¹ tn Heb “in the days of the judging of the judges.” The LXX simply reads “when the judges judged,” and Syriac has “in the days of the judges.” Cf. NASB “in the days when the judges governed (ruled NRSV).”

sn Many interpreters, reading this statement in the light of the Book of Judges which describes a morally corrupt period, assume that the narrator is painting a dark backdrop against which Ruth’s exemplary character and actions will shine even more brightly. However, others read this statement in the light of the book’s concluding epilogue which traces the full significance of the story to the time of David, the chosen king of Judah (4:18-22).

² tn Heb “in the land.” The phrase “of Judah” is supplied in the translation to clarify the referent.

³ sn The name Bethlehem (בֵּית לֶחֶם, bet lekhem) is from “house, place” (בֵּית) and “bread, food” (לֶחֶם), so the name literally means “House of Bread” or “Place of Food.” Perhaps there is irony here: One would not expect a severe famine in such a location. This would not necessarily indicate that Bethlehem was under divine discipline, but merely that the famine was very severe, explaining the reason for the family’s departure.

map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

⁴ tn Or “to live temporarily.” The verb גּוּר (gur, “sojourn”) may refer to (1) temporary dwelling in a location (Deut 18:6; Judg 17:7) or (2) permanent dwelling in a location (Judg 5:17; Ps 33:8). When used of a foreign land, it can refer to (1) temporary dwelling as a visiting foreigner (Gen 12:10; 20:1; 21:34; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 44:14) or (2) permanent dwelling as a resident foreigner (Gen 47:4; Exod 6:4; Num 15:14; Deut 26:5; 2 Sam 4:3; Jer 49:18,33; 50:40; Ezek 47:22-23). Although Naomi eventually returned to Judah, there is some ambiguity whether or not Elimelech intended the move to make them permanent resident foreigners. Cf. NASB “to sojourn” and NIV “to live for a while,” both of which imply the move was temporary, while “to live” (NCV, NRSV, NLT) is more neutral about the permanence of the relocation.

sn Some interpreters view Elimelech’s departure from Judah to sojourn in Moab as lack of faith in the covenant God of Israel to provide for his family’s needs in the land of promise; therefore his death is consequently viewed as divine judgment. Others note that God never prohibited his people from seeking food in a foreign land during times of famine but actually sent his people to a foreign land during a famine in Canaan on at least one occasion as an act of deliverance (Gen 37-50). In this case, Elimelech’s sojourn to Moab was an understandable act by a man concerned for the survival of his family, perhaps even under divine approval, so their death in Moab was simply a tragedy, a bad thing that happened to a godly person.

⁵ tn Heb “he and his wife and his two sons.” The LXX omits “two.”

⁶ sn The name “Elimelech” literally means “My God [is] king.” The narrator’s explicit identification of his name seems to cast him in a positive light.

⁷ tn Heb “and the name of his wife [was] Naomi.” This has been simplified in the translation for stylistic reasons.

sn The name Naomi (נָעֳמִי, na’omi) is from the adjective נֹעַם (noam, “pleasant, lovely”) and literally means “my pleasant one” or “my lovely one.” Her name will become the subject of a wordplay in 1:20-21 when she laments that she is no longer “pleasant” but “bitter” because of the loss of her husband and two sons.

⁸ tn Heb “and the name[s] of his two sons [were] Mahlon and Kilion.”

sn The name Mahlon (מַחְלוֹן, makhlon) is from מָלָה (malah, “to be weak, sick”) and Kilion (כִליוֹן, khilyon) is from כָלָה (khalah, “to be frail”). The rate of infant mortality was so high during the Iron Age that parents typically did not name children until they survived infancy and were weaned. Naomi and Elimelech might have named their two sons Mahlon and Kilion to reflect their weak condition in infancy due to famine – which eventually prompted the move to Moab where food was abundant.

⁹ tn Heb “[They were] Ephrathites.” Ephrathah is a small village (Ps 132:6) in the vicinity of Bethlehem (Gen 35:16), so close in proximity that it is often identified with the larger town of Bethlehem (Gen 35:19; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]; HALOT 81 s.v. אֶפְרָתָה); see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 64. The designation “Ephrathites” might indicate that they were residents of Ephrathah. However, the adjectival form אֶפְרָתִים (ephratim, “Ephrathites”) used here elsewhere refers to someone from the clan of Ephrath (cf. 1 Chr 4:4) which lived in the region of Bethlehem: “Now David was the son of an Ephrathite from Bethlehem in Judah whose name was Jesse” (1 Sam 17:12; cf. Mic 5:2 [MT 5:1]). So it is more likely that the virtually identical expression here – “Ephrathites from Bethlehem in Judah” – refers to the clan of Ephrath in Bethlehem (see R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth [NICOT], 91).

¹⁰ tn Heb “and were there”; KJV “continued there”; NRSV “remained there”; TEV “were living there.”

¹¹ tn Heb “And Elimelech, the husband of Naomi, died.” The vav (ו) functions in a consecutive sense (“then”), but the time-frame is not explicitly stated.

¹² tn Heb “they.” The verb is 3rd person masculine plural referring to Naomi’s sons, as the translation indicates.

¹³ tn Heb “and they lifted up for themselves Moabite wives.” When used with the noun “wife,” the verb נָשָׂא (nasa’, “to lift up, carry, take”) forms the idiom “to take a wife,” that is, to marry (BDB 673 s.v. Qal.3.d; 2 Chr 11:21; 13:21; 24:3; Ezra 9:2,12; 10:44; Neh 13:25).

¹⁴ tn Heb “the name of the one [was] Orpah and the name of the second [was] Ruth.”

sn The name Orpah (עָרְפָּה, ’orpah) is from the noun עֹרֶף (’oref, “back of the neck”) and the related verb (“to turn one’s back”). The name Ruth (רוּת, rut) is from the noun רְעוּת (rÿ’ut, “friendship”), derived from the root רֵעַ (rea’, “friend, companion”). Ironically, Orpah will eventually turn her back on Naomi, while Ruth will display extraordinary friendship as her life-long companion (see 1:14). Since they seem to mirror the most definitive action of these women, perhaps they designate character types (as is the case with the name Mara in 1:21 and Peloni Almoni in 4:2) rather than their original birth names.

¹⁵ tn Heb “and the two of them also died, Mahlon and Kilion.”

¹⁶ tn The term יֶלֶד (yeled, “offspring”), from the verb יָלַד (yalad, “to give birth to”), is used only here of a married man. By shifting to this word from the more common term בֵּן (ben, “son”; see vv. 1-5a) and then using it in an unusual manner, the author draws attention to Naomi’s loss and sets up a verbal link with the story’s conclusion (cf. 4:16). Although grown men, they were still her “babies” (see E. F. Campbell, Ruth [AB], 56; F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 66).

¹⁷ tn Heb “and she arose, along with her daughters-in-law, and she returned from the region of Moab.”

¹⁸ tn Heb “in the region of Moab”; KJV, NRSV “in the country of Moab.” Since this is a repetition of the phrase found earlier in the verse, it has been shortened to “in Moab” in the present translation for stylistic reasons.

¹⁹ tn Heb “had visited” or “taken note of.” The basic meaning of פָּקַד (paqad) is “observe, examine, take note of” (T. F. Williams, NIDOTTE 3:658), so it sometimes appears with זָכַר (zakhar, “to remember”; Pss 8:4 [MT 5]; 106:4; Jer 14:10; 15:15; Hos 8:13; 9:9) and רָאָה (ra’ah, “to see”; Exod 4:31; Ps 80:14 [MT 15]; NIDOTTE 3:659). It often emphasizes the cause/effect response to what is seen (NIDOTTE 3:659). When God observes people in need, it is glossed “be concerned about, care for, attend to, help” (Gen 21:1; 50:24, 25; Exod 4:31; Ruth 1:6; 1 Sam 2:21; Jer 15:15; Zeph 2:7; Zech 10:3b; NIDOTTE 3:661). When humans are the subject, it sometimes means “to visit” needy people to bestow a gift (Judg 15:1; 1 Sam 17:18). Because it has such a broad range of meanings, its use here has been translated variously: (1) “had visited” (KJV, ASV, NASV, RSV; so BDB 823-24 s.v. פָּקַד); (2) “had considered” (NRSV) and “had taken note of” (TNK; so HALOT 955-57 s.v. פקד); and (3) “had come to the aid of” (NIV), “had blessed” (TEV), and “had given” (CEV; so NIDOTTE 3:657). When God observed the plight of his people, he demonstrated his concern by benevolently giving them food.

²⁰ tn Heb “by giving to them food.” The translation “reversing the famine and providing abundant crops” attempts to clarify the referent of לֶחֶם (lekhem, “food”) as “crops” and highlights the reversal of the famine that began in v. 1. The infinitive construct לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם (latet lahem lakhem) may denote (1) purpose: “[he visited his people] to give them food” or (2) complementary sense explaining the action of the main verb: “[he visited his people] by giving them food.” The term לֶחֶם (lakhem) here refers to agricultural fertility, the reversal of the famine in v. 1.

²¹ tn Heb “and she went out from the place she had been, and her two daughters-in-law with her, and they went on the way to return to the land of Judah.”

²² tn Heb “each to the house of her mother.” Naomi’s words imply that it is more appropriate for the two widows to go home to their mothers, rather than stay with their mother-in-law (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 75).

²³ tc The MT (Kethib) has the imperfect יַעֲשֶׂה (ya’aseh, “[the Lord] will do”), but the marginal reading (Qere) has the shortened jussive form יַעַשׂ (ya’as, “may [the Lord] do”), which is more probable in this prayer of blessing. Most English versions adopt the jussive form (KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, JPS, TEV, CEV, NLT).

