¹ tn The Hebrew text does not have the word “son.” So also in vv. 3-5.

² tn Heb “wife.”

³ tn The Hebrew text does not have “sons.”

⁴ tn Heb “was strengthening himself.” The statement may have a negative sense here, perhaps suggesting that Abner was overstepping the bounds of political propriety in a self-serving way.

⁵ tc The Hebrew of the MT reads simply “and he said,” with no expressed subject for the verb. It is not likely that the text originally had no expressed subject for this verb, since the antecedent is not immediately clear from the context. We should probably restore to the Hebrew text the name “Ish-bosheth.” See a few medieval Hebrew mss, Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and Vulgate. Perhaps the name was accidentally omitted by homoioarcton. Note that both the name Ishbosheth and the following preposition אֶל (’el) begin with the letter alef.

⁶ tn Heb “come to”; KJV, NRSV “gone in to”; NAB “been intimate with”; NIV “sleep with.”

⁷ sn This accusation against Abner is a very serious one, since an act of sexual infringement on the king’s harem would probably have been understood as a blatant declaration of aspirations to kingship. As such it was not merely a matter of ethical impropriety but an act of grave political significance as well.

⁸ tn Heb “I do.”

⁹ tn Heb “brothers.”

¹⁰ tn Heb “and you have laid upon me the guilt of the woman today.”

¹¹ tn Heb “So will God do to Abner and so he will add to him.”

¹² tc Heb “has sworn to David.” The LXX, with the exception of the recension of Origen, adds “in this day.”

¹³ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Ish-bosheth) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹⁴ tn The Hebrew text adds here, “on his behalf.”

¹⁵ tn Heb “cut a covenant.” So also in vv. 13, 21.

¹⁶ tn Heb “and behold, my hand is with you.”

¹⁷ tn The words “when you come to see my face,” though found in the Hebrew text, are somewhat redundant given the similar expression in the earlier part of the verse. The words are absent from the Syriac Peshitta.

¹⁸ tn Heb “to Ish-bosheth son of Saul saying.” To avoid excessive sibilance (especially when read aloud) the translation renders “saying” as “with this demand.”

¹⁹ tn Heb “whom I betrothed to myself.”

²⁰ tn Heb “sent and took her.”

²¹ tn In 1 Sam 25:44 this name appears as “Palti.”

²² tn Heb “Go, return.”

²³ tn Heb “the word of Abner was with.”

²⁴ tn Heb “you were seeking David to be king over you.”

²⁵ tc The present translation follows the LXX, the Syriac Peshitta, and Vulgate in reading “I will save,” rather than the MT “he saved.” The context calls for the 1st person common singular imperfect of the verb rather than the 3rd person masculine singular perfect.

²⁶ tn Heb “from the hand of.”

²⁷ tn Heb “into the ears of.”

²⁸ tn Heb “also Abner went to speak into the ears of David in Hebron.”

²⁹ tn Heb “all which was good in the eyes of Israel and in the eyes of all the house of Benjamin.”

³⁰ tn After the cohortatives, the prefixed verbal form with the prefixed conjunction indicates purpose or result.

³¹ tn Heb “And look, the servants of David.”

³² tn Heb “he”; the referent (David) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³³ tn Heb “Look, Abner.”

³⁴ tc The LXX adds “in peace.”

³⁵ tn Heb “your going out and your coming in.” The expression is a merism. It specifically mentions the polar extremities of the actions but includes all activity in between the extremities as well, thus encompassing the entirety of one’s activities.

³⁶ tn Heb “and he struck him down there [in] the stomach.”

³⁷ tn Heb “and he [i.e., Abner] died on account of the blood of Asahel his [i.e., Joab’s] brother.”

³⁸ tn Heb “and may they whirl over.” In the Hebrew text the subject of the plural verb is unexpressed. The most likely subject is Abner’s “shed blood” (v. 28), which is a masculine plural form in Hebrew. The verb חוּל (khul, “whirl”) is used with the preposition עַל (’al) only here and in Jer 23:19; 30:23.

³⁹ tc 4QSam^a has “of Joab” rather than “of his father” read by the MT.

⁴⁰ tn Heb “the house of Joab.” However, it is necessary to specify that David’s curse is aimed at Joab’s male descendants; otherwise it would not be clear that “one who works at the spindle” refers to a man doing woman’s work rather than a woman.

⁴¹ tn Heb “and may there not be cut off from the house of Joab.”

