in 4:14, there is an understood equative verb joining the two, with the resultant meaning “the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.”

⁶⁶ tn Grk “Whoever.”

⁶⁷ tn Here μένει (menei, from μένω [menw]) has been translated as “resides” because the confession is constitutive of the relationship, and the resulting state (“God resides in him”) is in view.

⁶⁸ tn Both ἐγνώκαμεν (egnwkamen) and πεπιστεύκαμεν (pepisteukamen) in 4:16 are perfect tenses, implying past actions with existing results. In this case the past action is specified as the recognition of (ἐγνώκαμεν) and belief in (πεπιστεύκαμεν) “the love which God has in us.” But what is the relationship between the two verbs γινώσκω (ginwskw) and πιστεύω (pisteuw)? (1) Some interpreters would see a different nuance in each. (2) But in the Gospel of John the two verbs frequently occur together in the same context, often in the same tense; examples may be found in John 6:69, 8:31-32, 10:38, 14:7-10, and 17:8. They also occur together in one other context in 1 John, 4:1-2. Of these John 6:69, Peter’s confession, is the closest parallel to the usage here: “We have come to believe [πεπιστεύκαμεν] and to know [ἐγνώκαμεν] that you are the holy One of God.” Here the order between “knowing” and “believing” is reversed from 1 John 4:16, but an examination of the other examples from the Gospel of John should make it clear that there is no difference in meaning when the order of the terms is reversed. It appears that the author considered both terms to describe a single composite action. Thus they represent a hendiadys which describes an act of faith/belief/trust on the part of the individual; knowledge (true knowledge) is an inseparable part of this act of faith.

⁶⁹ tn The force of the preposition ἐν (en) in the phrase ἐν ἡμῖν (en Jhmin) in 4:16a is disputed: Although (1) “for” (in the sense of “on behalf of”) is possible and is a common English translation, the other uses of the same phrase in 4:9 (where it refers to God’s love for us) and 4:12 (where it refers to God’s indwelling of the believer) suggest that (2) the author intends to emphasize interiority here – a reference to God’s love expressed in believers. This is confirmed by the only other uses in 1 John of the verb ἔχω (ecw) with the preposition ἐν (3:15 and 5:10) both of which literally mean something in someone.

⁷⁰ tn Once again μένω (menw) in its three occurrences in 4:16 looks at the mutual state of believers and God. No change of status or position is in view in the context, so the participle and both finite verbs are translated as “resides.”

⁷¹ tn The referent of ἐν τούτῳ (en toutw) here is more difficult to determine than most, because while there are both ἵνα (Jina) and ὅτι (Joti) clauses following, it is not clear whether or not they are related to the ἐν τούτῳ. There are actually three possibilities for the referent of ἐν τούτῳ in 4:17: (1) it may refer to the ἵνα clause which immediately follows, so that the love of believers is brought to perfection in that they have confidence in the day of judgment. The main problem with this interpretation is that since the day of judgment is still future, it necessitates understanding the second use of the preposition “in” (second ἐν [en]) to mean “about” or “concerning” with reference to the day of judgment in order to make logical sense. (2) The ἐν τούτῳ may refer to the ὅτι clause in 4:17b, meaning “love is perfected with us…in that just as he [Christ] is, so also are we in this world.” This makes logical sense, and there are numerous cases where ἐν τούτῳ is explained by a ὅτι clause that follows. However, according to this understanding the intervening ἵνα clause is awkward, and there is no other instance of the phrase ἐν τούτῳ explained by a following ὅτι clause where a ἵνα clause intervenes between the two in this way. (3) Thus, the third possibility is that ἐν τούτῳ refers to what precedes in 4:16b, and this also would make logical sense: “By this – by our residing in love so that we reside in God and he resides in us – is love brought to perfection with us.” This has the additional advantage of agreeing precisely with what the author has already said in 4:12: “If we love one another, God remains in us and his love is brought to perfection in us.” Thus option (3) is best, with the phrase ἐν τούτῳ referring to what precedes in 4:16b, and the ἵνα clause which follows indicates the result of this perfection of love in believers: In the future day of judgment they will have confidence. The ὅτι clause would then give the reason for such confidence in the day of judgment: because just as Jesus is, so also are believers in this world – they are already currently in relationship with God just as Jesus is.

⁷² tn The preposition μετά (meta) means “with” and modifies the verb τετελείωται (teteleiwtai). If the prepositional phrase modified the noun ἡ ἀγάπη which immediately precedes it, it would almost certainly have the Greek article, thus: ἡ ἀγάπη ἡ μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν (Jh agaph Jh meq’ Jhmwn).

sn To say love is perfected with us means “with regard to our actions in loving our brothers.”

⁷³ tn Grk “that one” (a reference to Jesus is indicated in the context). Once more the author uses the pronoun ἐκεῖνος (ekeinos) to refer to Jesus Christ, as he did in 2:6; 3:3, 5, 7, and 16. A reference to Christ is confirmed in this context because the author says that “just as he is, so also are we [believers] in this world” and since 3:2 indicated that believers are to be like God in the future (but are not yet), the only one believers can be like already in the present age is Jesus Christ.

⁷⁴ sn The entire phrase fear has to do with punishment may be understood in two slightly different ways: (1) “fear has its own punishment” or (2) “fear has to do with [includes] punishment.” These are not far apart, however, and the real key to understanding the expression lies in the meaning of the word “punishment” (κόλασις, kolasis). While it may refer to torture or torment (BDAG 555 s.v. 1) there are numerous Koine references involving eternal punishment (2 Macc 4:38; T. Reu. 5:5; T. Gad 7:5) and this is also the use in the only other NT reference, Matt 25:46. In the present context, where the author has mentioned having confidence in the day of judgment (4:17), it seems virtually certain that eternal punishment (or fear of it) is what is meant here. The (only) alternative to perfected love, which results in confidence at the day of judgment, is fear, which has to do with the punishment one is afraid of receiving at the judgment. As 4:18b states, “the one who fears [punishment] has not been perfected in love.” It is often assumed by interpreters that the opposite to perfected love (which casts out fear) is imperfect love (which still has fear and therefore no assurance). This is possible, but it is not likely, because the author nowhere mentions ‘imperfect’ love, and for him the opposite of ‘perfected’ love appears to be not imperfect love but hate (cf. 4:20). In other words, in the antithetical (‘either/or’) categories in which the author presents his arguments, one is either a genuine believer, who becomes ‘perfected’ in love as he resides in love and in a mutually indwelling relationship with God (cf. 4:16b), or one is not a genuine believer at all, but one who (like the opponents) hates his brother, is a liar, and does not know God at all. This individual should well fear judgment and eternal punishment because in the author’s view that is precisely where such a person is headed.

⁷⁵ tn Grk “punishment, and the person who fears.”

⁷⁶ tn “Punishment” is not repeated in the Greek text at this point but is implied.

⁷⁷ sn No object is supplied for the verb love (the author with his propensity for obscurity has left it to the readers to supply the object). The obvious objects that could be supplied from the context are either God himself or other believers (the brethren). It may well be that the author has both in mind at this point; the statement is general enough to cover both alternatives, although the following verse puts more emphasis on love for the brethren.

⁷⁸ tn Grk “if anyone should say…”

⁷⁹ tn “Yet” is supplied to bring out the contrast.