²⁴ tn Heb “do with you”; NRSV “deal kindly with you”; NLT “reward you for your kindness.” The pronominal suffix “you” appears to be a masculine form, but this is likely a preservation of an archaic dual form (see E. F. Campbell, Ruth [AB], 65; F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 75-76).

²⁵ tn Heb “the dead” (so KJV, NRSV); NLT “your husbands.” This refers to their deceased husbands.

²⁶ tn Heb “devotion as you have done with the dead and with me.” The noun חֶסֶד (khesed, “devotion”) is a key thematic term in the book of Ruth (see 2:20; 3:10). G. R. Clark suggests that חֶסֶד “is not merely an attitude or an emotion; it is an emotion that leads to an activity beneficial to the recipient”; an act of חֶסֶד is “a beneficent action performed, in the context of a deep and enduring commitment between two persons or parties, by one who is able to render assistance to the needy party who in the circumstances is unable to help him – or herself” (The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible [JSOTSup], 267). HALOT 336-37 s.v. II חֶסֶד defines the word as “loyalty” or “faithfulness.” Other appropriate glosses might be “commitment” and “devotion.”

²⁷ tn Heb “may the Lord give to you, and find rest, each [in] the house of her husband.” The syntax is unusual, but following the jussive (“may he give”), the imperative with vav (ו) conjunctive (“and find”) probably indicates the purpose or consequence of the preceding action: “May he enable you to find rest.”

²⁸ tn Heb “rest.” While the basic meaning of מְנוּחָה (mÿnukhah) is “rest,” it often refers to “security,” such as provided in marriage (BDB 629-30 s.v.; HALOT 600 s.v.). Thus English versions render it in three different but related ways: (1) the basic sense: “rest” (KJV, ASV, NASV, NIV); (2) the metonymical cause/effect sense: “security” (NRSV, NJPS, REB, NLT, GW); and (3) the referential sense: “home” (RSV, TEV, CEV, NCV).

²⁹ tn Heb “in the house of her husband” (so KJV, NASB); NRSV “your husband.”

³⁰ tn Heb “they lifted their voice[s] and wept” (KJV, ASV, NASB all similar). This refers to loud weeping characteristic of those mourning a tragedy (Judg 21:2; 2 Sam 13:36; Job 2:12).

³¹ tn The particle כִּי (ki) here has the force of “no, on the contrary” (see Gen 31:26; Ps 44:22; HALOT 470 s.v. II כִּי 3).

³² tn Or perhaps “we want to” (so NCV, CEV, NLT), if the imperfect is understood in a modal sense indicating desire.

³³ tn Heb “Why would you want to come with me?” Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer. The phrase “to Judah” is added in the translation for clarification.

³⁴ tn Heb “Do I still have sons in my inner parts that they might become your husbands?” Again Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer.

³⁵ sn Too old to get married again. Naomi may be exaggerating for the sake of emphasis. Her point is clear, though: It is too late to roll back the clock.

³⁶ tn Verse 12b contains the protasis (“if” clause) of a conditional sentence, which is completed by the rhetorical questions in v. 13. For a detailed syntactical analysis, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 78-79.

³⁷ tn Heb “For them would you wait until they were grown?” Some understand הֲלָהֵן (halahen) as an interrogative he (ה) with an Aramaic particle meaning “therefore” (see GKC 301 §103.b.2 [n. 4]; cf. ASV, NASB), while others understand the form to consist of an interrogative he, the preposition ל (lamed, “for”), and an apparent third person feminine plural pronominal suffix (CEV, NLT “for them”). The feminine suffix is problematic, for its antecedent is the hypothetical “sons” mentioned at the end of v. 12. For this reason some emend the form to הלתם (“for them,” a third person masculine plural suffix). R. L. Hubbard raises the possibility that the nunated suffix is an archaic Moabite masculine dual form (Ruth [NICOT], 111, n. 31). In any case, Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer.

³⁸ tn Heb “For them would you hold yourselves back so as not to be for a man?” Again Naomi’s rhetorical question expects a negative answer. The verb עָגַן (’agan, “hold back”; cf. KJV, ASV “stay”; NRSV “refrain”) occurs only here in the OT. For discussion of its etymology and meaning, see HALOT 785-86 s.v. עגן, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 79-80.

³⁹ tn The negative is used here in an elliptical manner for emphasis (see HALOT 48 s.v. I אַל; GKC 479-80 §152.g).

⁴⁰ tn Heb “No, my daughters.” Naomi is not answering the rhetorical questions she has just asked. In light of the explanatory clause that follows, it seems more likely that she is urging them to give up the idea of returning with her. In other words, the words “no, my daughters” complement the earlier exhortation to “go back.” To clarify this, the words “you must not return with me” are added in the translation.

⁴¹ tn Heb “bitterness to me.” The term מָרַר (marar) can refer to emotional bitterness: “to feel bitter” (1 Sam 30:6; 2 Kgs 4:27; Lam 1:4) or a grievous situation: “to be in bitter circumstances” (Jer 4:18) (BDB 600 s.v.; HALOT 638 s.v. I מרר). So the expression מַר־לִי (mar-li) can refer to emotional bitterness (KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NJPS, CEV, NLT) or a grievous situation (cf. NRSV, NAB, NCV, CEV margin). Although Naomi and her daughters-in-law had reason for emotional grief, the issue at hand was Naomi’s lamentable situation, which she did not want them to experience: being a poor widow in a foreign land.

⁴² tn Heb “for there is bitterness to me exceedingly from you.” The clause כִּי־מַר־לִי מְאֹד מִכֶּם (ki-mar-li me’od mikkem) is notoriously difficult to interpret. It has been taken in three different ways: (1) “For I am very bitter for me because of you,” that is, because of your widowed condition (cf. KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, NJB, REB, JB, TEV). This does not fit well, however, with the following statement (“for the LORD has attacked me”) nor with the preceding statement (“You must not return with me”). (2) “For I am far more bitter than for you” (cf. NASB, NIV, NJPS, NEB, CEV, NLT). This does not provide an adequate basis, however, for the preceding statement (“You must not return with me”). (3) “For my bitterness is too much for you [to bear]” (cf. NAB, NRSV, NCV, CEV margin). This is preferable because it fits well with both the preceding and following statements. These three options reflect the three ways the preposition מן may be taken here: (1) causal: “because of, on account of” (BDB 580 s.v. מִן 2.f; HALOT 598 s.v. מִן 6), not that Orpah and Ruth were the cause of her calamity, but that Naomi was grieved because they had become widows; (2) comparative: “more [bitter] than you” (BDB 581 s.v. 6.a; HALOT 598 s.v. 5b), meaning that Naomi’s situation was more grievous than theirs – while they could remarry, her prospects were much more bleak; and (3) elative, describing a situation that is too much for a person to bear: “too [bitter] for you” (BDB 581 s.v. 6.d; HALOT 598 s.v. 5a; IBHS 267 §14.4f; e.g., Gen 4:13; Exod 18:18; Deut 17:8; 1 Kgs 19:17), meaning that Naomi’s plight was too bitter for her daughters-in-law to share. While all three options are viable, the meaning adopted must fit two criteria: (1) The meaning of this clause (1:13b) must provide the grounds for Naomi’s emphatic rejection of the young women’s refusal to separate themselves from her (1:13a); and (2) it must fit the following clause: “for the hand of the LORD has gone out against me” (1:13c). The first and second options do not provide adequate reasons for sending her daughters-in-law back home, nor do they fit her lament that the LORD had attached her (not them); however, the third option (elative sense) fits both criteria. Naomi did not want her daughters-in-law to share her sad situation, that is, to be poor, childless widows in a foreign land with no prospect for marriage. If they accompanied her back to Judah, they would be in the same kind of situation in which she found herself in Moab. If they were to find the “rest” (security of home and husband) she wished for them, it would be in Moab, not in Judah. The Lord had already deprived her of husband and sons. She could do nothing for them in this regard because she had no more sons to give them as husbands, and she was past the age of child-bearing to raise up new husbands for them in the future – as if they could wait that long anyway (1:13a). For a discussion of these three options and defense of the approach adopted here, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 80-81.

⁴³ tn Heb “for the hand of the Lord has gone out against me” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NIV all similar). The expression suggests opposition and hostility, perhaps picturing the Lord as the Divine Warrior who is bringing calamity upon Naomi. See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 113.

⁴⁴ tn Heb “they lifted their voice[s] and wept” (so NASB; see v. 9). The expression refers to loud weeping employed in mourning tragedy (Judg 21:2; 2 Sam 13:36; Job 2:12).

⁴⁵ tc The LXX adds, “and she returned to her people” (cf. TEV “and went back home”). Translating the Greek of the LXX back to Hebrew would read a consonantal text of ותשׁב אל־עמה. Most dismiss this as a clarifying addition added under the influence of v. 15, but this alternative reading should not be rejected too quickly. It is possible that a scribe’s eye jumped from the initial vav on ותשׁב (“and she returned”) to the initial vav on the final clause (וְרוּת [vÿrut], “and Ruth”), inadvertently leaving out the intervening words, “and she returned to her people.” Or a scribe’s eye could have jumped from the final he on לַחֲמוֹתָהּ (lakhamotah, “to her mother-in-law”) to the final he on עַמָּהּ (’ammah, “her people”), leaving out the intervening words, “and she returned to her people.”

⁴⁶ tn The clause is disjunctive. The word order is conjunction + subject + verb, highlighting the contrast between the actions of Orpah and Ruth.

sn Orpah is a literary foil for Ruth. Orpah is a commendable and devoted person (see v. 8); after all she is willing to follow Naomi back to Judah. However, when Naomi bombards her with good reasons why she should return, she relents. But Ruth is special. Despite Naomi’s bitter tirade, she insists on staying. Orpah is a good person, but Ruth is beyond good – she possesses an extra measure of devotion and sacrificial love that is uncommon.