⁴² tn The expression used here is difficult. The translation “one who works at the spindle” follows a suggestion of S. R. Driver that the expression pejoratively describes an effeminate man who, rather than being a mighty warrior, is occupied with tasks that are normally fulfilled by women (S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel, 250-51; cf. NAB “one unmanly”; TEV “fit only to do a woman’s work”; CEV “cowards”). But P. K. McCarter, following an alleged Phoenician usage of the noun to refer to “crutches,” adopts a different view. He translates the phrase “clings to a crutch,” seeing here a further description of physical lameness (II Samuel [AB], 118). Such an idea fits the present context well and is followed by NIV, NCV, and NLT, although the evidence for this meaning is questionable. According to DNWSI 2:915-16, the noun consistently refers to a spindle in Phoenician, as it does in Ugaritic (see UT 468).

⁴³ tn Heb “was walking.”

⁴⁴ tn Heb “lifted up his voice and wept.” The expression is a verbal hendiadys.

⁴⁵ tc The translation follows many medieval Hebrew manuscripts and several ancient versions in reading “your hands,” rather than “your hand.”

⁴⁶ tc 4QSam^a lacks the words “all the people.”

⁴⁷ tn Heb “Thus God will do to me and thus he will add.”

⁴⁸ tn Heb “it was good in their eyes.”

⁴⁹ tn Heb “from the king.”

⁵⁰ tn Heb “a leader and a great one.” The expression is a hendiadys.

⁵¹ tn Heb “are hard from me.”

⁵² tn Heb “May the Lord repay the doer of the evil according to his evil” (NASB similar).

⁵³ tn Or “with the spirit”; cf. vv. 14-16.

⁵⁴ tn Grk “edification.”

⁵⁵ sn The Greek term builds (himself) up does not necessarily bear positive connotations in this context.

⁵⁶ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.

⁵⁷ tn Grk “eager for spirits.” The plural is probably a shorthand for the Spirit’s gifts, especially in this context, tongues.

⁵⁸ tc ‡ Most witnesses, including some important ones (א A D^s Ψ 048 Ï lat sy bo), have γάρ (gar, “for”) here, while an equally impressive array of witnesses lack the conjunction (Ì⁴⁶ B F G 0243 1739 1881 sa). This conjunction was frequently added by scribes in epistolary literature as a clarifying word, making the connection with the preceding more explicit. As such, it has the earmarks of being a motivated reading and thus should be rejected. NA²⁷ places the word in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

⁵⁹ tn Grk “what then is it?”

⁶⁰ tn Grk “how can someone who fills the place of the unlearned say ‘Amen.’”

⁶¹ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.

⁶² sn A quotation from Isa 28:11-12.

⁶³ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.

⁶⁴ sn This phrase may be taken with v. 33a.

⁶⁵ tn The word for “woman” and “wife” is the same in Greek. Because of the reference to husbands in v. 35, the word may be translated “wives” here. But in passages governing conduct in church meetings like this (cf. 11:2-16; 1 Tim 2:9-15) the general meaning “women” is more likely.

⁶⁶ sn For they are not permitted to speak. In light of 11:2-16, which gives permission for women to pray or prophesy in the church meetings, the silence commanded here seems not to involve the absolute prohibition of a woman addressing the assembly. Therefore (1) some take be silent to mean not taking an authoritative teaching role as 1 Tim 2 indicates, but (2) the better suggestion is to relate it to the preceding regulations about evaluating the prophets (v. 29). Here Paul would be indicating that the women should not speak up during such an evaluation, since such questioning would be in violation of the submission to male leadership that the OT calls for (the law, e.g., Gen 2:18).