⁸⁰ tn See note on the phrase “fellow Christian” in 2:9.

⁸¹ tn See note on the phrase “fellow Christian” in 2:9.

⁸² sn In 4:20 the author again describes the opponents, who claim to love God. Their failure to show love for their fellow Christians proves their claim to know God to be false: The one who does not love his fellow Christian whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.

⁸³ tn The ἵνα (Jina) clause in 4:21 could be giving (1) the purpose or (2) the result of the commandment mentioned in the first half of the verse, but if it does, the author nowhere specifies what the commandment consists of. It makes better sense to understand this ἵνα clause as (3) epexegetical to the pronoun ταύτην (tauthn) at the beginning of 4:21 and thus explaining what the commandment consists of: “that the one who loves God should love his brother also.”

⁸⁴ tn See note on the phrase “fellow Christian” in 2:9.

⁸⁵ tn Heb “of bloods.” The plural noun דָּמִים (damim, “bloods”) connotes “bloodshed” or “blood guilt” (BDB 196-97 s.v. דָּם 2.f; HALOT 224-25 s.v. דָּם 5; DCH 2:443-47 s.v. דָּם). Human blood in its natural state in the body is generally designated by the singular form דָּם (dam, “blood”); after it has been spilled, the plural form is used to denote the abundance of blood in quantity (IBHS 119-20 §7.4.1; BDB 196-97 s.v. דָּם 2.f). The plural is often used with the verb שָׁפַךְ (shafakh, “to spill, to shed”) to connote bloodshed (Gen 9:6; 37:22; Lev 17:4; Num 35:33; Deut 21:7; 1 Sam 25:31; 1 Kgs 18:28; 2 Kgs 21:16; 24:4; 1 Chr 22:8; Ezek 16:38; 22:4, 6, 9, 12, 27; 23:45; 33:25; 36:18; Prov 1:16). The plural often denotes bloodshed (Gen 4:10; 2 Sam 3:27, 28; 16:8; 20:12; 1 Kgs 2:5; 2 Kgs 9:7, 26, 33; 2 Chr 24:25; Job 16:18; Isa 1:15; 4:4; 9:4; 26:21; 33:15; 34:3, 6, 7; Ezek 7:23; 16:6, 9, 36; 21:37; 22:13; 24:8; Hos 1:4; 4:2; Hab 2:8, 12, 17; Mic 3:10; Zech 9:7) or blood-guilt (Exod 22:1; Lev 20:9; Num 35:27; Deut 19:10; 22:8; Judg 9:24; 1 Sam 25:26, 33; 2 Sam 21:1; Isa 33:15; Ezek 9:9). The term can refer to murder (2 Sam 16:7, 8; Pss 5:7; 26:9; 55:24; 59:3; 139:10; Prov 29:10) or more generally, connote social injustice, cruelty, and oppression (Deut 21:8, 9; 1 Sam 19:5; 2 Kgs 21:6; 24:4; Pss 94:21; 106:38; Prov 6:17; Isa 59:7; Jer 7:6; 22:3; Joel 4:19; Jonah 1:14). The term may refer to blood that has been shed in war (1 Kgs 2:5) and the unnecessary shedding of blood of one’s enemy (1 Kgs 2:31), which is probably the intended meaning here. The phrase “city of bloodshed” (עִיר דָּמִים [’ir damim], “city of bloods”) is used elsewhere to describe a city held guilty before God of blood-guilt and about to be judged by God (Ezek 22:2; 24:6).

⁸⁶ tn Heb “All of her [is] lying.”

⁸⁷ tn Heb “full of plunder.”

⁸⁸ tn Heb “prey does not depart.”

⁸⁹ tn Heb “the sound of a whip.”

⁹⁰ tn Heb “the shaking of a chariot wheel.”

⁹¹ tn Heb “a horse.”

⁹² tn Albright argues that the term דֹּהֵר (doher) should be translated as “chariot driver” (W. F. Albright, “The Song of Deborah in Light of Archaeology,” BASOR 62 [1936]: 30). More recent research indicates that this term denotes “to dash” (HALOT 215 s.v.) or “to gallop, neigh” (DCH 2:417 s.v. דהר I). It is used as a synonym for רָקַד (raqad, “to skip”). This Hebrew verb is related to Egyptian thr (“to travel by chariot”) and Arabic dahara VII (“to hurry”). The related noun דַּהֲרָה (daharah) means “dashing, galloping” (Judg 5:22; HALOT 215 s.v.; DCH 2:417 s.v. דַּהֲרָה I).

⁹³ tn Heb “a chariot.”

⁹⁴ tn The Piel participle מְרַקֵּדָה (mÿraqqedah, “jolting”) is from רַקַד (raqad); this verb means “to dance, to leap” (of children, Job 21:11), “to skip about, to dance” (Eccl 3:4), and “to leap” (of chariots, Joel 2:5). In related Semitic languages (Akkadian, Ugaritic, and Arabic) the root raqad means “to dance, to skip about.” Here, the verb is used as a figurative expression (hypocatastasis) to describe the jostling of the madly rushing war-chariots.

⁹⁵ tn Heb “a horseman.” Although the Hebrew term פָּרָס (paras, alternately spelled פָּרָשׂ [paras] here) could denote “horse” (1 Sam 8:11; Joel 2:4; Hab 1:8; Jer 46:4), the Hiphil participle מַעֲלֶה (ma’aleh, “cause to charge”) – the subject of which is פָּרָס – suggests that פָּרָס refers here to “horsemen” charging their horses (2 Sam 1:6; 1 Kgs 20:20; Jer 4:29; 46:4).

⁹⁶ tn The term מַעֲלֶה (ma’aleh; the Hiphil participle “cause to charge”) refers to charioteers bringing war-horses up to a charge or attack (e.g., Jer 46:9; 51:27). On the other hand, the KJV translates this as “lifteth up [both the bright sword and the glittering sword],” while RV renders it as “mounts [his horse (or chariot)].”

⁹⁷ tn Heb “a sword.”

⁹⁸ tn Heb “flash of a sword.” Alternately, “swords flash.” Although לַהַב (lahav) can mean “blade” (Judg 3:22; 1 Sam 17:7), it means “flash [of the sword]” here (e.g., Hab 3:11; see HALOT 520 s.v.) as suggested by its parallelism with וּבְרַק (uvÿraq, “flashing, gleaming point [of the spear]”); cf. Job 20:25; Deut 32:41; Hab 3:11; Ezek 21:15.

⁹⁹ tn Heb “a spear.”

¹⁰⁰ tn Heb “and flash of a spear.” Alternately, “spears glimmer” (HALOT 162 s.v. בָּרָק).

¹⁰¹ tn Heb “many slain.”

¹⁰² tc The MT reads לַגְּוִיָּה (laggÿviyyah, “to the dead bodies”). The LXX reflects לְגוֹיָה (lÿgoyah, “to her nations”) which arose due to confusion between the consonant ו (vav) and the vowel וֹ (holem-vav) in an unpointed text.

tn Heb “There is no end to the dead bodies.”

¹⁰³ tn Heb “they.”

