¹ tn Heb “made our yoke burdensome.”

¹ tn Heb “made our yoke burdensome.”

² sn Here the yoke figuratively represents the burdensome nature of slavery.

¹ tn Heb “heavy stone” (so NRSV, TEV, NLT); KJV “burdensome stone”; NIV “an immovable rock.”

¹ sn Times of refreshing. The phrase implies relief from difficult, distressful or burdensome circumstances. It is generally regarded as a reference to the messianic age being ushered in.

² sn What is in view here is the idea that the people consider Jeremiah’s views of loyalty to God and obedience to the covenant “burdensome.” That is, “What burdensome demands is the Lord asking you to impose on us?” (See Jer 17:21, 22, 24, 27, where this same word is used regarding Sabbath observance, which they chafed at). The Lord answers back that it is not he who is being burdensome to them; they are burdensome to him (See 15:6: “I am weary,” and compare Isa 1:14, where the verb rather than the noun is used).

¹ tn The explicit reason the commandments of God are not burdensome to the believer is given by the ὅτι (hoti) clause at the beginning of 5:4. It is because “everyone who is begotten by God conquers the world.”

⁶ tn The expression וְהָקֵל מֵעָלֶיךָ (v^ehaqel meʿalekha) means literally “and make it light off yourself.” The word plays against the word for “heavy” used earlier—since it was a heavy or burdensome task, Moses must lighten the load.

¹ tc The LXX has “For the terror of God restrained me.” Several commentators changed it to “came upon me.” Driver had “The fear of God was burdensome.” I. Eitan suggested “The terror of God was mighty upon me” (“Two unknown verbs: etymological studies,” JBL 42 [1923]: 22-28). But the MT makes clear sense as it stands.

⁵ tn In the prepositional phrase עָלַי (ʿalay) the results of a scribal change are found (these changes were called tiqqune sopherim, “corrections of the scribes” made to avoid using improper language about God). The prepositional phrase would have been עָלֶךָ (ʿalekha, “to you,” as in the LXX). But it offended the Jews to think of Job being burdensome to God. Job’s sin could have repercussions on him, but not on God.

² tn Heb “but you, now, lighten the burdensome work of your father and the heavy yoke which he placed on us, and we will serve you.” In the Hebrew text the prefixed verbal form with vav (וְנַעַבְדֶךָ, v^enaʿav^edekha, “and we will serve you”) following the imperative (הָקֵל, haqel, “lighten”) indicates purpose/result. The conditional sentence used in the present translation is an attempt to bring out the logical relationship between these forms.

² tn Heb “but you, now, lighten the burdensome work of your father and the heavy yoke which he placed on us, and we will serve you.” In the Hebrew text the prefixed verbal form with vav (וְנַעַבְדֶךָ, [v^enaʿavdekha] “and we will serve you”) following the imperative (הָקֵל [haqel], “lighten”) indicates purpose (or result). The conditional sentence used in the translation above is an attempt to bring out the logical relationship between these forms.

³ tc The translation follows the Latin and Greek versions. The Hebrew text reads, “What burden [i.e., burdensome message]?” The syntax of “what message?” is not in itself objectionable; the interrogative can function as an adjective (cf. BDB 552 s.v. מָה 1.a[a]). What is objectionable to virtually all the commentaries and lexicons is the unparalleled use of the accusative particle in front of the interrogative and the noun (see, e.g., BDB 672 s.v. III מָשָּׂא and GKC 365-66 §117.m, n. 3). The emendation only involves the redivision and revocalization of the same consonants: אֶת־מַה־מַשָּׂא (ʾet-mah-masaʾ) becomes אַתֶּם הַמָּשָּׂא (ʾatem hammasaʾ). This also makes a much more natural connection for the vav consecutive perfect that follows (cf. GKC 334 §112.x and compare Isa 6:7; Judg 13:3).

² tn The term מַשָּׂא (massaʾ, “pronouncement, a lifting up [of the voice]”) is a technical term introducing a message from the Lord (cf. Nah 1:1; Hab 1:1; Zech 9:1; Mal 1:1). Derived from the root נָשָׂא (nasaʾ, “to lift”), it is probably connected to the phrase “to raise one’s voice” (HALOT 639 s.v. II מַשָּׂא) and is usually translated as “oracle” or “utterance.” Because the root can also mean “to carry (a burden)” it has also been suggested that its nuance is of a burdensome message (KJV). Here it is the message which the prophet saw, suggesting that it is the report of a prophetic vision. In Nahum 1:1, the oracle is called “the book of vision.”

² tn The meaning of vv. 33-40 is debated. The translation given here follows the general direction of NRSV and REB rather than that of NIV and the related direction taken by NCV and God’s Word. The meaning of vv. 33-40 are debated because of (1) the etymological ambiguity involved in the word מָשָּׂא (masaʾ), which can mean either “burden” (as something carried or weighing heavily on a person; see, e.g., Exod 23:5; Num 4:27; 2 Sam 15:33; Ps 38:4) or “oracle” (of doom; see, e. g., Isa 13:1; Nah 1:1); (2) the ambiguity of the line in v. 36, which has been rendered, “For what is ‘burdensome’ really pertains rather to what a person himself says” (Heb “the burden is to the man his word”); and (3) the text in v. 33 of “you are the burden.” Many commentaries see a wordplay on the two words “burden” and “oracle,” which are homonyms. However, from the contrasts that are drawn in the passage, it is doubtful whether the nuance of “oracle” ever is in view. The word is always used in the Prophets of an oracle of doom or judgment; it is not merely revelation of God that one of the common people would have been talking about (contra NIV). Jeremiah never uses the word in that sense nor does anyone else in the book of Jeremiah.

² sn Here it appears that the acquisition of Ruth along with the land was an obligatory package deal (“When you acquire the field from Naomi, you must also acquire Ruth…”). On the other hand, Boaz viewed marriage to Ruth as voluntary in 3:13 (“If he does not want to redeem you, I will redeem you”), and presented the acquisition of the field as voluntary in 4:4 (“If you want to exercise your right…but if not, tell me!”). Initially, Boaz makes the transaction appear to be a mere land deal in 4:4. When the nearest relative jumped at the land offer, Boaz confronted him with the attendant social/family obligation of marrying Ruth to raise up an heir for the deceased to inherit this very land. By conducting the transaction in public where the close relative would need to save face, Boaz forced him either to reject the offer entirely or to include Ruth in the deal—but he could not take the land and reject Ruth. Either way, Ruth would be cared for and Elimelech’s line continued. But if he took Ruth, the acquisition of the land would be more economically burdensome than beneficial, so he yielded his purchase option to Boaz. For discussion, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 229-33.