⁶⁷ tc Some scholars have argued that vv. 34-35 should be excised from the text (principally G. D. Fee, First Corinthians [NICNT], 697-710; P. B. Payne, “Fuldensis, Sigla for Variants in Vaticanus, and 1 Cor 14.34-5,” NTS 41 [1995]: 240-262). This is because the Western witnesses (D F G ar b vg^ms Ambst) have these verses after v. 40, while the rest of the tradition retains them here. There are no mss that omit the verses. Why, then, would some scholars wish to excise the verses? Because they believe that this best explains how they could end up in two different locations, that is to say, that the verses got into the text by way of a very early gloss added in the margin. Most scribes put the gloss after v. 33; others, not knowing where they should go, put them at the end of the chapter. Fee points out that “Those who wish to maintain the authenticity of these verses must at least offer an adequate answer as to how this arrangement came into existence if Paul wrote them originally as our vv. 34-35” (First Corinthians [NICNT], 700). In a footnote he adds, “The point is that if it were already in the text after v. 33, there is no reason for a copyist to make such a radical transposition.” Although it is not our intention to interact with proponents of the shorter text in any detail here, a couple of points ought to be made. (1) Since these verses occur in all witnesses to 1 Corinthians, to argue that they are not original means that they must have crept into the text at the earliest stage of transmission. How early? Earlier than when the pericope adulterae (John 7:53-8:11) made its way into the text (late 2nd, early 3rd century?), earlier than the longer ending of Mark (16:9-20) was produced (early 2nd century?), and earlier than even “in Ephesus” was added to Eph 1:1 (upon reception of the letter by the first church to which it came, the church at Ephesus) – because in these other, similar places, the earliest witnesses do not add the words. This text thus stands as remarkable, unique. Indeed, since all the witnesses have the words, the evidence points to them as having been inserted into the original document. Who would have done such a thing? And, further, why would scribes have regarded it as original since it was obviously added in the margin? This leads to our second point. (2) Following a suggestion made by E. E. Ellis (“The Silenced Wives of Corinth (I Cor. 14:34-5),” New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis, 213-20 [the suggestion comes at the end of the article, almost as an afterthought]), it is likely that Paul himself added the words in the margin. Since it was so much material to add, Paul could have squelched any suspicions by indicating that the words were his (e.g., by adding his name or some other means [cf. 2 Thess 3:17]). This way no scribe would think that the material was inauthentic. (Incidentally, this is unlike the textual problem at Rom 5:1, for there only one letter was at stake; hence, scribes would easily have thought that the “text” reading was original. And Paul would hardly be expected to add his signature for one letter.) (3) What then is to account for the uniform Western tradition of having the verses at the end of the chapter? Our conjecture (and that is all it is) is that the scribe of the Western Vorlage could no longer read where the verses were to be added (any marginal arrows or other directional device could have been smudged), but, recognizing that this was part of the original text, felt compelled to put it somewhere. The least offensive place would have been at the end of the material on church conduct (end of chapter 14), before the instructions about the resurrection began. Although there were no chapter divisions in the earliest period of copying, scribes could still detect thought breaks (note the usage in the earliest papyri). (4) The very location of the verses in the Western tradition argues strongly that Paul both authored vv. 34-35 and that they were originally part of the margin of the text. Otherwise, one has a difficulty explaining why no scribe seemed to have hinted that these verses might be inauthentic (the scribal sigla of codex B, as noticed by Payne, can be interpreted otherwise than as an indication of inauthenticity [cf. J. E. Miller, “Some Observations on the Text-Critical Function of the Umlauts in Vaticanus, with Special Attention to 1 Corinthians 14.34-35,” JSNT 26 [2003]: 217-36.). There are apparently no mss that have an asterisk or obelisk in the margin. Yet in other places in the NT where scribes doubted the authenticity of the clauses before them, they often noted their protest with an asterisk or obelisk. We are thus compelled to regard the words as original, and as belonging where they are in the text above.

⁶⁸ tn Grk “Did the word of God go out from you.”

⁶⁹ tc ‡ μου (mou, “my”) is found after ἀδελφοί (adelfoi) in a number of significant witnesses (א A B* D¹ 048 326 1175 2464 al), but lacking in most other witnesses (Ì⁴⁶ B² D* F G Ψ 0243 33 1739 1881 Ï lat). Every other time Paul says “So then, brothers (and sisters)” he adds “my” (ὥστε, ἀδελφοί μου; {wste, adelfoi mou). There is no good reason why scribes would intentionally omit “my” here but not elsewhere. Thus, the longer reading is in conformity with Paul’s general style and as such seems to be scribally motivated. NA²⁷ has the word in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.

⁷⁰ tn Grk “speaking in tongues.” The words “anyone from” are supplied for the sake of clarity.

⁷¹ sn The book of Ezekiel frequently refers to the Israelites as a rebellious house (Ezek 2:5, 6, 8; 3:9, 26-27; 12:2-3, 9, 25; 17:12; 24:3).

⁷² sn This verse is very similar to Isa 6:9-10.

⁷³ tn Heb “see.” This plays on the uses of “see” in v. 2. They will see his actions with their eyes and perhaps they will “see” with their mind, that is, understand or grasp the point.