¹⁰⁴ tn The preposition מִן (min) on מֵרֹב (merov; Heb “from the abundance of harlotries”) is causal: “because of; in consequence of” (HALOT 598 מִן 6; BDB 579-80 s.v. מִן 2.e). See, e.g., Exod 2:23; 15:23; Deut 7:7; 2 Sam 3:11, 37; Job 22:4; Isa 6:4; 43:4; 53:5; Ezek 28:5, 18; Nah 1:5; Zech 2:8; see also IBHS 213 §11.2.11.d; R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 58, §319. The causal sense is supported by the LXX’s ἀπό (apo, “from, because of”). Most English versions adopt the causal sense (KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NJPS).

¹⁰⁵ tn Heb “Because of the many harlotries of the harlot.” The MT connects v. 4 with vv. 5-6; however, the LXX connects v. 4 with vv. 1-3. The Masoretic division is followed by NRSV and NJPS; the LXX division is followed by KJV and NIV; and the NASB division equivocates on the issue. It is best to connect v. 4 with vv. 5-6 (following the MT) because: (1) vv. 1-3 constitute a self-contained woe-oracle; and (2) the theme of the harlot unifies vv. 4-6: the accusation against the harlot (v. 4) and the stereotypical punishment of the harlot (vv. 5-6).

¹⁰⁶ tn Heb “fair of form, a mistress of sorceries.”

¹⁰⁷ tn Heb “she.” This has been translated as a relative pronoun for stylistic reasons. The shift from 2nd person feminine singular (“you”) to 3rd person feminine singular (“she”) is an example of heterosis of persons, a common literary/poetic device used in Hebrew poetry and prophetic literature.

¹⁰⁸ tc The MT reads the Qal participle הַמֹּכֶרֶת (hammokheret) which is derived from מָכַר (makhar, “to sell, to betray”): “the one who sells/betrays [nations].” The MT is supported by the LXX. The Dead Sea Scrolls read הממכרת (4QpNah 2:7): “the one who sells/betrays [nations]” (see DJD 5:38). Dahood repoints the MT as a Hophal participle, הַמֻּכֶּרֶת (hammukkeret) from נָכַר (nakhar, “to know, to recognize”): “the one who is known [by the nations for her harlotries]” (M. Dahood, “Causal Beth and the Root NKR in Nahum 3.4,” Bib 52 [1971]: 395-96). The BHS editors suggest emending the MT, due to metathesis, to הַכֹּמֶרֶת (hakkomeret) from II כמר (“to ensnare”; HALOT 482 s.v. II כמר) which is related to Assyrian kamaru [A] (“to ensnare”): “The one who ensnares [nations].” The related nouns “snare; net” (מִכְמָר, mikhmar) and “net” (מִכְמֶרֶת, mikhmeret) are used as metaphors of the wicked destroying their victims (Ps 141:10; Isa 51:20; Hab 1:15, 16). This approach is adopted by NJPS: “who ensnared nations.” Others suggest emending to the Qal participle הַכֹּמֶרֶת from III כמר (“to destroy, to overthrow”; BDB 485 s.v. III כמר) related to Assyrian kamaru [B] (“to destroy; to annihilate”): “the one who destroys nations.” The MT may be retained due to strong external support (LXX and 4QpNah) and adequate internal support; the conjectural emendations are unnecessary.

tn Heb “sells.” Alternately, “enslaves”; or perhaps “deceives.” Most scholars derive the Qal participle הַמֹּכֶרֶת from מָכַר (“to sell, to betray”): “who sells nations.” When used in reference to people, this verb may denote three things: (1) to sell slaves or prisoners of war (Exod 21:8; Deut 21:14; 24:7; Joel 4:3, 6); (2) to sell off someone into the hands of the enemy, that is, to give someone entirely into their power (Exod 21:7; 22:2; Deut 32:30; Judg 2:14; 3:8; 4:2; 10:7; 1 Sam 12:9; Isa 50:1; Joel 4:8; Ps 44:13); and (3) to betray someone (possibly the meaning here in Nah 3:4?); see HALOT 581-82 s.v. I מכר; BDB 569 s.v. מָכַר. This is related to Assyrian makara (“to carry out trade; to make merchandise of”). Some English versions nuance הַמֹּכֶרֶת as “who sells nations” (KJV, NASB); others nuance it metonymically, “who enslaves nations” (NIV, NRSV). Thomas derives הַמֹּכֶרֶת from II מָכַר (“to deceive, to beguile, to betray”) which is related to Arabic makara (“to betray”): “who deceives the nations” (D. W. Thomas, “The Root mkr in Hebrew,” JTS 37 [1936]: 388-89; idem, “A Further Note on the Root mkr in Hebrew,” JTS 3 [1952]: 214).

¹⁰⁹ tn Heb “the one who sells nations by her harlotries.”

¹¹⁰ tn Heb “and clans by her sorceries.”

¹¹¹ tn Traditionally, “the Lord of hosts.” See the note on the expression “the Lord who commands armies” in 2:13.

¹¹² tn Heb “I will uncover your skirts over your face.”

sn Strip off your clothes. In the ancient Near East, the typical punishment for a prostitute was to strip her of her clothes publicly to expose her to open shame, embarrassment, and public ridicule. Because Nineveh had acted like a prostitute, the Lord would punish her as a prostitute.

¹¹³ tn Heb “detestable things”; KJV, ASV “abominable filth”; NCV “filthy garbage.”

¹¹⁴ tc While the MT reads 2nd person feminine singular לָךְ (lakh, “for you”), the LXX reads αὔτή (Jauth, “for her”). The Dead Sea Scrolls from Wadi Murabba’at read לך (“for you”). The MT reading is preferred for several reasons: (1) it is supported by the scrolls from Wadi Murabba’at; (2) it is the most difficult reading; and (3) it explains the origin of the LXX which probably harmonized this with the preceding 3rd person feminine singular pronoun. Abrupt switches from third to second person are commonly found in poetic and prophetic literature (e.g., Deut 32:15; Isa 5:8; Jer 29:19; Job 16:7) as well as in Northwest Semitic curses (see S. Gevirtz, “West-Semitic Curses and the Problem of the Origins of Hebrew Law,” VT 11 [1961]: 147, n. 4).

tn Heb “From whence shall I find comforters for you?”

¹¹⁵ tn Heb “Are you better than Thebes?”

¹¹⁶ tn Heb “No-Amon.” The name is transliterated by NAB, NASB; many other English versions employ the equivalent “Thebes.”

¹¹⁷ tn The relative pronoun אֲשֶׁר (’asher) is functioning in a possessive sense: “whose” (Job 37:17; Ps 95:5; Isa 5:28; 49:23; Jer 31:32; see HALOT 98 s.v. 4).

¹¹⁸ tn The consonantal form חיל is vocalized in the MT as חֵיל (khel, “rampart”). The LXX translation ἡ ἀρξή (Jh arxh, “strength”) reflects confusion between the relatively rare חֵיל and the more common חַיִל (khayil, “strength”); see HALOT 310-12.

¹¹⁹ tn Heb “from (the) sea.” The form should be emended to מַיִם (mayim, “water”). This is a figurative description of the Nile River: It functioned like a fortress wall for Thebes.

¹²⁰ sn Cush is the Hebrew name for the ancient kingdom of Ethiopia (also known as Nubia) along the Nile valley south of Aswan in Egypt. Many modern English versions render this “Ethiopia,” but this area is not to be confused with modern Ethiopia (i.e., Abyssinia).