⁴⁷ sn Clung tightly. The expression suggests strong commitment (see R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth [NICOT], 115).

⁴⁸ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁴⁹ tn Or “gods” (so KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, CEV, NLT), if the plural form is taken as a numerical plural. However, it is likely that Naomi, speaking from Orpah’s Moabite perspective, uses the plural of majesty of the Moabite god Chemosh. For examples of the plural of majesty being used of a pagan god, see BDB 43 s.v. אֱלֹהִים 1.d. Note especially 1 Kgs 11:33, where the plural form is used of Chemosh.

⁵⁰ tn Heb “do not urge me to abandon you to turn back from after you.” Most English versions, following the lead of the KJV, use “leave” here. The use of עזב (“abandon”) reflects Ruth’s perspective. To return to Moab would be to abandon Naomi and to leave her even more vulnerable than she already is.

⁵¹ tn Heb “Thus may the Lord do to me and thus may he add…” The construction וְכֹה יֹסִיף…כֹּה יַעֲשֶׂה (koh ya’aseh...vÿkhoh yosif, “May he do thus…and may he do even more so…!”) is an oath formula of self-imprecation (e.g., 1 Sam 3:17; 14:44; 20:13; 25:22; 2 Sam 3:9,35; 19:14; 1 Kgs 2:23; 2 Kgs 6:31). In this formula the exact curse is understood but not expressed (GKC 472 §149.d; BDB 462 s.v. כֹּה 1.b). In ancient Near Eastern imprecations, when the curse was so extreme, it was not uttered because it was unspeakably awful: “In the twelve uses of this formula, the calamity which the speaker invokes is never named, since OT culture (in keeping with the rest of the ancient Near East) accorded such power to the spoken word” (F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 82). Ruth here pronounces a curse upon herself, elevating the preceding promise to a formal, unconditional level. If she is not faithful to her promise, she agrees to become an object of divine judgment. As in other occurrences of this oath/curse formula, the specific punishment is not mentioned. As Bush explains, the particle כִּי (ki) here is probably asseverative (“indeed, certainly”) and the statement that follows expresses what underscores the seriousness of her promise by invoking divine judgment, as it were, if she does otherwise. Of course, the Lord would not have been obligated to judge her if she had abandoned Naomi – this is simply an ancient idiomatic way of expressing her commitment to her promise.

⁵² tn Heb “certainly death will separate me and you.” Ruth’s vow has been interpreted two ways: (1) Not even death will separate her from Naomi – because they will be buried next to one another (e.g., NRSV, NCV; see E. F. Campbell, Ruth [AB], 74-75). However, for the statement to mean, “Not even death will separate me and you,” it would probably need to be introduced by אִם (’im, “if”) or negated by לֹא (lo’, “not”; see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 83). (2) Nothing except death will separate her from Naomi (e.g., KJV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NIV, TEV, NJPS, REB, NLT, GW; see Bush, 83). The particle כִּי introduces the content of the vow, which – if violated – would bring about the curse uttered in the preceding oath (BDB 472 s.v. כִּי 1.c; e.g., Gen 42:16; Num 14:22; 1 Sam 20:3; 26:16; 29:6; 2 Sam 3:35; 1 Kgs 2:23; Isa 49:18). Some suggest that כּי is functioning as an asseverative (“indeed, certainly”) to express what the speaker is determined will happen (Bush, 83; see 1 Sam 14:44; 2 Sam 3:9; 1 Kgs 2:23; 19:2). Here כִּי probably functions in a conditional sense: “if” or “if…except, unless” (BDB 473 s.v. כִּי2.b). So her vow may essentially mean “if anything except death should separate me from you!” The most likely view is (2): Ruth is swearing that death alone will separate her from Naomi.

sn Ruth’s devotion to Naomi is especially apparent here. Instead of receiving a sure blessing and going home (see v. 8), Ruth instead takes on a serious responsibility and subjects herself to potential divine punishment. Death, a power beyond Ruth’s control, will separate the two women, but until that time Ruth will stay by Naomi’s side and she will even be buried in the same place as Naomi.

⁵³ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Naomi) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁵⁴ tn Heb “she”; the referent (Ruth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁵⁵ tn Heb “she ceased speaking to her.” This does not imply that Naomi was completely silent toward Ruth. It simply means that Naomi stopped trying to convince her to go back to Moab (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 84-85).

⁵⁶ tn The suffix “them” appears to be masculine, but it is probably an archaic dual form (E. F. Campbell, Ruth [AB], 65; F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 75-76).

⁵⁷ map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

⁵⁸ tn The temporal indicator וַיְהִי (vayÿhi, “and it was”) here introduces a new scene.

⁵⁹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

⁶⁰ tn Heb “because of them” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV); CEV “excited to see them.”

⁶¹ tn Heb “they said,” but the verb form is third person feminine plural, indicating that the women of the village are the subject.

⁶² tn Heb “Is this Naomi?” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV). The question here expresses surprise and delight because of the way Naomi reacts to it (F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 92).

⁶³ tn Heb “said.” For stylistic reasons the present translation employs “replied” here.

⁶⁴ tn The third person feminine plural form of the pronominal suffix indicates the women of the village (see v. 19) are the addressees.

⁶⁵ sn The name Naomi means “pleasant.”

⁶⁶ sn The name Mara means “bitter.”

⁶⁷ tn Heb “Shaddai”; traditionally “the Almighty.” The etymology and meaning of this divine name is uncertain. It may be derived from: (1) שָׁדַד (shadad, “to be strong”), cognate to Arabic sdd, meaning “The Strong One” or “Almighty”; (2) שָׁדָה (shadah, “mountain”), cognate to Akkadian shadu, meaning “The Mountain Dweller” or “God of the Mountains”; (3) שָׁדַד (shadad, “to devastate”) and שַׁד (shad, “destroyer”), Akkadian Shedum, meaning “The Destroyer” or “The Malevolent One”; or (4) שֶׁ (she, “who”) plus דִּי (diy, “sufficient”), meaning “The One Who is Sufficient” or “All-Sufficient One” (HALOT 1420-22 s.v. שַׁדַּי, שַׁדָּי). In terms of use, Shaddai (or El Shaddai) is presented as the sovereign king/judge of the world who grants life/blesses and kills/judges. In Genesis he blesses the patriarchs with fertility and promises numerous descendants. Outside Genesis he blesses/protects and also takes away life/happiness. In light of Naomi’s emphasis on God’s sovereign, malevolent deprivation of her family, one can understand her use of this name for God. For discussion of this divine name, see T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God, 69-72.

⁶⁸ tn Or “caused me to be very bitter”; NAB “has made it very bitter for me.”

⁶⁹ sn I left here full. That is, with a husband and two sons.

⁷⁰ tn Heb “but empty the Lord has brought me back.” The disjunctive clause structure (vav + adverb + verb + subject) highlights the contrast between her former condition and present situation. Cf. TEV “has brought me back without a thing.”

sn Empty-handed. This statement is highly ironic, for ever-loyal Ruth stands by her side even as she speaks these words. These words reflect Naomi’s perspective, not the narrator’s, for Ruth will eventually prove to be the one who reverses Naomi’s plight and “fills” her “emptiness.” Naomi’s perspective will prove to be inaccurate and the women will later correct Naomi’s faulty view of Ruth’s value (see 4:15).

⁷¹ tn The disjunctive clause structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) here introduces either an attendant circumstance (“when the Lord has opposed me”) or an explanation (“seeing that the Lord has opposed me”).

⁷² tc The LXX reads “humbled me” here, apparently understanding the verb as a Piel (עָנָה, ’anah) from a homonymic root meaning “afflict.” However, עָנָה (“afflict”) never introduces its object with בְּ (bet); when the preposition בְּ is used with this verb, it is always adverbial (“in, with, through”). To defend the LXX reading one would have to eliminate the preposition.

tn Heb “has testified against me” (KJV, ASV both similar); NAB “has pronounced against me.” The idiom עָנַה בִי (’anah viy, “testify against”) is well attested elsewhere in legal settings (see BDB 773 s.v. עָנָה Qal.3.a; HALOT 852 s.v. I ענה qal.2). Naomi uses a legal metaphor and depicts the Lord as testifying against her in court.

⁷³ sn The divine name translated Sovereign One is שַׁדַּי (shadday, “Shaddai”). See further the note on this term in Ruth 1:20.

⁷⁴ tn Or “brought disaster upon me”; NIV “brought misfortune (calamity NRSV) upon me”; NLT “has sent such tragedy.”

⁷⁵ tn Heb “and Naomi returned, and Ruth the Moabitess, her daughter-in-law, with her, the one who returned from the region of Moab.”

sn This summarizing statement provides closure to the first part of the story. By highlighting Ruth’s willingness to return with Naomi, it also contrasts sharply with Naomi’s remark about being empty-handed.

⁷⁶ tn The pronoun appears to be third person masculine plural in form, but it is probably an archaic third person dual form (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 94).

⁷⁷ tn This statement, introduced with a disjunctive structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) provides closure for the previous scene, while at the same time making a transition to the next scene, which takes place in the barley field. The reference to the harvest also reminds the reader that God has been merciful to his people by replacing the famine with fertility. In the flow of the narrative the question is now, “Will he do the same for Naomi and Ruth?”

sn The barley harvest began in late March. See O. Borowski, Agriculture in Iron Age Israel, 91.

⁷⁸ sn See the note on King Agrippa in 25:13.

⁷⁹ tn Grk “It is permitted for you.”

⁸⁰ tn Or “extended his hand” (a speaker’s gesture).

⁸¹ tn Or “and began to speak in his own defense.”

⁸² sn See the note on King Agrippa in 25:13.