⁷⁴ tn Apart from this context the Hebrew term occurs only in Gen 15:17 in reference to the darkness after sunset. It may mean twilight.

⁷⁵ tn Or “land” (ASV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV).

⁷⁶ sn See also Ezek 12:11, 24:24, 27.

⁷⁷ tn The words “my baggage” are not in the Hebrew text, but are implied from the context.

⁷⁸ tc The nearly incoherent Hebrew reads “The prince is this burden (prophetic oracle?) in Jerusalem.” The Targum, which may only be trying to make sense of a very difficult text, says “Concerning the prince is this oracle,” assuming the addition of a preposition. This would be the only case where Ezekiel uses this term for a prophetic oracle. The LXX reads the word for “burden” as a synonym for leader, as both words are built on the same root (נָשִׂיא, nasi’), but the verse is still incoherent because it is only a phrase with no verb. The current translation assumes that the verb יִשָּׂא (yisa’) from the root נָשִׂיא has dropped out due to homoioteleuton. If indeed the verb has dropped out (the syntax of the verbless clause being the problem), then context clearly suggests that it be a form of נָשִׂיא (see vv. 7 and 12). Placing the verb between the subject and object would result in three consecutive words based on the root נָשִׂיא and an environment conducive to an omission in copying: הַנָּשִׂיא יִשָּׁא הַמַּשָּׂא הַזֶּה (hannasi’ yisha’ hammasa’ hazzeh, “the Prince will raise this burden”).

sn The prince in Jerusalem refers to King Zedekiah.

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

⁷⁹ tc The MT reads “within them.” Possibly a scribe copied this form from the following verse “among them,” but only “within it” makes sense in this context.

⁸⁰ sn The prince is a reference to Zedekiah.

⁸¹ tn The words “his belongings” are not in the Hebrew text but are implied.

⁸² tc The MT reads “they”; the LXX and Syriac read “he.”

⁸³ tn Or “Babylonians” (NCV, NLT).

sn The Chaldeans were a group of people in the country south of Babylon from which Nebuchadnezzar came. The Chaldean dynasty his father established became the name by which the Babylonians are regularly referred to in the book of Jeremiah, while Jeremiah’s contemporary, Ezekiel, uses both terms.

⁸⁴ sn He will not see it. This prediction was fulfilled in 2 Kgs 25:7 and Jer 52:11, which recount how Zedekiah was blinded before being deported to Babylon.

⁸⁵ sn There he will die. This was fulfilled when King Zedekiah died in exile (Jer 52:11).

⁸⁶ tn The Hebrew term normally refers to an earthquake (see 1 Kgs 19:11; Amos 1:1).

⁸⁷ tn Heb “the days draw near and the word of every vision (draws near).”

⁸⁸ sn Psalm 51. The psalmist confesses his sinfulness to God and begs for forgiveness and a transformation of his inner character. According to the psalm superscription, David offered this prayer when Nathan confronted him with his sin following the king’s affair with Bathsheba (see 2 Sam 11-12). However, the final two verses of the psalm hardly fit this situation, for they assume the walls of Jerusalem have been destroyed and that the sacrificial system has been temporarily suspended. These verses are probably an addition to the psalm made during the period of exile following the fall of Jerusalem in 586 b.c. The exiles could relate to David’s experience, for they, like him, and had been forced to confront their sin. They appropriated David’s ancient prayer and applied it to their own circumstances.

⁸⁹ tn Heb “a psalm by David, when Nathan the prophet came to him when he had gone to Bathsheba.”

⁹⁰ tn Or “according to.”

⁹¹ tn Or “according to.”

⁹² tn Traditionally “blot out my transgressions.” Because of the reference to washing and cleansing in the following verse, it is likely that the psalmist is comparing forgiveness to wiping an object clean (note the use of the verb מָחָה (makhah) in the sense of “wipe clean; dry” in 2 Kgs 21:13; Prov 30:20; Isa 25:8). Another option is that the psalmist is comparing forgiveness to erasing or blotting out names from a register (see Exod 32:32-33). In this case one might translate, “erase all record of my rebellious acts.”

⁹³ tn Heb “Thoroughly wash me from my wrongdoing.”

⁹⁴ sn In vv. 1b-2 the psalmist uses three different words to emphasize the multifaceted character and degree of his sin. Whatever one wants to call it (“rebellious acts,” “wrongdoing,” “sin”), he has done it and stands morally polluted in God’s sight. The same three words appear in Exod 34:7, which emphasizes that God is willing to forgive sin in all of its many dimensions. In v. 2 the psalmist compares forgiveness and restoration to physical cleansing. Perhaps he likens spiritual cleansing to the purification rites of priestly law.