¹²¹ tn Or “Cush was limitless and Egypt was strong.” The NIV treats the two nations (“Cush and Egypt”) as a hendiadys of the predicate and translates them as one clause. On the other hand, NJPS treats them separately and translates them in two different clauses.

¹²² tn Heb “Lubim.” Most modern English versions render this as “Libya” or “the Libyans.”

¹²³ tn The preposition בְּ (bet) in בְּעֶזְרָתֵךְ (bÿ’ezratekh) should probably be taken as a bet of identity rather than in a locative sense (DCH 2:84 s.v. בְּ 7; HALOT 104 s.v. בְּ 3).

¹²⁴ tc Although the LXX and Syriac read a 3 fs suffix, the 2 fs suffix on MT בְּעֶזְרָתֵךְ (bÿ’ezratekh, “your strength”) should be retained because of the support of 4QpNah, which reads בעזרתך. The MT is the more difficult reading and best explains the origin of the variants, which attempt to harmonize with the preceding 3 fs suffix.

tn Heb “your strength.”

sn This is an example of enallage – a figure of speech in which a speaker addresses a party who is not present. Here, the prophet Nahum addresses the city of Thebes.

¹²⁵ tn The Hebrew noun עָזָר (’azar) has been understood in two ways: (1) In the light of the Ugaritic root gzr (“hero, valiant one, warrior”), several scholars posit the existence of the Hebrew root II עָזַר (“warrior”), and translate בְּעֶזְרָתֵךְ (bÿ’ezratekh) as “in your army” (M. Dahood, Psalms, 1:210; P. Miller, “Ugaritic GZR and Hebrew `ZR II,” UF 2 [1970]: 168). (2) It is better to relate the Hebrew עָזָר to Canaanite izirtu (“military help”) which appears several times in the El-Amarna correspondence: “Let him give you soldiers and chariots as help for you so that they may protect the city” (EA 87:13) and “I have provided help for Tyre” (EA 89:18); see K. J. Cathcart, “More Philological Studies in Nahum,” JNWSL 7 (1979): 11.

¹²⁶ tc The MT reads לַגֹּלָה (laggolah, “as a captive”) with the preposition לְ (lamed) denoting essence/identity. On the other hand, 4QpNah reads בגולה (“as a captive”) with the preposition בְּ (bet) denoting essence/identity (“as a captive”). The LXX’s αἰξμάλωτος (aixmalwto", “as a prisoner”) does not reveal which preposition was the original.

¹²⁷ tc The past-time reference of the context indicates that the Pual verb יְרֻטְּשׁוּ (yÿruttÿshu) is a preterite describing past action (“they were smashed to pieces”) rather than an imperfect describing future action (“they will be smashed to pieces”). The past-time sense is supported by the Syriac and Vulgate. The LXX, however, misunderstood the form as an imperfect. Not recognizing that the form is a preterite, the BHS editors suggest emending to Pual perfect רֻטְּשׁוּ (ruttÿshu, “they were smashed to pieces”). This emendation is unnecessary once the possibility of a preterite is recognized. The Masoretic reading is supported by the reading ירוטשו found in the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah 3:10).

¹²⁸ tc The MT reads יַדּוּ (yadu, “they cast [lots]”) from יָדַד (yadad, “to cast [lots]”). On the other hand, the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah) read ירו (“they threw, cast [lots]”) from יָרָה (yarah, “to throw, cast [lots]”) (e.g., Josh 18:6). The textual variant arose due to orthographic confusion between ד (dalet) and ר (resh) – two Hebrew letters very similar in appearance. The root יָדַד is relatively rare – it occurs only two other times (Obad 11; Joel 4:3 [3:3 ET]) – therefore, it might have been confused with יָרָה which appears more frequently.

¹²⁹ tc The MT and Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah) read ועל נכבדיה (“for her nobles”). The LXX reflects וְעַל כָּל נִכְבַּדֶּיהָ (vÿ’al kol nikhbaddeha, “for all her nobles”), adding כָּל (“all”). The LXX addition probably was caused by the influence of the repetition of כָּל in the preceding and following lines.

¹³⁰ tc The editors of BHS suggest emending the MT reading, the Qal imperfect תִּשְׁכְּרִי (tishkÿri, “you will become drunk”) from שָׁכַר (shakhar, “to become drunk”; BDB 1016 s.v. שָׁכַר; HALOT 971 s.v. שׁכר). However, there is no external textual support for the emendation. The imagery of drunkenness is a common figure for defeat in battle.

tn Heb “you will be drunken.”

sn You…will act like drunkards. The imagery of drunkenness is frequently used to describe defeat in battle (Isa 49:26; Jer 25:27; 51:21). It is an appropriate use of imagery: Drunkards frequently pass out and wine drools out of their mouth; likewise, slain warriors lie fallen and their blood flows out of their mouths.

¹³¹ tc The MT reads the Niphal participle נַעֲלָמָה (na’alamah) from I עָלַם (’alam, “to conceal”). This is supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls, נעלמה (4QpNah 3:11), and is reflected by the LXX. Several scholars suggest nuancing the Niphal in a passive sense: “you will be concealed” or “you will be obscured” (BDB 761 s.v. I. עָלַם 2). However, the reflexive sense “you will conceal yourself; you will hide yourself” (e.g., Ps 26:4) is better (HALOT 835 s.v. עלם). On the other hand, the BHS editors suggest emending to the Niphal participle נֶעֱלָפָה (ne’elafah) from עָלַף (’alaf, “become faint”): “you will become faint,” “you will pass out,” or “you will swoon” (HALOT 836 s.v. עלף; BDB 761 s.v. I. עָלַם 2). This is unnecessary and lacks textual support.

tn Heb “you will hide yourself.”

¹³² sn Ironically, Sennacherib had recently planted fig trees along all the major avenues in Nineveh to help beautify the city, and had encouraged the citizens of Nineveh to eat from these fruit trees. How appropriate that Nineveh’s defenses would now be compared to fig trees whose fruit would be eaten by its enemies.

¹³³ sn This extended simile compares the siege of Nineveh with reapers shaking a tree to harvest the “first-ripe fruit.” Fruit that matured quickly and ripened early in the season dropped from the trees more easily than the later crop which developed more slowly (Isa 28:4). To harvest the later crop the worker had to climb the tree (sixteen to twenty feet tall) and pick the figs by hand from each branch. On the other hand, the fruit from the early harvest could be gathered quickly and with a minimum of effort by simply shaking the trunk of the tree (G. Dalman, Arbeit und Sitte in Palestina, 1:378-80). The point of this simile is that Nineveh would fall easily and quickly.

¹³⁴ tn This conditional sentence expresses a real anticipated situation expected to occur in the future, rather than an unreal completely hypothetical situation. The particle אִם (’im, “if”) introduces real conditions (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 75, §453). The imperfect tense verb יִנּוֹעוּ (yinno’u, “they are shaken”) depicts a future-time action conceived as a real situation expected to occur (see Joüon 2:629 §167.c; IBHS 510-11 §31.6.1).