⁸³ tn BDAG 613 s.v. μάλιστα 1 states, “μ. γνώστην ὄντα σε since you are outstandingly familiar Ac 26:3.”

⁸⁴ tn Grk “several controversial issues.” BDAG 428 s.v. ζήτημα states, “in our lit. only in Ac, w. the mng. it still has in Mod. Gk. (controversial) question, issue, argument…Ac 15:2; 26:3. ζ. περί τινος questions about someth.…18:15; 25:19.”

⁸⁵ tn BDAG 218 s.v. δέομαι states, “In our lit. only w. the mng. to ask for something pleadingly, ask, request,” and then in section a.α states, “w. inf. foll.…Ac 26:3.”

⁸⁶ tn Grk “my manner of life.”

⁸⁷ tn Or “nation.”

⁸⁸ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

⁸⁹ tn These words are repeated from v. 4 (“all the Jews know”). Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, it was necessary to begin a new sentence at the beginning of v. 5 in the translation, but for this to make sense, the main verb ἵσασι ({isasi) has to be repeated to connect with the ὅτι (Joti) clause (indirect discourse) in v. 5.

⁹⁰ tn Grk “having known me from time past.” The participle προγινώσκοντες (proginwskonte") has been translated as a causal adverbial participle.

⁹¹ tn BDAG 866 s.v. προγινώσκω 2 has “Know from time past…προγινώσκοντές με ἄνωθεν Ac 26:5.” L&N 28.6 states, “‘they have already known me beforehand, if they are willing to testify’ Ac 26:5.”

⁹² tn That is, strictest religious party. “Party” alone is used in the translation because “the strictest religious party of our religion” would be redundant.

⁹³ sn See the note on Pharisee in 5:34.

⁹⁴ tn BDAG 568 s.v. κρίνω 5.a.α has “κρίνεσθαι ἐπί τινι be on trial because of a thing Ac 26:6.”

⁹⁵ tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

⁹⁶ tn Grk “to which [promise] our twelve tribes…” The antecedent of the relative pronoun (the promise in v. 6) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁹⁷ tn Or “earnestly worship.” The object of this service, God, is omitted but implied: BDAG 587 s.v. λατρεύω states, “Without the dat. of the one to whom service is given: ἐν ἐκτενείᾳ νύκτα κ. ἡμέραν λ. serve (God) earnestly night and day Ac 26:7.” Although clear from the context in Greek, “God” must be supplied as the recipient of the service for the modern English reader.

⁹⁸ tn Grk “I am being accused by the Jews.” The passive construction was simplified by converting it to an active one in the translation.

⁹⁹ tn Grk “O King!”

¹⁰⁰ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate that the second person pronoun (“you”) is plural (others in addition to King Agrippa are being addressed).

¹⁰¹ tn BDAG 568 s.v. κρίνω 3 states, “τί ἄπιστον κρίνεται παρ᾿ ὑμῖν; why do you think it is incredible? Ac 26:8.” The passive construction (“why is it thought unbelievable…”) has been converted to an active one to simplify the translation.

¹⁰² tn Or “incredible.” BDAG 103 s.v. ἄπιστος 1 states, “unbelievable, incredible…τί ἄπιστον κρίνεται παρ᾿ ὑμῖν…; why does it seem incredible to you? Ac 26:8.”

¹⁰³ tn Grk “if.” The first-class conditional construction, which assumes reality for the sake of argument, has been translated as indirect discourse.

¹⁰⁴ tn BDAG 737 s.v. οὖν 3 states, “It has been proposed that some traces of older Gk. usage in which οὖν is emphatic, = certainly, really, to be sure etc. (s. L-S-J-M s.v. 1) remain in the pap…and in the NT…indeed, of course Ac 26:9.”

¹⁰⁵ tn Grk “I thought to myself.” BDAG 255 s.v. δοκέω 2.a has “ἔδοξα ἐμαυτῷ δεῖν πρᾶξαι = Lat. mihi videbar I was convinced that it was necessary to do Ac 26:9.”

¹⁰⁶ tn Grk “by receiving authority.” The participle λαβών (labwn) has been taken instrumentally.

¹⁰⁷ tn Grk “cast down a pebble against them.” L&N 30.103 states, “(an idiom, Grk ‘to bring a pebble against someone,’ a reference to a white or black pebble used in voting for or against someone) to make known one’s choice against someone – ‘to vote against.’ …‘when they were sentenced to death, I also voted against them’ Ac 26:10.”

¹⁰⁸ tn Grk “when they were being executed”; but the context supports the sentencing rather than the execution itself (cf. L&N 30.103).

¹⁰⁹ tn Grk “and punishing…I tried.” The participle τιμωρῶν (timwrwn) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style. Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

¹¹⁰ sn See the note on synagogue in 6:9.

¹¹¹ tn The imperfect verb ἠνάγκαζον (hnankazon) has been translated as a conative imperfect (so BDAG 60 s.v. ἀναγκάζω 1, which has “ἠνάγκαζον βλασφημεῖν I tried to force them to blaspheme Ac 26:11”).

¹¹² tn Or “was so insanely angry with them.” BDAG 322 s.v. ἐμμαίνομαι states, “to be filled with such anger that one appears to be mad, be enraged…περισσῶς ἐμμαινόμενος αὐτοῖς being furiously enraged at them Ac 26:11”; L&N 88.182 s.v. ἐμμαίνομαι, “to be so furiously angry with someone as to be almost out of one’s mind – ‘to be enraged, to be infuriated, to be insanely angry’ …‘I was so infuriated with them that I even went to foreign cities to persecute them’ Ac 26:11.”

¹¹³ tn Or “I pursued them even as far as foreign cities.”

¹¹⁴ tn Grk “in which [activity].” Due to the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started at the beginning of v. 12 in the translation. The referent of the relative pronoun (“which”) was specified as “this very thing” for clarity.

¹¹⁵ tn Grk “going.” The participle πορευόμενος (poreuomenos) has been taken temporally.

¹¹⁶ tn L&N 37.40 s.v. ἐπιτροπή states, “the full authority to carry out an assignment or commission – ‘authority, complete power.’ πορευόμενος εἰς τὴν Δαμασκὸν μετ᾿ ἐξουσίας καὶ ἐπιτροπῆς τῶν ἀρχιερέων ‘going to Damascus with authority and complete power from the high priests’ Ac 26:12. In Ac 26:12 the combination of ἐξουσία and ἐπιτροπή serves to reinforce the sense of complete authority.”

¹¹⁷ tn Grk “O King.”

¹¹⁸ tn Or “from the sky” (the same Greek word means both “heaven” and “sky”).

¹¹⁹ tn The word “everywhere” has been supplied in the translation to clarify the meaning of περιλάμψαν (perilamyan). Otherwise the modern reader might think that each of the individuals were encircled by lights or halos. See also Acts 9:7; 22:6, 9.

¹²⁰ tn Grk “in the Hebrew language.” See Acts 22:7 and 9:4.

¹²¹ tn Grk “It is hard for you.”

¹²² tn “Goads” are pointed sticks used to direct a draft animal (an idiom for stubborn resistance). See BDAG 539-40 s.v. κέντρον 2.

sn Sayings which contain the imagery used here (kicking against the goads) were also found in Greek writings; see Pindar, Pythians 2.94-96; Euripides, Bacchae 795.

¹²³ tn Grk “said.”

¹²⁴ tn L&N 30.89 has “‘to choose in advance, to select beforehand, to designate in advance.’”

¹²⁵ sn As a servant and witness. The commission is similar to Acts 1:8 and Luke 1:2. Paul was now an “eyewitness” of the Lord.

¹²⁶ tn BDAG 719 s.v. ὁράω A.1.b states, “W. attraction of the relative ὧν = τούτων ἅ Lk 9:36; Ac 22:15. The attraction may be due to colloq. breviloquence in μάρτυρα ὧν τε εἶδες με ὧν τε ὀφθήσομαί σοι a witness to the things in which you saw me and to those in which I shall appear to you Ac 26:16b.”

¹²⁷ tc ‡ Some mss read “of the things in which you have seen me.” The accusative object με (me, “me”) is found after εἶδές (eide") in B C*^vid 614 945 1175 1505 1739 1891 2464 pc sy sa; it is lacking in Ì⁷⁴ א A C² E Ψ 096 Ï latt bo. The external evidence is relatively evenly divided, though there is a slight preference for the omission. NA²⁷ includes the word in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

¹²⁸ tn Grk “rescuing.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the participle ἐξαιρούμενος (exairoumeno") has been translated as a finite verb and a new sentence started in the translation at the beginning of v. 17.

¹²⁹ tn That is, from the Jewish people. Grk “the people”; the words “your own” have been supplied to clarify the meaning.

¹³⁰ tn The antecedent of the relative pronoun is probably both the Jews (“your own people”) and the Gentiles, indicating the comprehensive commission Paul received.

¹³¹ sn To open their eyes so that they turn… Here is Luke’s most comprehensive report of Paul’s divine calling. His role was to call humanity to change their position before God and experience God’s forgiveness as a part of God’s family. The image of turning is a key one in the NT: Luke 1:79; Rom 2:19; 13:12; 2 Cor 4:6; 6:14; Eph 5:8; Col 1:12; 1 Thess 5:5. See also Luke 1:77-79; 3:3; 24:47.

¹³² tn BDAG 352-53 s.v. ἐξουσία 2 states, “Also of Satan’s power Ac 26:18.” It is also possible to translate this “the domain of Satan” (cf. BDAG 353 s.v. 6)

¹³³ tn Or “and an inheritance.”

¹³⁴ sn See the note on King Agrippa in 25:13.

¹³⁵ sn I was not disobedient. Paul’s defense is that he merely obeyed the risen Jesus. He was arrested for obeying heavenly direction and preaching the opportunity to turn to God.