⁹⁵ tn Heb “know.”

⁹⁶ tn Heb “and my sin [is] in front of me continually.”

⁹⁷ tn Heb “only you,” as if the psalmist had sinned exclusively against God and no other. Since the Hebrew verb חָטָא (hata’, “to sin”) is used elsewhere of sinful acts against people (see BDB 306 s.v. 2.a) and David (the presumed author) certainly sinned when he murdered Uriah (2 Sam 12:9), it is likely that the psalmist is overstating the case to suggest that the attack on Uriah was ultimately an attack on God himself. To clarify the point of the hyperbole, the translation uses “especially,” rather than the potentially confusing “only.”

⁹⁸ tn The Hebrew term לְמַעַן (lÿma’an) normally indicates purpose (“in order that”), but here it introduces a logical consequence of the preceding statement. (Taking the clause as indicating purpose here would yield a theologically preposterous idea – the psalmist purposely sinned so that God’s justice might be vindicated!) For other examples of לְמַעַן indicating result, see 2 Kgs 22:17; Jer 27:15; Amos 2:7, as well as IBHS 638-40 §38.3.

⁹⁹ tn Heb “when you speak.” In this context the psalmist refers to God’s word of condemnation against his sin delivered through Nathan (cf. 2 Sam 12:7-12).

¹⁰⁰ tn Heb “when you judge.”

¹⁰¹ tn Heb “Look, in wrongdoing I was brought forth, and in sin my mother conceived me.” The prefixed verbal form in the second line is probably a preterite (without vav [ו] consecutive), stating a simple historical fact. The psalmist is not suggesting that he was conceived through an inappropriate sexual relationship (although the verse has sometimes been understood to mean that, or even that all sexual relationships are sinful). The psalmist’s point is that he has been a sinner from the very moment his personal existence began. By going back beyond the time of birth to the moment of conception, the psalmist makes his point more emphatically in the second line than in the first.

¹⁰² sn The juxtaposition of two occurrences of “look” in vv. 5-6 draws attention to the sharp contrast between the sinful reality of the psalmist’s condition and the lofty ideal God has for him.

¹⁰³ tn The perfect is used in a generalizing sense here.

¹⁰⁴ tn Heb “in the covered [places],” i.e., in the inner man.

¹⁰⁵ tn Heb “in the secret [place] wisdom you cause me to know.” The Hiphil verbal form is causative, while the imperfect is used in a modal sense to indicate God’s desire (note the parallel verb “desire”).

sn You want me to possess wisdom. Here “wisdom” does not mean “intelligence” or “learning,” but refers to moral insight and skill.

¹⁰⁶ tn The imperfect verbal form is used here to express the psalmist’s wish or request.

¹⁰⁷ tn Heb “cleanse me with hyssop.” “Hyssop” was a small plant (see 1 Kgs 4:33) used to apply water (or blood) in purification rites (see Exod 12:22; Lev 14:4-6, 49-52; Num 19:6-18. The psalmist uses the language and imagery of such rites to describe spiritual cleansing through forgiveness.

¹⁰⁸ tn After the preceding imperfect, the imperfect with vav (ו) conjunctive indicates result.

¹⁰⁹ tn The imperfect verbal form is used here to express the psalmist’s wish or request.

¹¹⁰ sn I will be whiter than snow. Whiteness here symbolizes the moral purity resulting from forgiveness (see Isa 1:18).

¹¹¹ tn Heb “cause me to hear happiness and joy.” The language is metonymic: the effect of forgiveness (joy) has been substituted for its cause. The psalmist probably alludes here to an assuring word from God announcing that his sins are forgiven (a so-called oracle of forgiveness). The imperfect verbal form is used here to express the psalmist’s wish or request. The synonyms “happiness” and “joy” are joined together as a hendiadys to emphasize the degree of joy he anticipates.

¹¹² sn May the bones you crushed rejoice. The psalmist compares his sinful condition to that of a person who has been physically battered and crushed. Within this metaphorical framework, his “bones” are the seat of his emotional strength.

¹¹³ tn In this context of petitionary prayer, the prefixed verbal form is understood as a jussive, expressing the psalmist’s wish or request.

