² sn Nathanael’s confession—You are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel—is best understood as a confession of Jesus’ messiahship. It has strong allusions to Ps 2:6-7, a well-known messianic psalm. What Nathanael’s exact understanding was at this point is hard to determine, but “son of God” was a designation for the Davidic king in the OT, and Nathanael parallels it with King of Israel here.

³ tn Grk “every [kind of] disease and every [kind of] sickness.” Here “every” was not repeated in the translation for stylistic reasons. The present translation, like several other translations (e.g., NASB, NKJV, CEV, NLT), has opted for “every kind of disease and sickness” here (KJV “all manner of sickness and all manner of disease”), understanding the Greek term πᾶς to refer to “everything belonging, in kind, to the class designated by the noun” (BDAG 784 s.v. 5).

³ tn Grk “people.” The plural of ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos) usually indicates people in general, but the singular is used in the expression “Son of Man.” There is thus an ironic allusion to Jesus’ statement in v. 6: His self-designation as “Son of Man” is meant to be unique, but the crowd regards it simply as meaning “human, person.” To maintain this connection for the English reader the plural ἀνθρώποις (anthrōpois) has been translated here as “men” rather than as the more generic “people.”

³ tn Grk “every [kind of] disease and every [kind of] sickness.” Here “every” was not repeated in the translation for stylistic reasons. The present translation, like several other translations (e.g., NASB, CEV, NLT), has opted for “every kind of disease and sickness” here, understanding the Greek term πᾶς to refer to “everything belonging, in kind, to the class designated by the noun” (BDAG 784 s.v. 5).

² tn The Hebrew term אַדִּירֶיךָ (ʾaddirekha, “your officers”) from the root אַדִּיר (ʾaddir, “high noble, majestic one”) designates “prominent people” in society (Judg 5:13, 25; Jer 14:3; Ps 16:3; Neh 3:5; 10:30; 2 Chr 23:20) and prominent “officers” in the military (Nah 2:6; 3:18); see HALOT 14 s.v.; BDB 12 s.v. אַדִּיר. This is related to Assyrian adaru (“high noble official”).

³ sn The passage is highly figurative. The sword of the Lord, which is itself a figure of the destructive agency of the enemy armies, is here addressed as a person and is encouraged by rhetorical questions (questions designed to dissuade) and commands to “be quiet,” “be at rest,” and “be silent,” all of which aim to get the Lord to call off the destruction against the Philistines.

² sn Heb “on its tel.” A tel is a site where successive layers of occupation are built upon one another after the destruction or decay of the former city. The original site was not abandoned because it had been chosen for strategic purposes, such as proximity to water or ease of defense. Many modern archaeological sites have the designation “Tel” as a component of their name because of this practice.

¹ sn The significance of the qualifying phrase “buzzing wings” is uncertain. Some suggest that the designation points to Cush as a land with many insects. Another possibility is that it refers to the swiftness with which this land’s messengers travel (v. 2a); they move over the sea as swiftly as an insect flies through the air. For a discussion of the options, see J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 1:359-60.

⁶ sn These three geographical designations may refer to provinces established by the Assyrians in 734-733 b.c. The “way of the sea” is the province of Dor, along the Mediterranean coast, the “region beyond the Jordan” is the province of Gilead in Transjordan, and “Galilee of the nations” (a title that alludes to how the territory had been overrun by foreigners) is the province of Megiddo located west of the Sea of Galilee. See Y. Aharoni, Land of the Bible, 374.

¹ tn Heb “if you do not believe, you will not endure.” The verb forms are second plural; the Lord here addresses the entire Davidic family and court. (Verse 4 was addressed to the king.) There is a wordplay in the Hebrew text, designed to draw attention to the alternatives set before the king (cf. 1:20). “Believe” (תַאֳמִינוּ, taʾaminu) is a Hiphil form of the verb אָמָן (ʾaman); “endure” (תֵאָמֵנוּ, teʾamenu) is a Niphal form of this same verb.

