² tc The MT has “two years” here. If this number is to be accepted as correct, the meaning apparently would be that after a lapse of two years at the beginning of Saul’s reign, he then went about the task of consolidating an army as described in what follows (cf. KJV, ASV, CEV). But if the statement in v. 1 is intended to be a comprehensive report on the length of Saul’s reign, the number is too small. According to Acts 13:21 Saul reigned for forty years. Some English versions (e.g., NIV, NCV, NLT), taking this forty to be a round number, add it to the “two years” of the MT and translate the number here as “forty-two years.” While this is an acceptable option, the present translation instead replaces the MT’s “two” with the figure “forty.” Admittedly the textual evidence for this decision is weak, but the same can be said of any attempt to restore sense to this difficult text (note the ellipsis marks at this point in NAB, NRSV). The Syriac Peshitta lacks this part of v. 1.

³ tn It is often thought that the term here is equivalent to a technical term in Akkadian (resh sharruti) that refers to the part of the year remaining from the death or deposing of the previous king until the beginning of the calendar year, when the new king officially ascended the throne. In this case it would refer to the part of the year between September, 609 b.c., when Jehoiakim was placed on the throne as a puppet king by Pharaoh Necho (2 Kgs 23:34-35), and April, 608 b.c., when he would have been officially celebrated as king. However, it will be suggested below, in conjunction with the textual problems in 27:1 and 28:1, that the term does not necessarily refer to this period.

⁵ tn Heb “as it is today.” This phrase would obviously be more appropriate after all these things had happened, as is the case in 44:6, 23, where the verbs referring to these conditions are past. Some see this phrase as a marginal gloss added after the tragedies of 597 b.c. or 586 b.c. However, it may refer here to the beginning stages, where Judah has already suffered the loss of Josiah, its freedom, some of its temple treasures, and some of its leaders (Dan 1:1-3. The different date for Jehoiakim there is due to the different method of counting the king’s first year; the third year there is the same as the fourth year in 25:1).

⁴ sn Cf. Jer 29:10; 25:11-14. Jeremiah had prophesied that after a time of seventy years the Jews would return “to this place.” How these seventy years are to be reckoned is a matter of debate among scholars. Some understand the period to refer to the approximate length of Babylon’s ascendancy as a world power, beginning either with the fall of Nineveh (612 b.c.) or with Nebuchadnezzar’s coronation (605 b.c.) and continuing till the fall of Babylon to the Persians in 539 b.c. Others take the seventy years to refer to the period from the destruction of the temple in 586 b.c. till its rebuilding in 516 b.c.

¹ tn The words “all this took” are not in the Greek text, but are supplied to make a complete statement in English. There is debate over where this period of 450 years fits and what it includes: (1) It could include the years in Egypt, the conquest of Canaan, and the distribution of the land; (2) some connect it with the following period of the judges. This latter approach seems to conflict with 1 Kgs 6:1; see also Josephus, Ant. 8.3.1 (8.61).

² sn Judging from v. 22, this was one of the winter months, meaning that the reckoning is based on the calendar that starts with April rather than the one that 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.

³ sn The expression the disgraceful things we did in our earlier history refers to the disgrace that accompanied the sins that Israel committed in her earlier years before she learned the painful lesson of submission to the Lord through the discipline of exile. For earlier references to the sins of her youth (i.e., in her earlier years as a nation) see 3:24-25; 22:21; 32:29. At the time that these verses were written, neither northern Israel or Judah had expressed the kind of contrition voiced in vv. 18-19. As one commentator notes, the words here are both prophetic and instructive.

² sn The terms used here refer to the enjoyment of a period of peace and stability and to the reversal of the curse (contrast, e.g., Deut 28:30). The Hebrew word translated “enjoy its fruit” is a technical one that refers to the owner of a vineyard getting to enjoy its fruit in the fifth year after it was planted, the crops of the first three years lying fallow, and those of the fourth being given to the Lord (cf. Lev 19:23-25).

¹ sn You founded the earth…your years will never run out. In its original setting Ps 102:25-27 refers to the work of God in creation, but here in Hebrews 1:10-12 the writer employs it in reference to Christ, the Lord, making a strong argument for the essential deity of the Son.

¹ tn Grk “a small child.” The Greek term νήπιος (nēpios) refers to a young child, no longer a helpless infant but probably not more than three or four years old (L&N 9.43). The point in context, though, is that this child is too young to take any responsibility for the management of his assets.

³ tn Or “in a legal meeting of the citizens.” L&N 30.81 has “ἐν τῇ ἐννόμῳ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐπιλυθήσεται ‘it will have to be settled in a legal meeting of the citizens’ Ac 19:39.” This meeting took place three times a year.

¹ sn The first day of the week would be early Sunday morning. The Sabbath (and in this year the Passover) would have lasted from 6 p.m. Friday until 6 p.m. Saturday. Sunday would thus mark the first day of the following week.

¹ sn Passover. According to John’s sequence of material, considerable time has elapsed since the feast of 5:1. If the feast in 5:1 was Pentecost of a.d. 31, then this feast would be the Passover of a.d. 32, just one year before Jesus’ crucifixion.

¹ sn Use of the singular high priesthood to mention two figures is unusual but accurate, since Annas was the key priest from a.d. 6-15 and then his relatives were chosen for many of the next several years. After two brief tenures by others, his son-in-law Caiaphas came to power and stayed there until a.d. 36.

¹ tn Heb “the latter rain.” This expression refers to the last concentration of heavy rainfall in the spring of the year in Palestine, about March or April. Metaphorically and eschatologically (as here) the “latter rain” speaks of God’s outpouring of blessing in the end times (cf. Hos 6:3; Joel 2:21-25).

² sn The eighth month of Darius’ second year was late October—late November, 520 b.c., by the modern (Julian) calendar. This is two months later than the date of Haggai’s first message to the same community (cf. Hag 1:1).

² sn Before one stone was laid on another in the Lord’s temple is best taken as referring to the laying of the present temple’s foundation, sixteen years earlier (536 b.c.; see Ezra 3:8). Cf. NCV “before you started laying stones”; TEV “before you started to rebuild”; NLT “before you began to lay (started laying CEV) the foundation.”

¹ sn The twenty-fourth day of the sixth month of King Darius’ second year was September 21, 520 b.c., twenty-three days after the original command by Haggai to rebuild (1:1). The text does not state the reason for the delay, but it may have resulted from the pressing need to bring in the late summer harvest.

¹ sn Solomon’s temple was demolished in 586 b.c., 66 years prior to Haggai’s time. There surely would have been some older people who remembered the former splendor of that magnificent structure and who lamented the contrast to the small, unimpressive temple they were building (see Ezra 3:8-13).

¹ tn Heb “Did you bring me…?” This rhetorical question expects a negative answer. The point seems to be this: Since sacrifices did not characterize God’s relationship with Israel during the nation’s formative years, the people should not consider them to be so fundamental. The Lord places a higher priority on justice than he does on empty ritual.