¹¹⁴ sn In this context Hide your face from my sins means “Do not hold me accountable for my sins.”

¹¹⁵ tn See the note on the similar expression “wipe away my rebellious acts” in v. 1.

¹¹⁶ sn The heart is viewed here as the seat of the psalmist’s motives and moral character.

¹¹⁷ tn Heb “and a reliable spirit renew in my inner being.”

¹¹⁸ tn Heb “do not cast me away from before you.”

¹¹⁹ sn Your Holy Spirit. The personal Spirit of God is mentioned frequently in the OT, but only here and in Isa 63:10-11 is he called “your/his Holy Spirit.”

¹²⁰ sn Do not take…away. The psalmist expresses his fear that, due to his sin, God will take away the Holy Spirit from him. NT believers enjoy the permanent gift of the Holy Spirit and need not make such a request nor fear such a consequence. However, in the OT God’s Spirit empowered certain individuals for special tasks and only temporarily resided in them. For example, when God rejected Saul as king and chose David to replace him, the divine Spirit left Saul and came upon David (1 Sam 16:13-14).

¹²¹ tn Heb “and [with] a willing spirit sustain me.” The psalmist asks that God make him the kind of person who willingly obeys the divine commandments. The imperfect verbal form is used here to express the psalmist’s wish or request.

¹²² tn The cohortative expresses the psalmist’s resolve. This may be a vow or promise. If forgiven, the psalmist will “repay” the Lord by declaring God’s mercy and motivating other sinners to repent.

¹²³ tn Heb “your ways.” The word “merciful” is added for clarification. God’s “ways” are sometimes his commands, but in this context, where the teaching of God’s ways motivates repentance (see the next line), it is more likely that God’s merciful and compassionate way of dealing with sinners is in view. Thanksgiving songs praising God for his deliverance typically focus on these divine attributes (see Pss 34, 41, 116, 138).

¹²⁴ tn Or “return,” i.e., in repentance.

¹²⁵ tn Heb “from bloodshed.” “Bloodshed” here stands by metonymy for the guilt which it produces.

¹²⁶ tn Heb “my tongue will shout for joy your deliverance.” Another option is to take the prefixed verbal form as a jussive, “may my tongue shout for joy.” However, the pattern in vv. 12-15 appears to be prayer/request (see vv. 12, 14a, 15a) followed by promise/vow (see vv. 13, 14b, 15b).

¹²⁷ tn Heb “open my lips.” The imperfect verbal form is used here to express the psalmist’s wish or request.

¹²⁸ tn Heb “and my mouth will declare your praise.”

¹²⁹ tn Or “For.” The translation assumes the particle is asseverative (i.e., emphasizing: “certainly”). (Some translations that consider the particle asseverative leave it untranslated.) If taken as causal or explanatory (“for”, cf. NRSV), the verse would explain why the psalmist is pleading for forgiveness, rather than merely offering a sacrifice.

¹³⁰ tn The translation assumes that the cohortative is used in a hypothetical manner in a formally unmarked conditional sentence, “You do not want a sacrifice, should I offer [it]” (cf. NEB). For other examples of cohortatives in the protasis (“if” clause) of a conditional sentence, see GKC 320 §108.e. (It should be noted, however, that GKC understands this particular verse in a different manner. See GKC 320 §108.f, where it is suggested that the cohortative is part of an apodosis with the protasis being suppressed.)

¹³¹ sn You do not desire a burnt sacrifice. The terminology used in v. 16 does not refer to expiatory sacrifices, but to dedication and communion offerings. This is not a categorical denial of the sacrificial system in general or of the importance of such offerings. The psalmist is talking about his specific situation. Dedication and communion offerings have their proper place in worship (see v. 19), but God requires something more fundamental, a repentant and humble attitude (see v. 17), before these offerings can have real meaning.

¹³² tn Heb “a broken spirit.”

¹³³ tn Heb “a broken and crushed heart.”

¹³⁴ tn Or “despise.”

¹³⁵ tn Heb “do what is good for Zion in your favor.”

¹³⁶ tn Or “Build.” The imperfect verbal form is used here to express the psalmist’s wish or request.

¹³⁷ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

¹³⁸ tn Or “desire, take delight in.”

¹³⁹ tn Heb “then they will offer up bulls.” The third plural subject is indefinite.

¹⁴⁰ sn Verses 18-19 appear to reflect the exilic period, when the city’s walls lay in ruins and the sacrificial system had been disrupted.