¹³⁵ tn Heb “they”; the referent (the first ripe fruit of the previous line, rendered here as “their figs”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹³⁶ tn The syntax of the concluding clause (apodosis) emphasizes that this action is expected and certain to occur. This clause is introduced by vav conjunction and the perfect tense verb וְנָפְלוּ (vÿnoflu, “they will fall”) which emphasizes the expected certainty of the action (see Joüon 2:627-33 §167; IBHS 526-29 §32.2.1).

¹³⁷ sn This is appropriate imagery and highly ironic. After defeating their enemies, the Assyrian kings often encouraged their troops to consume the fruit of the conquered city’s fruit trees.

¹³⁸ tn Or “have been opened wide.” The Niphal perfect נִפְתְּחוּ (niftÿkhu) from פָּתַח (patach, “to open”) may designate a past-time action (“have been opened wide”) or a present-time circumstance (“are wide open”). The present-time sense is preferred in vv. 13-14. When used in reference to present-time circumstances, the perfect tense represents a situation occurring at the very instant the expression is being uttered; this is the so-called “instantaneous perfect” (IBHS 488-89 §30.5.1). The root פָּתַח (“to open”) is repeated for emphasis to depict the helpless state of the Assyrian defenses: פָּתוֹחַ נִפְתְּחוּ (patoakh niftÿkhu, “wide open”).

¹³⁹ tn Or “has consumed.” The Qal perfect אָכְלָה (’okhlah) from אָכַל (’akhal, “to consume”) refers either to a past-time action (“has consumed”) or a present-time action (“consumes”). The context suggests the present-time sense is preferable here. This is an example of the “instantaneous perfect” which represents a situation occurring at the very instant the expression is being uttered (see IBHS 488-89 §30.5.1).

¹⁴⁰ tn Heb “your bars.”

¹⁴¹ tn Heb “waters of siege.”

¹⁴² tn Heb “go into the mud.”

¹⁴³ tn Heb “Take hold of the mud-brick mold!”

¹⁴⁴ sn The expression the fire will consume you is an example of personification. Fire is often portrayed consuming an object like a person might consume food (Lev 6:3; 10:2; 16:25; Num 16:35; Deut 4:24; 5:22; Judg 9:15; 1 Kgs 18:38; 2 Kgs 1:10, 12, 14; 2 Chr 7:1; Isa 5:24; 10:17; 30:27, 30; 33:14; Amos 1:4, 7, 10, 12, 14; 2:2, 5; 5:6).

¹⁴⁵ tn The verb אָכַל (’akhal, “to consume, to devour”) is used twice for emphasis: “the fire will consume you, the sword…will devour you.”

sn The expression the sword…will devour you is an example of personification; the sword is frequently portrayed as consuming or devouring a defeated enemy (Deut 32:42; 2 Sam 2:26; 11:25; 18:8; Hos 11:6; Jer 2:30; 12:12); see BDB 37 s.v. אָכַל 4; HALOT 46 s.v. אכל.

¹⁴⁶ tc The root כָּבֵּד (kabbed, “be numerous”) is repeated for emphasis: the forms are the Hitpael infinitive absolute הִתְכַּבֵּד (hitkabbed) and Hitpael imperative הִתְכַּבְּדִי (hitkabbÿdi), both translated here as “Multiply yourself”). The infinitive absolute functions as an imperative (GKC §113.bb, 346). The BHS editors suggest emending the Hitpael infinitive absolute form הִתְכַּבֵּד to the Hitpael imperative form הִתְכַּבְּדִי in order to have two identical forms in this line. However, this is not necessary; the infinitive absolute is used for stylistic variation and often precedes imperatives to add urgency. The MT makes sense as it stands.

¹⁴⁷ tn Or “Increase!” or “You have increased.” The form and meaning of the MT perfect tense verb הִרְבֵּית (hirbet; from רָבָה [ravah], “to increase”) is debated. The LXX translated it as a simple past meaning. However, some scholars argue for an imperatival form or an imperatival nuance due to the presence of the two preceding volitive forms: הִתְכַּבֵּד (hitkabbed) and הִתְכַּבְּדִי (hitkabbÿdi, “Multiply…multiply!”). For example, the editors of BHS propose emending the perfect tense הִרְבֵּית to the imperative form הַרְבִי (harvi, “multiply!”). K. J. Cathcart (Nahum in the Light of Northwest Semitic [BibOr], 145) retains the MT perfect form but classifies it as a precative perfect with an imperatival nuance (“increase!”). Some scholars deny the existence of the precative perfect in Hebrew (G. R. Driver, Tenses in Hebrew, 25-26); however, others argue for its existence (IBHS 494-95 §30.5.4).

¹⁴⁸ tn The words “they are like” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarity.

¹⁴⁹ tn The verb פָּשַׁט (pashat, “to strip off”) refers to the action of the locust shedding its outer layer of skin or sheaths of wings while in the larval stage (BDB 833 s.v.). In a similar sense, this verb is normally used of a person stripping off garments (Gen 37:23; Lev 6:4; 16:23; Num 20:26, 28; 1 Sam 18:4; 19:24; 31:8, 9; 2 Sam 23:10; 1 Chr 10:8, 9; Neh 4:17; Job 19:9; 22:6; Ezek 16:39; 23:26; 26:16; 44:19; Hos 2:5; Mic 2:8; 3:3).

¹⁵⁰ tn Or “your guards.” The noun מִגְּזָרַיִךְ (miggÿzarayikh, “your courtiers”) is related to Assyrian manzazu (“courtier”; AHw 2:639.a) or massaru (“guard”; AHw 2:621.a); see HALOT 601 s.v. *מִגְּזָר). The nuance “princes,” suggested by older lexicographers (BDB 634 s.v. מִנְזַר), is obsolete.

¹⁵¹ tn The noun טַפְסְרַיִךְ (tafsÿrayikh, “your scribes”) from טִפְסָר (tifsar, “scribe, marshal”) is a loanword from Assyrian tupsarru and Sumerian DUB.SAR (“tablet-writer; scribe; official”); see BDB 381 s.v. טִפְסָר; HALOT 379 s.v. This term is also attested in Ugaritic tupsarru and in Phoenician dpsr. As in Jer 51:27, it is used of military and administrative officials. This term designated military officials who recorded the names of recruits and the military activities of Assyrian kings (see P. Machinist, “Assyria and its Image in the First Isaiah,” JAOS 103 [1983]: 736).

¹⁵² tn Heb “it flees.”

¹⁵³ tc The BHS editors propose redividing the singular MT reading וְנוֹדַד (vÿnodad, “and it flees”) to the plural וְנוֹדְדוּ (vÿnodÿdu, “and they flee”) due to the difficulty of a singular verb. However, the LXX supports the singular MT reading. The subject is גוֹב (gov, “swarm”), not individual locusts.

¹⁵⁴ tc The MT reads the noun with 3rd person masculine singular suffix מְקוֹמוֹ (mÿqomo, “its place”). The BHS editors suggest emending to 3rd person masculine plural suffix מְקוֹמָם (mÿqomam, “their place”). The MT is supported by the LXX reading, which has a singular suffix. The 3rd person masculine singular suffix is not as awkward as the BHS editors claim – its antecedent is the singular אַרְבֶּה (’arbeh, “locust”) and גוֹב גֹבָי (gov govay, “a swarm of locusts”), as reflected by the 3rd person masculine singular verb וְנוֹדַד (translated “it flies away”).

