² tn On this term BDAG 924-25 s.v. σιρικός states, “per. to silk from Ser, subst. τὸ σιρικόν silk cloth or garments w. other costly materials Rv 18:12.”

³ tn The word “jewelry” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate that gold ornaments or jewelry is intended; otherwise the reader might assume wearing gold-colored clothing was forbidden.

³ tn In the NT this term is used only for strips of cloth used to wrap a body for burial (LN 6.154; BDAG 693 s.v. ὀθόνιον).

² sn This mockery involved putting elegant royal clothes on Jesus, either white or purple (the colors of royalty). This was no doubt a mockery of Jesus’ claim to be a king.

² sn Sheep’s clothing…voracious wolves. Jesus uses a metaphor here to point out that these false prophets appear to be one thing, but in reality they are something quite different and dangerous.

² tn The Pual participle מְתֻלָּעִים (m^etullaʿim, “dressed in scarlet”) from תָּלָע (talaʿ, “scarlet”) is used elsewhere of clothing dyed red or purple (Isa 1:18; Lam 4:5).

³ sn In Jewish understanding a husband should provide food and cloth to his wife. These women are so desperate as to be willing to exempt the man from some of his traditional, fundamental duties as a husband.

² tn Heb “a garment of violence covers them.” The metaphor suggests that violence is habitual for the wicked. They “wear” it like clothing; when one looks at them, violence is what one sees.

¹ tn Heb “as for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth.” Sackcloth was worn by mourners. When the psalmist’s enemies were sick, he was sorry for their misfortune and mourned for them.

¹ tn The verb חָבַל (khaval) means “to take pledges.” In this verse Eliphaz says that Job not only took as pledge things the poor need, like clothing, but he did it for no reason.

¹ tn The skin and flesh form the exterior of the body and so the image of “clothing” is appropriate. Once again the verb is the prefixed conjugation, expressing what God did.

² tc The MT reads פְגָרִים (f^egarim, “corpses”), but this seems odd among a list of plunder. A few medieval Hebrew mss and the Vulgate read בְגָדִים (v^egadim, “clothing”), which fits the context much better.

¹ sn Tearing one’s clothing and throwing dirt on one’s head were outward expressions of grief in the ancient Near East, where such demonstrable reactions were a common response to tragic news.

¹ tn Heb “stumblers have put on strength.” Because of the contrast between the prior and current condition, the participle has been translated with past tense. The Hebrew metaphor is a picture of getting dressed with (“putting on”) strength like clothing.

¹ tn The exact nature of this article of the priest’s clothing is difficult to determine. Cf. KJV, ASV “breeches”; NAB “drawers”; NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT “undergarments”; NCV “underclothes”; CEV “underwear”; TEV “shorts.”

³ sn He protested by shaking out his clothes. A symbolic action of protest, similar but not identical to the practice of shaking the dust off one’s feet (see Acts 13:51). The two symbolic actions are related, however, since what is shaken off here is the dust raised by the feet and settling in the clothes. The meaning is, “I am done with you! You are accountable to God.”

⁴ sn The “fine linen” refers to expensive clothing (e.g., Gen 41:42), as does the “purple” (e.g., Exod 26:7; 27:9, 18). Garments dyed with purple indicated wealth and high rank (e.g., Song 3:5). The rich man in Luke 16:19 was clothed in fine linen and purple as well. The difference is that the wise woman is charitable, but he is not.

¹ tc The present translation reads with the LXX וְהִלְבִּישׁוֹ (v^ehilbisho, “and he will clothe him”) rather than the reading of the MT וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ (v^ehilbishu, “and they will clothe”). The reading of the LXX is also followed by NAB, NRSV, TEV, CEV, and NLT. Likewise, the later verbs in this verse (“cause him to ride” and “call”) are better taken as singulars rather than plurals.

¹ sn Put off all such things. The commands in vv. 8-9 are based on two reasons given in vv. 9-10—reasons which are expressed in terms of a metaphor about clothing oneself. Paul says that they have put off the old man and have put on the new man. Two things need to be discussed in reference to Paul’s statement. (1) What is the meaning of the clothing imagery (i.e., the “have put off” and “have been clothed”)? (2) What is the meaning of the old man and the new man? Though some commentators understand the participles “have put off” (v. 9) and “have been clothed” (v. 10) as imperatives (i.e., “put off!” and “put on!”), this use of participles is extremely rare in the NT and thus unlikely here. It is better to take them as having the semantic force of indicatives, and thus they give an explanation of what had happened to the Colossians at the time of their conversion—they had taken off the old man and put on the new when they trusted in Christ (cf. 1:4). While it is difficult to say for certain what the background to Paul’s “clothing” metaphor might be (whether it is primarily Jewish and comes from the OT, or primarily Gentile and comes from some facet of the Greco-Roman religious milieu), it is nonetheless clear, on the basis of Paul’s usage of the expression, that the old man refers to man as he is in Adam and dominated by sin (cf. Rom 6:6; Eph 4:22), while the new man refers to the Christian whose new sphere of existence is in Christ. Though the metaphor of clothing oneself primarily reflects outward actions, there is a distinct inward aspect to it, as the rest of v. 10 indicates: being renewed in knowledge according to the image of the one who created it. Paul’s point, then, is that Christians should take off their dirty clothing (inappropriate behavior) and put on clean clothing (behavior consistent with knowing Christ) because this has already been accomplished in a positional sense at the time of their conversion (cf. Gal 3:27 with Rom 13:14).

³ tn Grk “shaking out his clothes, he said to them.” L&N 16:8 translates Acts 18:6 “when they opposed him and said evil things about him, he protested by shaking the dust from his clothes.” The addition of the verb “protested by” in the translation is necessary to clarify for the modern reader that this is a symbolic action. It is similar but not identical to the phrase in Acts 13:51, where the dust from the feet is shaken off. The participle ἐκτιναξάμενος (ektinaxamenos) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.