¹³⁶ tn According to L&N 1.5, “In Ac 26:19 the adjective οὐράνιος could be interpreted as being related simply to the meaning of οὐρανός^a ‘sky,’ but it seems preferable to regard οὐράνιος in this context as meaning simply ‘from heaven’ or ‘heavenly.’”

¹³⁷ tn BDAG 1093-94 s.v. χώρα 2.b states, “of the provincial name (1 Macc 8:3) ἡ χώρα τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας Ac 26:20.”

¹³⁸ sn That they should repent and turn to God. This is the shortest summary of Paul’s message that he preached.

¹³⁹ tn BDAG 93 s.v. ἄξιος 1.b, “καρποὶ ἄ. τῆς μετανοίας fruits in keeping with your repentance…Lk 3:8; Mt 3:8. For this ἄ. τῆς μετανοίας ἔργα Ac 26:20.” Note how Paul preached the gospel offer and the issue of response together, side by side.

¹⁴⁰ tn Grk “in the temple.” This is actually a reference to the courts surrounding the temple proper, and has been translated accordingly.

¹⁴¹ tn Grk “So experiencing…I stand.” The participle τυχών (tucwn) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

¹⁴² tn BDAG 311 s.v. ἐκτός 3.b, “functions as prep. w. gen. οὐδὲν ἐ. ὧν nothing except what (cf. 1 Ch 29:3; 2 Ch 17:19; TestNapht. 6:2) Ac 26:22.”

¹⁴³ sn What the prophets and Moses said. Paul argued that his message reflected the hope of the Jewish scriptures.

¹⁴⁴ tn BDAG 277-78 s.v. εἰ 2 has “marker of an indirect question as content, that…Sim. also (Procop. Soph., Ep. 123 χάριν ἔχειν εἰ = that) μαρτυρόμενος…εἰ παθητὸς ὁ Χριστός testifying…that the Christ was to suffer…Ac 26:23.”

¹⁴⁵ tn Or “the Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

sn See the note on Christ in 2:31.

¹⁴⁶ tn That is, to the Jewish people. Grk “the people”; the word “our” has been supplied to clarify the meaning.

¹⁴⁷ sn Note how the context of Paul’s gospel message about Jesus, resurrection, and light both to Jews and to the Gentiles is rooted in the prophetic message of the OT scriptures. Paul was guilty of following God’s call and preaching the scriptural hope.

¹⁴⁸ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Paul) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹⁴⁹ sn See the note on Porcius Festus in 24:27.

¹⁵⁰ tn On the term translated “lost your mind” see BDAG 610 s.v. μαίνομαι, which has “you’re out of your mind, you’re raving, said to one whose enthusiasm seems to have outrun better judgment 26:24.”

sn The expression “You have lost your mind” would be said to someone who speaks incredible things, in the opinion of the hearer. Paul’s mention of the resurrection (v. 23) was probably what prompted Festus to say this.

¹⁵¹ tn Grk “said.”

¹⁵² sn See the note on Porcius Festus in 24:27.

¹⁵³ tn Or “declaring.” BDAG 125 s.v. ἀποφθέγγομαι states, “speak out, declare boldly or loudly…τὶ: σωφροσύνης ῥήματα Ac 26:25.”

¹⁵⁴ tn BDAG 987 s.v. σωφροσύνη 1 has “gener. soundness of mind, reasonableness, rationality…ἀληθείας καὶ σωφροσύνης ῥήματα true and rational words (opp. μαίνομαι) Ac 26:25.”

¹⁵⁵ tn BDAG 782 s.v. παρρησιάζομαι 1 states, “speak freely, openly, fearlessly…likew. in the ptc. w. a verb of saying foll.…παρρησιασάμενοι εἶπαν 13:46. – 26:26.” This could refer to boldness in speaking here.

¹⁵⁶ tn Grk “to whom I am speaking freely.” The relative pronoun (“whom”) was replaced by the personal pronoun (“him”) to simplify the translation.

¹⁵⁷ tn Grk “I cannot convince myself.” BDAG 792 s.v. πείθω 3.a states, “οὐ πείθομαι w. acc. and inf. I cannot believe Ac 26:26” (see also BDAG 586 s.v. λανθάνω).

¹⁵⁸ tn BDAG 586 s.v. λανθάνω states, “λανθάνειν αὐτὸν τούτων οὐ πείθομαι οὐθέν I cannot bring myself to believe that any of these things has escaped his notice Ac 26:26.”

¹⁵⁹ tn This term refers to a hidden corner (BDAG 209 s.v. γωνία). Paul’s point is that these events to which he refers were not done in a secret, hidden place, tucked away outside of view. They were done in public for all the world to see.

¹⁶⁰ sn “Do you believe the prophets?” Note how Paul made the issue believing the OT prophets and God’s promise which God fulfilled in Christ. He was pushing King Agrippa toward a decision not for or against Paul’s guilt of any crime, but concerning Paul’s message.

¹⁶¹ sn See the note on King Agrippa in 25:13.

¹⁶² sn See the note on King Agrippa in 25:13.

¹⁶³ tn Or “In a short time you will make me a Christian.” On the difficulty of the precise nuances of Agrippa’s reply in this passage, see BDAG 791 s.v. πείθω 1.b. The idiom is like 1 Kgs 21:7 LXX. The point is that Paul was trying to persuade Agrippa to accept his message. If Agrippa had let Paul persuade him, he would have converted to Christianity.

sn The question “In such a short time are you persuading me to become a Christian?” was probably a ploy on Agrippa’s part to deflect Paul from his call for a decision. Note also how the tables have turned: Agrippa was brought in to hear Paul’s defense, and now ends up defending himself. The questioner is now being questioned.

¹⁶⁴ tn BDAG 703 s.v. ὀλίγος 2.b.β has “καὶ ἐν ὀλ. καὶ ἐν μεγάλῳ whether in a short or a long time vs. 29 (cf. B-D-F §195; GWhitaker, The Words of Agrippa to St. Paul: JTS 15, 1914, 82f; AFridrichsen, SymbOsl 14, ’35, 50; Field, Notes 141-43; s. Rob. 653).”

¹⁶⁵ sn Except for these chains. The chains represented Paul’s unjust suffering for the sake of the message. His point was, in effect, “I do not care how long it takes. I only hope you and everyone else hearing this would become believers in Christ, but without my unjust suffering.”

¹⁶⁶ tn Grk “they spoke to one another saying.” The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant in English and has not been translated.

¹⁶⁷ tn BDAG 93 s.v. ἄξιος 1.b has “θανάτου ἢ δεσμῶν ἄ. nothing deserving death or imprisonment 23:29; 26:31.”

sn Not doing anything deserving death… Here is yet another declaration of Paul’s innocence, but still no release. The portrayal shows how unjust Paul’s confinement was.

¹⁶⁸ sn See the note on King Agrippa in 25:13.

¹⁶⁹ sn See the note on Porcius Festus in 24:27.

¹⁷⁰ tn Or “set free.”

¹⁷¹ tn Or “to the emperor” (“Caesar” is a title for the Roman emperor).

sn If he had not appealed to Caesar. Ultimately Agrippa and Festus blamed what Paul himself had done in appealing to Caesar for his own continued custody. In terms of Luke’s narrative, this still appears unjust and a denial of responsibility.

¹⁷² sn The fourth year that Jehoiakim…was ruling over Judah would have been 605/4 b.c. Jehoiakim began his rule in 609/8 b.c. after his father Josiah was killed by Pharaoh Necho at Megiddo. Necho had installed him as puppet king in place of his brother Jehoahaz who was deposed by Necho after a reign of only three months (2 Kgs 23:31-35). According to Jer 46:2 that was the year in which Nebuchadnezzar defeated Jehoiakim’s suzerain Necho at Carchemish. That was also the same year that Jerusalem came under attack and submitted to Babylonian control after a brief siege (Dan 1:1; see the study note on 25:1 for the reason for the difference in the dating between Jer 25:1; 36:2 and Dan 1:1). These events confirmed what Jeremiah had been saying about the foe from the north (4:6; 6:1; 15:12) and would have provided the impetus for the hopes that the people would repent if they were reminded about what Jeremiah had been saying.

¹⁷³ tn Heb “This word came to Jeremiah from the Lord in the fourth year of Jehoiakim son of Josiah the king of Judah, saying.”

¹⁷⁴ sn Heb “a roll [or scroll] of a document.” Scrolls consisted of pieces of leather or parchment sewn together and rolled up on wooden rollers. The writing was written from right to left and from top to bottom in columns and the scroll unrolled from the left roller and rolled onto the right one as the scroll was read. The scroll varied in length depending on the contents. This scroll was probably not all that long since it was read three times in a single day (vv. 10-11, 15-16, 21-23).

¹⁷⁵ sn The intent is hardly that of giving a verbatim report of everything that the Lord had told him to say or of everything that he had actually said. What the scroll undoubtedly contained was a synopsis of Jeremiah’s messages as constructed from his memory.

¹⁷⁶ sn This refers to the messages that Jeremiah delivered during the last eighteen years of Josiah, the three month reign of Jehoahaz and the first four years of Jehoiakim’s reign (the period between Josiah’s thirteenth year [cf. 1:2] and the fourth year of Jehoiakim [v. 1]). The exact content of this scroll is unknown since many of the messages in the present book are undated. It is also not known what relation this scroll had to the present form of the book of Jeremiah, since this scroll was destroyed and another one written that contained more than this one did (cf. v. 32). Since Jeremiah continued his ministry down to the fall of Jerusalem in 587/6 b.c. (1:2) and beyond (cf. Jer 40-44) much more was added to those two scrolls even later.

¹⁷⁷ tn Heb “will turn each one from his wicked way.”