¹⁵⁵ tc The MT reads אַיָּם (’ayyam, “Where are they?”); see, e.g., Isa 19:12; DCH 1:202-3 s.v. אֵי; HALOT 40 s.v.). On the other hand, the LXX’s οὐαί αὐτοῖς (ouai autoi", “Woe to them!”) seems to reflect a reading of אֶיָּם (’eyyam, “Alas to them!”). The BHS editors suggest emending to אֵיכָה (“Alas!” or “How?”) and join it to v. 18, or אוֹי מַה (’oy mah, “Woe! Why…?”) joined to v. 18. HALOT (40 s.v.) suggests the emendation אֵיךָ (’ekha, “Alas to you!”).

tn Heb “Its place is not known – where are they?” The form אַיָּם has been taken in various ways: (1) an interrogative adverb with 3rd person masculine plural suffix (“where are they?”; GKC 296-97 §100.o; BDB 32 s.v. אַי 1.a); (2) an interrogative particle אֵי (’ey, “where?”) lengthened to אַיָּה (ayyah) and written with the enclitic particle ־ם (mem; GKC 295 §100.g), similar to ayyami (“where?”) in Assyrian (CAD 1.1.220); see W. A. Maier, Nahum, 356; R. D. Patterson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (WEC), 111; T. Longman, “Nahum,” The Minor Prophets, 2:826.

¹⁵⁶ sn The term shepherd was frequently used in the ancient Near East in reference to kings and other leaders (royal, political, military). Here, the expression your shepherds is an implied comparison (hypocatastasis) referring to the royal/military leadership of Assyria.

¹⁵⁷ tn The Hebrew term אַדִּירֶיךָ (’addirekha, “your officers”) from the root אַדִּיר (’addir, “high noble, majestic one”) designates “prominent people” in society (Judg 5:13, 25; Jer 14:3; Ps 16:3; Neh 3:5; 10:30; 2 Chr 23:20) and prominent “officers” in the military (Nah 2:6; 3:18); see HALOT 14 s.v.; BDB 12 s.v. אַדִּיר. This is related to Assyrian adaru (“high noble official”).

¹⁵⁸ tn The MT reads יִשְׁכְּנוּ (yishkÿnu, “they are settling down; they are lying down”) from שָׁכַן (shakhan, “to settle down, to lie down”). The BHS editors suggest emending to יָשְׁנוּ (yashnu, “they are slumbering”) in order to produce a tighter parallelism with the parallel verb נָמוּ (namu, “they are sleeping”). However, the MT has an adequate parallelism because the verb שָׁכַן is often used in reference to the dead lying down in the grave (Job 4:19; 26:5; Ps 94:17; Isa 26:19; see BDB 1015 s.v. שָׁכַן Qal.2.b). This is a figurative expression (hypocatastasis) for someone dying. Although the LXX misunderstood the syntax of this line, the LXX translation ἐκοίμισε (ekoimise, “he has laid low”) points to a form of the Masoretic verbal root שָׁכַן.

¹⁵⁹ tn The words “like sheep” are not in the Hebrew text; they are added for clarification of the imagery. The previous line compares Assyria’s leaders to shepherds.

¹⁶⁰ tc The MT reads the hapax legomenon כֵּהָה (kehah, “relief, alleviation”). On the other hand, the LXX reads ἴασις (iasi", “healing”) which seems to reflect a reading of גֵּהָה (gehah, “cure, healing”). In the light of the LXX, the BHS editors suggest emending the MT to גֵּהָה (gehah) – which occurs only once elsewhere (Prov 17:22) – on the basis of orthographic and phonological confusion between Hebrew כ (kaf) and ג (gimel). This emendation would produce the common ancient Near Eastern treaty-curse: “there is no cure for your wound” (e.g., Hos 5:13); see HALOT 461 s.v. כֵּהָה; K. J. Cathcart, “Treaty-Curses and the Book of Nahum,” CBQ 35 (1973): 186; D. Hillers, Treaty-Curses and the Old Testament Prophets, 64-66.

tn Heb “There is no relief of your fracture.”

¹⁶¹ tn Heb “your injury is fatal.”

¹⁶² tn Heb “the report of you.”

¹⁶³ tn Heb “will clap their hands over you.”

¹⁶⁴ tn Heb “For who ever escaped…?”

¹⁶⁵ tn Grk “And entering, he passed through”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

¹⁶⁶ map For location see Map5 B2; Map6 E1; Map7 E1; Map8 E3; Map10 A2; Map11 A1.

¹⁶⁷ tn Grk “And behold.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the introduction of a new character. The Greek word ἰδού (idou) at the beginning of this statement has not been translated because it has no exact English equivalent here, but adds interest and emphasis (BDAG 468 s.v. 1).

¹⁶⁸ sn This is the one place in the NT the office of chief tax collector is noted. He would organize the other tax collectors and collect healthy commissions (see also the note on the word tax collector in 3:12).

¹⁶⁹ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

¹⁷⁰ tn Grk “He was trying to see who Jesus was.”

¹⁷¹ tn Grk “and he was not able to because of the crowd, for he was short in stature.”

¹⁷² tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of Zacchaeus not being able to see over the crowd.

¹⁷³ sn A sycamore tree would have large branches near the ground like an oak tree and would be fairly easy to climb. These trees reach a height of some 50 ft (about 15 m).

¹⁷⁴ tn Grk “that one”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹⁷⁵ tc Most mss (A [D] W [Ψ] ˹³ 33^vid Ï latt) read “Jesus looking up, saw him and said.” The words “saw him and” are not in א B L T Θ Ë¹ 579 1241 2542 pc co. Both the testimony for the omission and the natural tendency toward scribal expansion argue for the shorter reading here.

¹⁷⁶ tn Grk “hastening, come down.” σπεύσας (speusa") has been translated as a participle of manner.

¹⁷⁷ sn I must stay. Jesus revealed the necessity of his associating with people like Zacchaeus (5:31-32). This act of fellowship indicated acceptance.

¹⁷⁸ sn On today here and in v. 9, see the note on today in 2:11.

¹⁷⁹ tn Grk “hastening, he came down.” σπεύσας (speusas) has been translated as a participle of manner.

¹⁸⁰ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹⁸¹ tn The participle χαίρων (cairwn) has been taken as indicating manner.

sn Zacchaeus responded joyfully. Luke likes to mention joy as a response to what God was doing (1:14; 2:10; 10:20; 13:17; 15:5, 32; 19:37; 24:41, 52).

¹⁸² tn Grk “they”; the referent is unspecified but is probably the crowd in general, who would have no great love for a man like Zacchaeus who had enriched himself many times over at their expense.

¹⁸³ tn This term is used only twice in the NT, both times in Luke (here and 15:2) and has negative connotations both times (BDAG 227 s.v. διαγογγύζω). The participle λέγοντες (legonte") is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

¹⁸⁴ sn Being the guest of a man who is a sinner was a common complaint about Jesus: Luke 5:31-32; 7:37-50; 15:1-2.

¹⁸⁵ sn Zacchaeus was a penitent man who resolved on the spot to act differently in the face of Jesus’ acceptance of him. In resolving to give half his possessions to the poor, Zacchaeus was not defending himself against the crowd’s charges and claiming to be righteous. Rather as a result of this meeting with Jesus, he was a changed individual. So Jesus could speak of salvation coming that day (v. 9) and of the lost being saved (v. 10).

