13:10 Lot looked up and saw 5 the whole region 6 of the Jordan. He noticed 7 that all of it was well-watered (before the Lord obliterated 8 Sodom and Gomorrah) 9 like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, 10 all the way to Zoar.
44:16 Judah replied, “What can we say 21 to my lord? What can we speak? How can we clear ourselves? 22 God has exposed the sin of your servants! 23 We are now my lord’s slaves, we and the one in whose possession the cup was found.”
1 tn The Hebrew term לָכֵן (lakhen, “therefore”) in this context carries the sense of “Okay,” or “in that case then I will do this.”
2 sn The symbolic number seven is used here to emphasize that the offender will receive severe punishment. For other rhetorical and hyperbolic uses of the expression “seven times over,” see Pss 12:6; 79:12; Prov 6:31; Isa 30:26.
3 tn Heb “sign”; “reminder.” The term “sign” is not used in the translation because it might imply to an English reader that God hung a sign on Cain. The text does not identify what the “sign” was. It must have been some outward, visual reminder of Cain’s special protected status.
4 sn God becomes Cain’s protector. Here is common grace – Cain and his community will live on under God’s care, but without salvation.
5 tn Heb “lifted up his eyes and saw.” The expression draws attention to the act of looking, indicating that Lot took a good look. It also calls attention to the importance of what was seen.
6 tn Or “plain”; Heb “circle.”
7 tn The words “he noticed” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
8 sn Obliterated. The use of the term “destroy” (שַׁחֵת, shakhet) is reminiscent of the Noahic flood (Gen 6:13). Both at the flood and in Sodom the place was obliterated by catastrophe and only one family survived (see C. Westermann, Genesis, 2:178).
9 tn This short temporal clause (preposition + Piel infinitive construct + subjective genitive + direct object) is strategically placed in the middle of the lavish descriptions to sound an ominous note. The entire clause is parenthetical in nature. Most English translations place the clause at the end of v. 10 for stylistic reasons.
10 sn The narrative places emphasis on what Lot saw so that the reader can appreciate how it aroused his desire for the best land. It makes allusion to the garden of the
11 tn Heb “For I have known him.” The verb יָדַע (yada’) here means “to recognize and treat in a special manner, to choose” (see Amos 3:2). It indicates that Abraham stood in a special covenantal relationship with the
12 tn Heb “and they will keep.” The perfect verbal form with vav consecutive carries on the subjective nuance of the preceding imperfect verbal form (translated “so that he may command”).
13 tn The infinitive construct here indicates manner, explaining how Abraham’s children and his household will keep the way of the
14 tn Heb “bring on.” The infinitive after לְמַעַן (lÿma’an) indicates result here.
15 tn Heb “spoke to.”
16 tn Heb “and it was from then.”
17 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Potiphar) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
18 sn The Hebrew word translated blessed carries the idea of enrichment, prosperity, success. It is the way believers describe success at the hand of God. The text illustrates the promise made to Abraham that whoever blesses his descendants will be blessed (Gen 12:1-3).
19 tn Heb “in the house and in the field.” The word “both” has been supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
20 sn The passage gives us a good picture of Joseph as a young man who was responsible and faithful, both to his master and to his God. This happened within a very short time of his being sold into Egypt. It undermines the view that Joseph was a liar, a tattletale, and an arrogant adolescent.
21 tn The imperfect verbal form here indicates the subject’s potential.
22 tn The Hitpael form of the verb צָדֵק (tsadeq) here means “to prove ourselves just, to declare ourselves righteous, to prove our innocence.”
23 sn God has exposed the sin of your servants. The first three questions are rhetorical; Judah is stating that there is nothing they can say to clear themselves. He therefore must conclude that they have been found guilty.