¹⁷⁸ tn Heb “their iniquity and their sin.”

sn The offer of withdrawal of punishment for sin is consistent with the principles of Jer 18:7-8 and the temple sermon delivered early in the reign of this king (cf. 26:1-3; 7:5-7).

¹⁷⁹ tn Heb “Then Baruch wrote down on a scroll from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord which he [the Lord] had spoken to him [Jeremiah].” The syntax of the Hebrew sentence is awkward and hard to reproduce “literally” in any meaningful way. The English sentence has been restructured to reproduce all the pertinent facts in more simplified language.

¹⁸⁰ tn Heb “I am restrained; I cannot go into.” The word “restrained” is used elsewhere in Jeremiah of his being confined to the courtyard of the guardhouse (33:1; 39:15). However, that occurred only later during the tenth year of Zedekiah (Jer 32:1-2) and Jeremiah appears here to be free to come and go as he pleased (vv. 19, 26). The word is used in the active voice of the Lord preventing Sarah from having a baby (Gen 16:2). The probable nuance is here “I am prevented/ debarred” from being able to go. No reason is given why he was prevented/debarred. It has been plausibly suggested that he was prohibited from going into the temple any longer because of the scathing sermon he delivered there earlier (Jer 26:1-3; 7:1-15).

¹⁸¹ sn Regular fast days were not a part of Israel’s religious calendar. Rather fast days were called on special occasions, i.e., in times of drought or a locust plague (Joel 1:14; 2:15), or during a military crisis (2 Chr 20:3), or after defeat in battle (1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12). A fast day was likely chosen for the reading of the scroll because the people would be more mindful of the crisis they were in and be in more of a repentant mood. The events referred to in the study note on v. 1 would have provided the basis for Jeremiah’s anticipation of a fast day when the scroll could be read.

¹⁸² tn Heb “So you go and read from the scroll which you have written from my mouth the words of the Lord in the ears of the people in the house of the Lord on a fast day, and in that way [for the explanation of this rendering see below] you will be reading them in the ears of all Judah [= the people of Judah] who come from their towns [i.e., to the temple to fast].” Again the syntax of the original is awkward, separating several of the qualifying phrases from the word or phrase they are intended to modify. In most of the “literal” English versions the emphasis on “what the Lord said” tends to get lost and it looks like two separate groups are to be addressed rather than one. The intent of the phrase is to define who the people are who will hear; the וַ that introduces the clause is explicative (BDB 252 s.v. וַ 1.b) and the גַּם (gam) is used to emphasize the explicative “all Judah who come in from their towns” (cf. BDB 169 s.v. גַּם 2). If some force were to be given to the “literal” rendering of that particle here it would be “actually.” This is the group that is to be addressed according to v. 3. The complex Hebrew sentence has been restructured to include all the relevant information in more comprehensible and shorter English sentences.

¹⁸³ tn Heb “will turn each one from his wicked way.”

¹⁸⁴ tn Heb “For great is the anger and the wrath which the Lord has spoken against this people.” The translation uses the more active form which is more in keeping with contemporary English style.

¹⁸⁵ tn Heb “And Baruch son of Neriah did according to all that the prophet Jeremiah commanded him with regard to reading from the scroll the words of the Lord in the temple of the Lord.” The sentence has been broken down and the modifiers placed where they belong to better conform to contemporary English style.

¹⁸⁶ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

¹⁸⁷ tn There is some debate about the syntax of the words translated “All the people living in Jerusalem and all the people who came into Jerusalem from the towns in Judah.” As the sentence is structured in Hebrew it looks like these words are the subject of “proclaim a fast.” However, most commentaries point out that the people themselves would hardly proclaim a fast; they would be summoned to fast (cf. 1 Kgs 21:9, 12; Jonah 3:7). Hence many see these words as the object of the verb which has an impersonal subject “they.” This is most likely unless with J. Bright (Jeremiah [AB], 180) the word “proclaim” is used in a looser sense as “observed.” The translation has chosen to follow this latter tack rather than use the impersonal (or an equivalent passive) construction in English. For a similar problem see Jonah 3:5 which precedes the official proclamation in 3:7. The Hebrew text reads: “In the fifth year of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah, in the ninth month they proclaimed a fast before the Lord, all the people in Jerusalem and all the people who came from the cities of Judah into Jerusalem.” The sentence has been broken down and restructured to better conform with contemporary English style.

sn Judging from v. 22 this was one of the winter months meaning that the reckoning is based on the calendar which starts with April rather than the one which starts with September (Nisan to Nisan rather than Tishri to Tishri). The ninth month would have been Kislev which corresponds roughly to December. According to Babylonian historical records this is the same year and the same month when Ashkelon was captured and sacked. The surrender of Jerusalem and the subsequent looting of the temple in the previous year (Dan 1:1) and the return of the menacing presence of Nebuchadnezzar in the near vicinity were probably the impetus for the fast.

¹⁸⁸ sn Shaphan had been the royal secretary under Jehoiakim’s father’s rule. During the course of his official duties the book of the law had been discovered and he had read it and reported its contents to Josiah who instituted sweeping reforms on the basis of his obedience to it. (See 2 Kgs 22 and note especially vv. 3, 8, 10.) If the Shaphan mentioned in 26:14 is the same person as this, Gemariah would have been the brother of the man who spoke up on Jeremiah’s behalf when the priests and prophets sought to have him killed.

¹⁸⁹ sn It is generally agreed that this is the same as the inner court mentioned in 1 Kgs 6:36; 7:12. It is called “upper” here because it stood above (cf. 1 Kgs 7:12) the outer court where all the people were standing.

¹⁹⁰ sn The New Gate is the same gate where Jeremiah had been accused of falsely claiming the Lord’s authority for his “treasonous” prophecies according to 26:10-11. See the study note on 26:10 for more details about the location of this gate.

¹⁹¹ tn The syntax of the original is complicated due to all the qualifying terms: Heb “And Baruch read from the scroll the words of Jeremiah in the house of the Lord in (i.e., in the entrance of) the room of Gemariah son of Shaphan the scribe in the upper court at the entrance of the New Gate in the house of the Lord in the ears of all the people.” The sentence has been broken down and restructured to contain all the same information in shorter English sentences that better conform with contemporary English style.

¹⁹² tn Heb “Micaiah son of Gemariah son of Shaphan heard all the words of the Lord from upon the scroll.” The words “heard Baruch read” are implicit from the context and are supplied in the translation for smoothness.

¹⁹³ sn If, as many believe, this man was the same as the Elishama mentioned in Jer 41:1; 2 Kgs 25:25, he was also a member of the royal family.

¹⁹⁴ sn This man has already been mentioned in Jer 26:22 as the official who was sent to Egypt to extradite the prophet Uriah that Jehoiakim had executed. Though he was instrumental in the death of that prophet, he appears to have been favorably disposed to Jeremiah or at least impressed by the seriousness of his messages, because he is one of the officials that urged Baruch and Jeremiah to hide (v. 19), and he counseled Jehoiakim not to burn the scroll (v. 25).

¹⁹⁵ tn Heb “Micaiah reported to them all the words which he heard when Baruch read from the scroll in the ears of the people.”

¹⁹⁶ tn Heb “in your hand.”

¹⁹⁷ tn The original has another example of a prepositioned object (called casus pendens in the grammars; cf. GKC 458 §143.b) which is intended to focus attention on “the scroll.” The Hebrew sentence reads: “The scroll which you read from it in the ears of the people take it and come.” Any attempt to carry over this emphasis into the English translation would be awkward. Likewise, the order of the two imperatives has been reversed as more natural in English.

¹⁹⁸ tn Heb “So Baruch son of Neriah took the scroll in his hand and went to them.” The clause order has been rearranged in the translation for stylistic reasons.

¹⁹⁹ tn Or “‘to us personally’…to them personally”; Heb “‘in our ears’…in their ears.” Elsewhere this has been rendered “in the hearing of” or “where they could hear.” All three of those idioms sound unnatural in this context. The mere personal pronoun seems adequate.

²⁰⁰ tn Heb “all the words.”

²⁰¹ tn According to BDB 808 s.v. פָּחַד Qal.1 and 40 s.v. אֶל 3.a, this is an example of the “pregnant” use of a preposition where an implied verb has to be supplied in the translation to conform the normal range of the preposition with the verb that is governing it. The Hebrew text reads: “they feared unto one another.” BDB translates “they turned in dread to each other.” The translation adopted seems more appropriate in this context.

²⁰² tn Heb “We must certainly report to the king all these things.” Here the word דְּבָרִים (dÿvarim) must mean “things” (cf. BDB 183 s.v. דָּבָר IV.3) rather than “words” because a verbatim report of all the words in the scroll is scarcely meant. The present translation has chosen to use a form that suggests a summary report of all the matters spoken about in the scroll rather than the indefinite “things.”

²⁰³ tn Or “Did Jeremiah dictate them to you?” The words “Do they actually come from Jeremiah’s mouth?” assume that the last phrase (מִפִּיו, mippiv) is a question, either without the formal he (הֲ) interrogative (see GKC 473 §150.a and compare usage in 1 Sam 16:4; Prov 5:16) or with a letter supplied from the end of the preceding word (single writing of a letter following the same letter [haplography]; so the majority of modern commentaries). The word is missing in the Greek version. The presence of this same word at the beginning of the answer in the next verse suggests that this was a question (probably without the he [הֲ] interrogative to make it more emphatic) since the common way to answer affirmatively is to repeat the emphatic word in the question (cf. GKC 476 §150.n and compare usage in Gen 24:58). The intent of the question is to make sure that these were actually Jeremiah’s words not Baruch’s own creation (cf. Jer 42:2-3 for a similar suspicion).