¹⁸⁶ tn This is a first class condition in the Greek text. It virtually confesses fraud.

¹⁸⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative

¹⁸⁸ sn This is one of the few uses of the specific term salvation in Luke (1:69, 71, 77), though the concept runs throughout the Gospel.

¹⁸⁹ sn The household is not a reference to the building, but to the people who lived within it (L&N 10.8).

¹⁹⁰ sn Zacchaeus was personally affirmed by Jesus as a descendant (son) of Abraham and a member of God’s family.

¹⁹¹ sn The Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost is Jesus’ mission succinctly defined. See Luke 15:1-32.

¹⁹² tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹⁹³ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

¹⁹⁴ tn The present active infinitive δοκεῖν (dokein) has been translated as causal.

¹⁹⁵ sn Luke means here the appearance of the full kingdom of God in power with the Son of Man as judge as Luke 17:22-37 describes.

¹⁹⁶ tn Or perhaps, “the kingdom of God must appear immediately (see L&N 71.36).

¹⁹⁷ tn Grk “a man of noble birth” or “a man of noble status” (L&N 87.27).

¹⁹⁸ sn Note that the receiving of the kingdom takes place in the far country. This suggests that those in the far country recognize and acknowledge the king when his own citizens did not want him as king (v. 14; cf. John 1:11-12).

¹⁹⁹ sn The background to this story about the nobleman who went…to receive for himself a kingdom had some parallels in the area’s recent history: Archelaus was appointed ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea in 4 b.c., but the people did not like him. Herod the Great also made a similar journey to Rome where he was crowned King of Judea in 40 b.c., although he was not able to claim his kingdom until 37 b.c.

²⁰⁰ tn See the note on the word “slave” in 7:2.

²⁰¹ sn That is, one for each. A mina was a Greek monetary unit worth one hundred denarii or about four months’ wages for an average worker based on a six-day work week.

²⁰² tn Or “subjects.” Technically these people were not his subjects yet, but would be upon his return. They were citizens of his country who opposed his appointment as their king; later the newly-appointed king will refer to them as his “enemies” (v. 27).

²⁰³ tn The imperfect is intense in this context, suggesting an ongoing attitude.

²⁰⁴ tn Grk “this one” (somewhat derogatory in this context).

²⁰⁵ tn Or “to rule.”

²⁰⁶ tn Grk “And it happened that when.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

²⁰⁷ tn Grk “he said for these slaves to be called to him.” The passive construction has been translated as an active one and simplified to “he summoned.”

²⁰⁸ tn Grk “in order that he might know” (a continuation of the preceding sentence). Due to the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation by supplying the pronoun “he” as subject and the verb “wanted” to convey the idea of purpose.

²⁰⁹ sn The Greek verb earned refers to profit from engaging in commerce and trade (L&N 57.195). This is an examination of stewardship.

²¹⁰ tn Here δέ (de) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of the royal summons.

²¹¹ tn Or “Lord”; or “Master.” (and so throughout this paragraph).

²¹² tn See the note on the word “minas” in v. 13.

²¹³ tn Grk “he”; the referent (the nobleman of v. 12, now a king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

²¹⁴ tn See Luke 16:10.

²¹⁵ sn The faithful slave received expanded responsibility (authority over ten cities) as a result of his faithfulness; this in turn is an exhortation to faithfulness for the reader.

²¹⁶ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

²¹⁷ tn Here δέ (de) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of the second slave’s report.

²¹⁸ tn Grk “he”; the referent (the nobleman of v. 12, now a king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

²¹⁹ sn Though ten were given minas, the story stops to focus on the one who did nothing with the opportunity given to him. Here is the parable’s warning about the one who does not trust the master. This figure is called “another,” marking him out as different than the first two.

²²⁰ tn The word “slave” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied for stylistic reasons.

²²¹ tn Grk “behold.”

²²² tn Or “that I stored away.” L&N 85.53 defines ἀπόκειμαι (apokeimai) here as “to put something away for safekeeping – ‘to store, to put away in a safe place.’”

²²³ tn The piece of cloth, called a σουδάριον (soudarion), could have been a towel, napkin, handkerchief, or face cloth (L&N 6.159).

²²⁴ tn Or “exacting,” “harsh,” “hard.”

²²⁵ tn Grk “man, taking out.” The Greek word can refer to withdrawing money from a bank (L&N 57.218), and in this context of financial accountability that is the most probable meaning. Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation by supplying the pronoun “you” as subject and translating the participle αἴρεις (airei") as a finite verb.

²²⁶ tn The Greek verb τίθημι (tiqhmi) can be used of depositing money with a banker to earn interest (L&N 57.217). In effect the slave charges that the master takes what he has not earned.

²²⁷ tn Grk “He”; the referent (the nobleman of v. 12, now a king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

²²⁸ tn Grk “out of your own mouth” (an idiom).

²²⁹ tn Note the contrast between this slave, described as “wicked,” and the slave in v. 17, described as “good.”

²³⁰ tn Or “exacting,” “harsh,” “hard.”

²³¹ tn That is, “If you really feared me why did you not do a minimum to get what I asked for?”

²³² tn Grk “on the table”; the idiom refers to a place where money is kept or managed, or credit is established, thus “bank” (L&N 57.215).

²³³ tn Grk “to those standing by,” but in this context involving an audience before the king to give an accounting, these would not be casual bystanders but courtiers or attendants.

²³⁴ tn Grk “the ten minas.”

²³⁵ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context. Those watching the evaluation are shocked, as the one with the most gets even more. The word “already” is supplied at the end of the statement to indicate this surprise and shock.

²³⁶ tc A few mss (D W 69 pc and a few versional witnesses) omit this verse either to harmonize it with Matt 25:28-29 or to keep the king’s speech seamless.

²³⁷ tn Grk “to everyone who has, he will be given more.”

sn Everyone who has will be given more. Again, faithfulness yields great reward (see Luke 8:18; also Matt 13:12; Mark 4:25).

²³⁸ sn The one who has nothing has even what he seems to have taken away from him, ending up with no reward at all (see also Luke 8:18). The exact force of this is left ambiguous, but there is no comfort here for those who are pictured by the third slave as being totally unmoved by the master. Though not an outright enemy, there is no relationship to the master either. Three groups are represented in the parable: the faithful of various sorts (vv. 16, 18); the unfaithful who associate with Jesus but do not trust him (v. 21); and the enemies (v. 27).

²³⁹ tn Grk “to rule over them.”

²⁴⁰ tn This term, when used of people rather than animals, has some connotations of violence and mercilessness (L&N 20.72).

²⁴¹ sn Slaughter them. To reject the king is to face certain judgment from him.

²⁴² tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

²⁴³ tn This could mean “before [his disciples],” but that is slightly more awkward, requiring an elided element (the disciples) to be supplied.

²⁴⁴ sn This is yet another travel note on the journey to Jerusalem. See also Luke 18:31; 19:11. Jesus does not actually enter Jerusalem until 19:45.

map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

²⁴⁵ tn Grk “And it happened that when.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated. Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.

²⁴⁶ sn The exact location of the village of Bethphage is not known. Most locate it on the southeast side of the Mount of Olives and northwest of Bethany, about 1.5 miles (3 km) east of Jerusalem.

