¹ sn The phrase in the last days is not quoted from Joel, but represents Peter’s interpretive explanation of the current events as falling “in the last days.”

² tn Traditionally, “a lawyer.” This was an expert in the interpretation of the Mosaic law (see also Luke 7:30, where the same term occurs).

³ tn That is, those who were skilled in the teaching and interpretation of the OT law. These are called “experts in the law” (Grk “scribes”) in v. 21.

⁵ sn A quotation from Deut 6:13. The word “only” is an interpretive expansion not found in either the Hebrew or Greek (LXX) text of the OT.

¹ tn Heb “messenger” or “angel” (מַלְאָךְ, malʾakh). This being appears to serve as an interpreter to the prophet (cf. vv. 13, 14).

¹ tn The Targum (Aramaic translation) of Jonah 1:1 interprets the Hebrew as, “There was a word of prophecy from the Lord” (cf. Tg. Hos 1:1).

¹ tn The Hebrew word occurs only here in the OT. It is interpreted based on a Syriac cognate meaning “to bristle or stiffen (in terror).”

⁶ tn The Hebrew text has simply חָזָה (khazah, “gaze”). The adverb “longingly” is interpretive (see the context, where sexual lust is depicted).

³ tn The vav (ו) + imperfect is translated here as a result clause; one might interpret it as indicating purpose, “and so I might be honored.”

⁴ tn Heb “and my God is [perhaps, “having been”] my strength.” The disjunctive structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) is interpreted here as indicating a causal circumstantial clause.

¹ tn Or “goads”; NCV “sharp sticks used to guide animals.” For further information see M. A. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 29-32.

¹ tn The form מַה (mah), normally the interrogative “what?” (so KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB) is best interpreted here as an exclamation. Tg. Prov 31:2 has “Woe!”

³ sn The verb is the Qal imperfect of קָרָא (qaraʾ); BDB 895 s.v. 5.b defines it here as “call for = demand, require,” but acknowledges that it probably needs revision. R. B. Y. Scott interprets it to mean “grasping” oil in the hand, an expression he compares to the modern “butterfingers” (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes [AB], 163). The imperfect form is interpreted as modal, “can grasp,” for this context. Others have interpreted it to mean “betrays”—“ointment of his right hand betrays itself,” meaning its smell persists. However, the connection to the proverb does not seem obvious with that interpretation.

¹ tn The particle כִּי (ki) is here interpreted with a temporal nuance. It is also possible that it could be read as concessive (so NIV, NLT “Though”).

¹ tn Heb “the man.” The LXX interpreted it as “my husband,” taking the article to be used as a possessive. Many English versions do the same.

² tc Heb “hand” (so KJV, NAB, NRSV). Some mss and versions have it as “trap,” which may very well represent an interpretation too.

¹ tn A number of interpreters and translations take this as “the pit” (see Job 17:14; cf. NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV).

¹ tn Heb “arises.” The LXX reads “takes vengeance,” an interpretation that is somewhat correct but unnecessary. The verb “to rise” would mean “to confront in judgment.”

² tn This clause is interpreted here as a subordinate clause to the first half of the verse. It could also be a separate clause: “was he not warmed…?”

¹ tn The word מָעַל (maʿal) is used for “treachery; deception; fraud.” Here Job is saying that their way of interpreting reality is dangerously unfaithful.