²⁰⁴ tn The verbal forms emphasize that each word came from his mouth. The first verb is an imperfect which emphasizes repeated action in past time and the second verb is a participle which emphasizes ongoing action. However, it is a little awkward to try to express this nuance in contemporary English. Even though it is not reflected in the translation, it is noted here for future reference.

²⁰⁵ tn The verbs here are both direct imperatives but it sounds awkward to say “You and Jeremiah, go and hide” in contemporary English. The same force is accomplished by phrasing the statement as strong advice.

²⁰⁶ tn Heb “they deposited.” For the usage of the verb here see BDB 824 s.v. פָּקַד Hiph.2.b and compare the usage in Jer 37:21 where it is used for “confining” Jeremiah in the courtyard of the guardhouse.

²⁰⁷ tn Heb “all the matters.” Compare the translator’s note on v. 16.

²⁰⁸ tn Both here and in the next verse the Hebrew has “in the ears of” before “the king” (and also before “all the officials”). As in v. 15 these words are not represented in the translation due to the awkwardness of the idiom in contemporary English (see the translator’s note on v. 15).

²⁰⁹ tn Heb “and Jehudi read it.” However, Jehudi has been the subject of the preceding; so it would be awkward in English to use the personal subject. The translation has chosen to bring out the idea that Jehudi himself read it by using the reflexive.

²¹⁰ tn Heb “in the autumn house.” Commentators are agreed that this was not a separate building or palace but the winter quarters in the palace.

sn Larger houses, including the palace, were two-storied buildings with a lower quarters better suited for the cold of winter and an upper quarters which was better ventilated to provide cool in the summer. Since this was the ninth month (December) the king had taken up residence in the lower, warmer quarters which were equipped with a portable fire pot or brazier to keep him warm.

²¹¹ tc Heb “the fire in the firepot was burning before him.” The translation assumes that the word “fire” (אֵשׁ, ’esh) has dropped out after the particle אֶת (’et) because of the similar beginnings of the two words. The word “fire” is found in the Greek, Syriac, and Targumic translations according to BHS. The particle אֵת should be retained rather than dropped as an erroneous writing of אֵשׁ. Its presence is to be explained as the usage of the sign of the accusative introducing a new subject (cf. BDB 85 s.v. אֶת 3.α and compare the usage in 27:8; 38:16 [in the Kethib]; 45:4).

²¹² tn Heb “doors.” This is the only time the word “door” is used in this way but all the commentaries and lexicons agree that it means “columns.” The meaning is figurative based on the similarity of shape.

²¹³ tn Heb “he.” The majority of commentaries and English versions are agreed that “he” is the king. However, since a penknife (Heb “a scribe’s razor”) is used to cut the columns off, it is possible that Jehudi himself did it. However, even if Jehudi himself did it, he was acting on the king’s orders.

²¹⁴ sn Heb “a scribe’s razor.” There is some irony involved here since a scribe’s razor was used to trim the sheets to be sewn together, scrape them in preparation for writing, and to erase errors. What was normally used to prepare the scroll was used to destroy it.

²¹⁵ tn Heb “until the whole scroll was consumed upon the fire which was in the fire pot.”

²¹⁶ tn Heb “Neither the king nor any of his servants who heard all these words were afraid or tore their clothes.” The sentence has been broken up into two shorter sentences to better conform to English style and some of the terms explained (e.g., tore their clothes) for the sake of clarity.

sn There are some interesting wordplays and contrasts involved here. The action of the king and his attendants should be contrasted with that of the officials who heard the same things read (v. 16). The king and his officials did not tear their garments in grief and sorrow; instead the king cut up the scroll (the words “tear” and “cut off” are the same in Hebrew [קָרַע, qara’]). Likewise, the actions of Jehoiakim and his attendants is to be contrasted with that of his father Josiah who some twenty or more years earlier tore his clothes in grief and sorrow (2 Kgs 22:11-20) and led the people in renewing their commitment to the covenant (2 Kgs 23:1-3). That was what the Lord had hoped would happen when the king and the people heard the warnings of Jeremiah (Jer 36:2-3). Instead, Jehoiakim expressed his contempt for the word of God by destroying the scroll.

²¹⁷ tn Heb “And also Elnathan, Delaiah, and Gemariah urged [or had urged] the king not to burn the scroll, but he did not listen to them.” The translation attempts to lessen the clash in chronological sequencing with the preceding. This sentence is essentially a flash back to a time before the scroll was totally burned (v. 23).

²¹⁸ tn Heb “the son of the king.” Many of the commentaries express doubt that this actually refers to Jehoiakim’s own son since Jehoiakim was only about thirty at this time and one of his sons would not have been old enough to have been in such a position of authority. The same doubt is expressed about the use of this term in 38:6 and in 1 Kgs 22:26. The term need not refer to the ruling king’s own son but one of the royal princes.

²¹⁹ tn Heb “Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah after the king had burned the scroll and the words [= containing the words] which Baruch wrote down from the mouth of Jeremiah, saying.”

²²⁰ tn Heb “Return, take another.” The verb “return” is used in the sense of repetition “take again” (cf. BDB 998 s.v. שׁוּב Qal.8). The idea is already contained in “Get another” so most modern English versions do not represent it.

²²¹ tn Heb “all the former words/things.”

²²² tn Heb “first [or former] scroll.”

²²³ tn Or “In essence you asked.” For explanation see the translator’s note on the end of the verse.

²²⁴ tn Heb “You burned this scroll, saying, ‘Why did you write on it, saying, “The king of Babylon will certainly come [the infinitive absolute before the finite verb expresses certainty here as several places elsewhere in Jeremiah] and destroy this land and exterminate from it both man and beast.”’” The sentence raises several difficulties for translating literally. I.e., the “you” in “why did you write” is undefined, though it obviously refers to Jeremiah. The gerund “saying” that introduces ‘Why did you write’ does not fit very well with “you burned the scroll.” Gerunds of this sort are normally explanatory. Lastly, there is no indication in the narrative that Jehoiakim ever directly asked Jeremiah this question. In fact, he had been hidden out of sight so Jehoiakim couldn’t confront him. The question is presented rhetorically, expressing Jehoiakim’s thoughts or intents and giving the rational for burning the scroll, i.e., he questioned Jeremiah’s right to say such things. The translation has attempted to be as literal as possible without resolving some of these difficulties. One level of embedded quotes has been eliminated for greater simplicity. For the rendering of “How dare you” for the interrogative “why do you” see the translator’s note on 26:9.

²²⁵ sn This prophesy was not “totally” fulfilled because his son Jehoiachin (Jeconiah) did occupy the throne for three months (2 Kgs 23:8). However, his rule was negligible and after his capitulation and exile to Babylon, he himself was promised that neither he nor his successors would occupy the throne of David (cf. Jer 22:30; and see the study notes on 22:24, 30).

²²⁶ sn Compare the more poetic prophecy in Jer 22:18-19 and see the study note on 22:19.

²²⁷ tn Heb “for their iniquity.”

²²⁸ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

²²⁹ tn Heb “all the disaster which I spoke against them and they did not listen [or obey].”

²³⁰ tn Heb “And he wrote upon it from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the scroll which Jehoiakim king of Judah burned in the fire. And many words like these were added to them besides [or further].” The translation uses the more active form in the last line because of the tendency in contemporary English style to avoid the passive. It also uses the words “everything” for “all the words” and “messages” for “words” because those are legitimate usages of these phrases, and they avoid the mistaken impression that Jeremiah repeated verbatim the words on the former scroll or repeated verbatim the messages that he had delivered during the course of the preceding twenty-three years.

²³¹ sn It is unclear whether this refers to the first scroll (36:4) or the second (36:32). Perhaps from the reactions of Baruch this refers to the second scroll which was written after he had seen how the leaders had responded to the first (36:19). Baruch was from a well-placed family; his grandfather, Mahseiah (32:12) had been governor of Jerusalem under Josiah (2 Chr 34:8) and his brother was a high-ranking official in Zedekiah’s court (Jer 51:59). He himself appears to have had some personal aspirations that he could see were being or going to be jeopardized (v. 5). The passage is both a rebuke to Baruch and an encouragement that his life will be spared wherever he goes. This latter promise is perhaps the reason that the passage is placed where it is, i.e., after the seemingly universal threat of destruction of all who have gone to Egypt in Jer 44.

²³² tn Heb “[This is] the word/message which Jeremiah the prophet spoke to Baruch son of Neriah when he wrote these words on a scroll from the mouth of Jeremiah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah, saying.”

²³³ tn Heb “Woe to me!” See the translator’s note on 4:13 and 10:19 for the rendering of this term.

²³⁴ sn From the context it appears that Baruch was feeling sorry for himself (v. 5) as well as feeling anguish for the suffering that the nation would need to undergo according to the predictions of Jeremiah that he was writing down.

²³⁵ tn The words, “The Lord told Jeremiah” are not in the text but are implicit in the address that follows, “Thus you shall say to him.” These words are supplied in the translation for clarity.

²³⁶ tn Heb “Thus you shall say to him [i.e., Baruch].”

²³⁷ tn Heb “and this is with regard to the whole earth.” The feminine pronoun הִיא (hi’) at the end refers to the verbal concepts just mentioned, i.e., this process (cf. GKC 459 §144.b and compare the use of the feminine singular suffix in the same function GKC 440-41 §135.p). The particle אֶת (’et) is here functioning to introduce emphatically the object of the action (cf. BDB 85 s.v. I אֵת 3.α). There is some debate whether אֶרֶץ (’erets) here applies to the whole land of Israel or to the whole earth. However, the reference to “all mankind” (Heb “all flesh”) in the next verse as well as “anywhere you go” points to “the whole earth” as the referent.

²³⁸ tn Heb “oracle of the Lord.”