²⁴⁷ tn Grk “at the mountain called ‘of Olives.’” This form of reference is awkward in contemporary English, so the more familiar “Mount of Olives” has been used in the translation.

sn “Mountain” in English generally denotes a higher elevation than it often does in reference to places in Palestine. The Mount of Olives is really a ridge running north to south about 1.8 mi (3 km) long, east of Jerusalem across the Kidron Valley. Its central elevation is about 100 ft (30 m) higher than Jerusalem. It was named for the large number of olive trees which grew on it.

²⁴⁸ tn Grk “saying.”

²⁴⁹ tn Grk “the village lying before [you]” (BDAG 530 s.v. κατέναντι 2.a).

²⁵⁰ tn Grk “in which entering.” This is a continuation of the previous sentence in Greek, but because of the length and complexity of the construction a new sentence was started here in the translation.

²⁵¹ tn Grk “a colt tied there on which no one of men has ever sat.”

²⁵² sn The custom called angaria allowed the impressment of animals for service to a significant figure.

²⁵³ tn Grk “sent ahead and went and found.”

²⁵⁴ sn Exactly as he had told them. Nothing in Luke 19-23 catches Jesus by surprise. Often he directs the action.

²⁵⁵ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

²⁵⁶ tn Grk “said to them.”

²⁵⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

²⁵⁸ tn Grk “garments”; but this refers in context to their outer cloaks. The action is like 2 Kgs 9:13.

²⁵⁹ sn See Zech 9:9.

²⁶⁰ tn Although ἐπεβίβασαν (epebibasan) is frequently translated “set [Jesus] on it” or “put [Jesus] on it,” when used of a riding animal the verb can mean “to cause to mount” (L&N 15.98); thus here “had Jesus get on it.” The degree of assistance is not specified.

²⁶¹ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

²⁶² tn The disciples initiated this action (since in 19:35 and 37 they are the subject) but the other gospels indicate the crowds also became involved. Thus it is difficult to specify the referent here as “the disciples” or “people.”

²⁶³ tn Grk “the descent of”; this could refer to either the slope of the hillside itself or the path leading down from it (the second option has been adopted for the translation, see L&N 15.109).

²⁶⁴ sn See the note on the name Mount of Olives in v. 29.

²⁶⁵ tn Grk “the”; the Greek article has been translated here as a possessive pronoun (ExSyn 215).

²⁶⁶ tn Here the participle χαίροντες (caironte") has been translated as a finite verb in English; it could also be translated adverbially as a participle of manner: “began to praise God joyfully.”

²⁶⁷ sn See 2:13, 20; Acts 2:47; 3:8-9.

²⁶⁸ tn Or “works of power,” “miracles.” Jesus’ ministry of miracles is what has drawn attention. See Luke 7:22.

²⁶⁹ tn Grk “they had seen, saying.” The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

²⁷⁰ sn Luke adds the title king to the citation from Ps 118:26 to make clear who was meant (see Luke 18:38). The psalm was used in looking for the deliverance of the end, thus leading to the Pharisees’ reaction.

²⁷¹ sn A quotation from Ps 118:26.

²⁷² tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context. Not all present are willing to join in the acclamation.

²⁷³ sn See the note on Pharisees in 5:17.

²⁷⁴ sn Teacher, rebuke your disciples. The Pharisees were complaining that the claims were too great.

²⁷⁵ tn Grk “and answering, he said.” This has been simplified in the translation to “He answered.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

²⁷⁶ tn Grk “these.”

²⁷⁷ sn This statement amounts to a rebuke. The idiom of creation speaking means that even creation knows what is taking place, yet the Pharisees miss it. On this idiom, see Gen 4:10 and Hab 2:11.

²⁷⁸ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.

²⁷⁹ tn Grk “he.”

²⁸⁰ sn When Jesus approached and saw the city. This is the last travel note in Luke’s account (the so-called Jerusalem journey), as Jesus approached and saw the city before entering it.

²⁸¹ sn On this day. They had missed the time of Messiah’s coming; see v. 44.

²⁸² tn Grk “the things toward peace.” This expression seems to mean “the things that would ‘lead to,’ ‘bring about,’ or ‘make for’ peace.”

²⁸³ sn But now they are hidden from your eyes. This becomes an oracle of doom in the classic OT sense; see Luke 13:31-35; 11:49-51; Jer 9:2; 13:7; 14:7. They are now blind and under judgment (Jer 15:5; Ps 122:6).

²⁸⁴ sn Jesus now predicted the events that would be fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem in a.d. 70. The details of the siege have led some to see Luke writing this after Jerusalem’s fall, but the language of the verse is like God’s exilic judgment for covenant unfaithfulness (Hab 2:8; Jer 6:6, 14; 8:13-22; 9:1; Ezek 4:2; 26:8; Isa 29:1-4). Specific details are lacking and the procedures described (build an embankment against you) were standard Roman military tactics.

²⁸⁵ sn An embankment refers to either wooden barricades or earthworks, or a combination of the two.

²⁸⁶ tn Grk “They will raze you to the ground.”

sn The singular pronoun you refers to the city of Jerusalem personified.

²⁸⁷ tn Grk “your children within you.” The phrase “[your] walls” has been supplied in the translation to clarify that the city of Jerusalem, metaphorically pictured as an individual, is spoken of here.

²⁸⁸ sn (Not) one stone on top of another is an idiom for total destruction.

²⁸⁹ tn Grk “leave stone on stone.”

²⁹⁰ tn Grk “the time of your visitation.” To clarify what this refers to, the words “from God” are supplied at the end of the verse, although they do not occur in the Greek text.

sn You did not recognize the time of your visitation refers to the time God came to visit them. They had missed the Messiah; see Luke 1:68-79.

²⁹¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

²⁹² tn Grk “he.”

²⁹³ tn Grk “the temple” (also in v. 47).

sn The merchants (those who were selling things there) would have been located in the Court of the Gentiles.

²⁹⁴ sn Matthew (21:12-27), Mark (11:15-19) and Luke (here, 19:45-46) record this incident of the temple cleansing at the end of Jesus’ ministry. John (2:13-16) records a cleansing of the temple at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. See the note on the word temple courts in John 2:14 for a discussion of the relationship of these accounts to one another.

²⁹⁵ sn A quotation from Isa 56:7.

²⁹⁶ tn Or “a hideout” (see L&N 1.57).

²⁹⁷ sn A quotation from Jer 7:11. The meaning of Jesus’ statement about making the temple courts a den of robbers probably operates here at two levels. Not only were the religious leaders robbing the people financially, but because of this they had also robbed them spiritually by stealing from them the opportunity to come to know God genuinely. It is possible that these merchants had recently been moved to this location for convenience.

²⁹⁸ tn Grk “And he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

²⁹⁹ tn Grk “and the scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 5:21.

³⁰⁰ tn Grk “to destroy.”

sn The action at the temple was the last straw. In their view, if Jesus could cause trouble in the holy place, then he must be stopped, so the leaders were seeking to assassinate him.

³⁰¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.

³⁰² tn Grk “they did not find the thing that they might do.”

³⁰³ sn All the people hung on his words is an idiom for intent, eager listening. Jesus’ popularity and support made it unwise for the leadership to seize him.