⁷ tn Heb “and my heart was leading along in wisdom.” The vav + noun, וְלִבִּי (v^elibbi) introduces a disjunctive, parenthetical clause designed to qualify the speaker’s remarks lest he be misunderstood: “Now my heart/mind….” He emphasizes that he never lost control of his senses in this process. It was a purely mental, cognitive endeavor; he never actually gave himself over to wanton self-indulgence in wine or folly.

¹ tn The word “rod” is a metonymy of cause, in which the instrument being used to discipline is mentioned in place of the process of disciplining someone. So the expression refers to the process of discipline that is designed to correct someone. Some understand the words “rod and reproof” to form a hendiadys, meaning “a correcting [or, reproving] rod” (cf. NAB, NIV “the rod of correction”).

² tn Heb “strange woman.” This can be interpreted as a “wayward wife” (so NIV) or an “unfaithful wife” (so NCV). As discussed earlier, the designations “strange woman” and “foreign woman” could refer to Israelites who stood outside the community in their lawlessness and loose morals—an adulteress or wayward woman. H. Ringgren and W. Zimmerli, however, suggest that she is also a promoter of a pagan cult, but that is not entirely convincing (Spruche/Prediger [ATD], 19).

² tn Since the psalm appears to focus on an individual’s concerns, not the situation of Israel, this introduction may be a later addition designed to apply the psalm’s message to the entire community. To provide a better parallel with the next line, some emend the Hebrew phrase לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֱלֹהִים (l^eyisra’el ʾelohim, “to Israel, God”) to אֱלֹהִים [or אֵל] לָיָּשָׁר (layyashar ʾelohim [or ʾel], “God [is good] to the upright one”).

² sn Here too is a reference to pagan views indirectly. The fleeing serpent was a designation for Leviathan, whom the book will simply describe as an animal, but the pagans thought to be a monster of the deep. See the same Hebrew phrase in Isaiah 27:1. God’s power over nature is associated with defeat of pagan gods (see further W. F. Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan).

² tn The Hebrew text uses a wordplay here: שֹׁגֵג (shogeg) is “the one going astray,” i.e., the one who is unable to guard and guide his life. The second word is מַשְׁגֶּה (mashgeh), from a different but historically related root שָׁגָה (shagah), which here in the Hiphil means “the one who misleads, causes to go astray.” These two words are designed to include everybody—all are under the wisdom of God.

¹ sn Elijah’s sarcastic proposals would have been especially offensive and irritating to Baal’s prophets, for they believed Baal was imprisoned in the underworld as death’s captive during this time of drought. Elijah’s apparent ignorance of their theology is probably designed for dramatic effect; indeed the suggestion that Baal is away on a trip or deep in sleep comes precariously close to the truth as viewed by the prophets.

² tn This is the תְּרוּמָה (t^erumah), the “raised offering” or “heave offering” (cf. KJV, ASV). It may simply be called a “contribution” (so NAB). The verb of the sentence is from the same root: “you shall lift up/raise up.” It was to be an offering separated from the rest and raised up to the Lord in the sight of all. It was designed to remind the Israelites that the produce and the land belonged to God.

² sn That is, the woman had previously been assigned for marriage to another man but the marriage deal had not yet been consummated. In the meantime, the woman has lost her virginity and has, therefore, lost part of her value to the master in the sale to the man for whom she had been designated. Compensation was, therefore, required (see the explanation in B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 130-31).

² tn The Hebrew term for “choice wheat flour” (סֹלֶת, solet) is often translated “fine flour” (cf. KJV, NAB, NIV, NCV), but it refers specifically to wheat as opposed to barley (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 10). Moreover, the translation “flour” might be problematic, since the Hebrew term may designate the “grits” rather than the more finely ground “flour” (see J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:179 as opposed to Levine, 10, and J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 30).