²³⁹ sn Compare Jer 25:31, 33. The reference here to universal judgment also forms a nice transition to the judgments on the nations that follow in Jer 46-51 which may be another reason for the placement of this chapter here, out of its normal chronological order (see also the study note on v. 1).

²⁴⁰ tn Heb “I will give you your life for a spoil.” For this idiom see the translator’s note on 21:9 and compare the usage in 21:9; 38:2; 39:18.

²⁴¹ sn Psalm 9. The psalmist, probably speaking on behalf of Israel or Judah, praises God for delivering him from hostile nations. He celebrates God’s sovereignty and justice, and calls on others to join him in boasting of God’s greatness. Many Hebrew mss and the ancient Greek version (LXX) combine Psalms 9 and 10 into a single psalm.

²⁴² tc The meaning of the Hebrew term עַלְמוּת (’almut) is uncertain. Some mss divide the form into עַל מוּת (’al mut, “according to the death [of the son]”), while the LXX assumes a reading עֲלֻמוֹת עַל (’al ’alumot, “according to alumoth”). The phrase probably refers to a particular tune or musical style.

²⁴³ tn The cohortative forms in vv. 1-2 express the psalmist’s resolve to praise God publicly.

²⁴⁴ tn Heb “[to] your name, O Most High.” God’s “name” refers metonymically to his divine characteristics as suggested by his name, in this case “Most High.” This divine title (עֶלְיוֹן, ’elyo/) pictures God as the exalted ruler of the universe who vindicates the innocent and judges the wicked. See especially Ps 47:2.

²⁴⁵ tn Or “perish”; or “die.” The imperfect verbal forms in this line either emphasize what typically happens or describe vividly the aftermath of a recent battle in which the Lord defeated the psalmist’s enemies.

²⁴⁶ tn Heb “for you accomplished my justice and my legal claim.”

²⁴⁷ tn Heb “you sat on a throne [as] one who judges [with] righteousness.” The perfect verbal forms in v. 4 probably allude to a recent victory (see vv. 5-7). Another option is to understand the verbs as describing what is typical (“you defend…you sit on a throne”).

²⁴⁸ tn The verb גָּעַר (ga’ar) is often understood to mean “rebuke” and in this context taken to refer to the Lord’s “rebuke” of the nations. In some cases it is apparent that scolding or threatening is in view (see Gen 37:10; Ruth 2:16; Zech 3:2). However, in militaristic contexts this translation is inadequate, for the verb refers in this setting to the warrior’s battle cry, which terrifies and paralyzes the enemy. See A. Caquot, TDOT 3:53, and note the use of the verb in Pss 68:30; 106:9; and Nah 1:4, as well as the related noun in Job 26:11; Pss 18:15; 76:6; 104:7; Isa 50:2; 51:20; 66:15.

²⁴⁹ tn The singular form is collective (note “nations” and “their name”). In the psalms the “wicked” (רְשָׁעִים, rÿsha’im) are typically proud, practical atheists (Ps 10:2, 4, 11) who hate God’s commands, commit sinful deeds, speak lies and slander (Ps 50:16-20), and cheat others (Ps 37:21). In this context the hostile nations who threaten Israel/Judah are in view.

²⁵⁰ tn Heb “their name you wiped out forever and ever.” The three perfect verbal forms in v. 5 probably refer to a recent victory (definite past or present perfect use), although they might express what is typical (characteristic use).

²⁵¹ tn Heb “the enemy – they have come to an end [in] ruins permanently.” The singular form אוֹיֵב (’oyev, “enemy”) is collective. It is placed at the beginning of the verse to heighten the contrast with יְהוָה (yÿhvah, “the Lord”) in v. 7.

²⁵² tn Heb “you uprooted cities.”

²⁵³ tn Heb “it has perished, their remembrance, they.” The independent pronoun at the end of the line is in apposition to the preceding pronominal suffix and lends emphasis (see IBHS 299 §16.3.4). The referent of the masculine pronoun is the nations/enemies (cf. v. 5), not the cities (the Hebrew noun עָרִים [’arim, “cities”] is grammatically feminine). This has been specified in the present translation for clarity; many modern translations retain the pronoun “them,” resulting in ambiguity (cf. NRSV “their cities you have rooted out; the very memory of them has perished”).

²⁵⁴ tn The construction vav (ו) + subject highlights the contrast between the exalted Lord and his defeated foes (see v. 6).

²⁵⁵ tn Heb “sits” (i.e., enthroned, see v. 4). The imperfect verbal form highlights the generalization.

²⁵⁶ tn Heb “he establishes for justice his throne.”

²⁵⁷ tn Heb “the peoples.” The imperfect verbal forms in v. 8 either describe God’s typical, characteristic behavior, or anticipate a future judgment of worldwide proportions (“will judge…”).

²⁵⁸ tn Following the imperfect in v. 9, the construction vav (ו) conjunctive + shortened form of the prefixed verb הָיָה (hayah) indicates a consequence or result of the preceding statement. The construction functions this same way in Pss 81:15 and 104:20.

²⁵⁹ tn Heb “and the Lord is an elevated place for the oppressed.” The singular form דָּךְ (dakh, “oppressed”) is collective here.

²⁶⁰ tn Heb “[he is] an elevated place for times in trouble.” Here an “elevated place” refers to a stronghold, a defensible, secure position that represents a safe haven in times of unrest or distress (cf. NEB “tower of strength”; NIV, NRSV “stronghold”).

²⁶¹ tn Heb “and the ones who know your name trust in you.” The construction vav (ו) conjunctive + imperfect at the beginning of the verse expresses another consequence of the statement made in v. 8. “To know” the Lord’s “name” means to be his follower, recognizing his authority and maintaining loyalty to him. See Ps 91:14, where “knowing” the Lord’s “name” is associated with loving him.

²⁶² tn Heb “the ones who seek you.”

²⁶³ tn Heb “sits” (i.e., enthroned, and therefore ruling – see v. 4). Another option is to translate as “lives” or “dwells.”

²⁶⁴ tn Heb “declare among the nations his deeds.”

²⁶⁵ tn Heb “for the one who seeks shed blood remembered them.” The idiomatic expression “to seek shed blood” seems to carry the idea “to seek payment/restitution for one’s shed blood.” The plural form דָּמִים (damim, “shed blood”) occurs only here as the object of דָּרַשׁ (darash); the singular form דָּם (dam, “blood”) appears with the verb in Gen 9:5; 42:22; Ezek 33:6. “Them,” the pronominal object of the verb “remembered,” refers to the oppressed, mentioned specifically in the next line, so the referent has been specified in the translation for clarity.

²⁶⁶ tn Heb “did not forget.”

²⁶⁷ tn Heb “the cry for help of the oppressed.” In this context the “oppressed” are the psalmist and those he represents, whom the hostile nations have threatened.

²⁶⁸ tn The words “when they prayed,” though not represented in the Hebrew text, are supplied in the translation for clarification. The petition in vv. 13-14 is best understood as the cry for help which the oppressed offered to God when the nations threatened. The Lord answered this request, prompting the present song of thanksgiving.

²⁶⁹ tn Or “show me favor.”

²⁷⁰ tn Heb “see my misery from the ones who hate me.”

²⁷¹ tn Heb “one who lifts me up.”

²⁷² tn Or “so that I might.”

²⁷³ tn Heb “all your praise.” “Praise” stands by metonymy for the mighty acts that prompt it.

²⁷⁴ sn Daughter Zion is an idiomatic title for Jerusalem. It appears frequently in the prophets, but only here in the psalms.

²⁷⁵ tn Heb “in your deliverance.”

²⁷⁶ tn Heb “sank down.”

²⁷⁷ sn The hostility of the nations against God’s people is their downfall, for it prompts God to intervene and destroy them. See also Ps 7:15-16.

²⁷⁸ tn Heb “by the work of his hands [the] wicked [one] was ensnared. The singular form רָשָׁע (rasha’, “wicked”) is collective or representative here (see vv. 15, 17). The form נוֹקֵשׁ (noqesh) appears to be an otherwise unattested Qal form (active participle) from נָקַשׁ (naqash), but the form should be emended to נוֹקַשׁ (noqash), a Niphal perfect from יָקַשׁ (yaqash).

²⁷⁹ tn This is probably a technical musical term.

²⁸⁰ tn Heb “the wicked turn back to Sheol.” The imperfect verbal form either emphasizes what typically happens or describes vividly the aftermath of the Lord’s victory over the psalmist’s enemies. See v. 3.

²⁸¹ tn The words “this is the destiny of” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons. The verb “are turned back” is understood by ellipsis (see the preceding line).

²⁸² tn Heb “forget.” “Forgetting God” refers here to worshiping false gods and thereby refusing to recognize his sovereignty (see also Deut 8:19; Judg 3:7; 1 Sam 12:9; Isa 17:10; Jer 3:21; Ps 44:20). The nations’ refusal to acknowledge God’s sovereignty accounts for their brazen attempt to attack and destroy his people.

²⁸³ tn Or “forgotten.”

²⁸⁴ tn Heb “the hope of the afflicted does [not] perish forever.” The negative particle is understood by ellipsis; note the preceding line. The imperfect verbal forms express what typically happens.

²⁸⁵ sn Rise up, Lord! …May the nations be judged. The psalm concludes with a petition that the Lord would continue to exercise his justice as he has done in the recent crisis.

²⁸⁶ tn Or “prevail.”

²⁸⁷ tn Heb “place, Lord, terror with regard to them.” The Hebrew term מוֹרָה (morah, “terror”) is an alternative form of מוֹרָא (mora’; a reading that appears in some mss and finds support in several ancient textual witnesses).

²⁸⁸ tn Heb “let the nations know they [are] man[kind]”; i.e., mere human beings (as opposed to God).