¹ tc The MT has a plural “you” here, but the LXX and a Qumran ms have the singular. The singular may be the correct reading; the verb “you have honored” later in the verse is singular even in the MT. However, it is more probable that the Lord here refers to Eli and his sons. Note the plural in the second half of the verse (“you have made yourselves fat”).

³ tc The consonantal text (Kethib) has וְשָׁכָבְתִּי (v^eshakhavtiy, “then I will lie down”; Qal perfect first person common singular), while the marginal reading (Qere) is וְשָׁכָבְתְּ (v^eshakhav^et, “then you lie down”; Qal perfect second person feminine singular) which makes more sense. It is possible that the Kethib preserves an archaic spelling of the second person feminine singular form (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 144-45).

⁴ tc The consonantal text (Kethib) has וְיָרַדְתִּי (v^eyaradti, “then I will go down”; Qal perfect first person common singular), while the marginal reading (Qere) is וְיָרַדְתְּ (v^eyarad^et, “then you go down”; Qal perfect second person feminine singular) which makes more much sense in context. It is possible that the Kethib preserves an archaic spelling of the second person feminine singular form (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 144-45).

⁸ tc Several English versions (NAB, NEB, RSV, NRSV, JB, CEV) suggest deleting MT הַבַּיִת (habbayit, lit. “the house”) due to dittography with בתה in שִׁבְתָּהּ (shivtah) which precedes; however, several ancient textual witnesses support the MT (medieval Hebrew manuscripts, Syriac, Targum). The LXX reading ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ (en tō agrō, “in the field”) probably does not represent an alternate Hebrew textual tradition, but merely the translator’s attempt to smooth out a difficult Hebrew text.

⁵ tn The Hebrew text expands the statement with the additional phrase “burned with fire.” The words “with fire” are redundant in English and have been omitted from the translation for stylistic reasons. Some textual witnesses read “burned…her father’s house,” perhaps under the influence of 14:15. On the other hand, the shorter text may have lost this phrase due to haplography.

² tc Heb “and attacked the army, while the army was secure.” The Hebrew term בֶטַח (vetakh, “secure”) may means the army was undefended (see R. G. Boling, Judges [AB], 156), not suspecting an attack at that time and place. A few mss supported by the LXX read the participle form from the same root, בֹטֵחַ (voteakh) “trustingly,” the implication being that they were not attentive to defense.

¹ tn Heb “Why have you given me as an inheritance one lot and one portion, though I am a great people until [the time] which, until now the Lord has blessed me?” The construction עַד אֲשֶׁר־עַד־כֹּה (ʿad ʾasher ʿad koh, “until [the time] which, until now”) is extremely awkward. An emendation of the first עַד (ʿad) to עַל (ʿal) yields a more likely reading: “for until now” (see HALOT 787 s.v. III עַד).

² tn In the Hebrew text the place name “Luz” has the directive ending, indicating that the border went from Bethel to Luz. Elsewhere Luz and Bethel appear to be names for the same site (cf. Judg 1:23), but here they appear to be distinct. Note that the NIV translates “from Bethel (that is, Luz)” here, following the reading of the LXX, εἰς Βαιθηλ Λουζα (eis Baithēl Louza, “from Bethel [Luz]”).

¹ tc Heb “and they went and [?].” The root and meaning of the verb form יִצְטַיָּרוּ (yitstayyaru) are uncertain. The Hebrew text form most likely should be יִצְטַיָּדוּ (yitstayyadu), read by some Hebrew mss and ancient versions, from the root צוּד (tsud, “take provisions,” BDB 845 s.v. II צוד) which also occurs in v. 11. Note NRSV “they went and prepared provisions”; cf. NEB “They went and disguised themselves”; NIV “they went as a delegation.”

² tn Heb “he.” Smr, LXX, and the Targums read the plural “they,” which is necessary in any case in the translation because of contemporary English style. The third person singular also occurs in the Hebrew text twice more in this verse, three times in v. 17, once in v. 18, five times in v. 20, and four times in v. 21. Each time it is translated as third person plural for stylistic reasons.

³ sn The Hebrew term translated “assembly” (קָהָל, qahal) does not refer here to the nation as such but to the formal services of the tabernacle or temple. Since emasculated or other sexually abnormal persons were commonly associated with pagan temple personnel, the thrust here may be primarily polemical in intent. One should not read into this anything having to do with the mentally and physically handicapped as fit to participate in the life and ministry of the church.

¹ tn Or “instruction.” The LXX reads here τὸ δευτερονόμιον τοῦτο (to deuteronomion touto, “this second law”). From this Greek phrase the present name of the book, “Deuteronomy” or “second law” (i.e., the second giving of the law), is derived. However, the MT’s expression מִשְׁנֶה הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת (mishneh hattorah hazzoʾt) is better rendered “copy of this law.” Here the term תּוֹרָה (torah) probably refers only to the book of Deuteronomy and not to the whole Pentateuch.

² tc Some scholars, on the basis of v. 11, emend the MT reading שִׁכְנוֹ (shikhno, “his residence”) to the infinitive construct לְשַׁכֵּן (l^eshakken, “to make [his name] to dwell”), perhaps with the third person masculine singular sf לְשַׁכְּנוֹ (l^eshakk^eno, “to cause it to dwell”). Though the presupposed noun שֵׁכֶן (shekhen) is nowhere else attested, the parallel here with שַׁמָּה (shammah, “there”) favors retaining the MT as it stands.

¹ tc The MT is difficult. The Kittim refers normally to Cyprus, or any maritime people to the west. W. F. Albright proposed emending the line to “islands will gather in the north, ships from the distant sea” (“The Oracles of Balaam,” JBL 63 [1944]: 222-23). Some commentators accept that reading as the original state of the text, since the present MT makes little sense.

⁴ tn Heb “and as a number, the fourth part of Israel.” The noun in the MT is not in the construct state, and so it should be taken as an adverbial accusative, forming a parallel with the verb “count.” The second object of the verse then follows, “the fourth part of Israel.” Smr and the LXX have “and who has numbered” (וּמִסְפָּר, umispar), making this colon more parallel to the preceding one. The editor of BHS prefers this reading.

⁴ tc The Targum, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, and the Vulgate read “they did not cease prophesying,” presumably taking the verb to be יָסֻפוּ (yasufu; from סוּף; suf). This does not represent a change in the consonantal text, only in the vowels, which were not originally written. The Hebrew verb סוּף is rare (occurring) and appears to mean “to come to an end; to perish” (HALOT, 746). This would mean that they did not die from their encounter with the Lord.

¹ tc The MT does not mention the departures of the northerly and westerly tribes. The Greek text completes the description by adding them, making a full schedule of the departure of the groups of tribes. The Greek is not likely to be original, however, since it carries all the signs of addition to complete the text, making a smooth, full reading. The MT is to be preferred; it apparently used two of the groups to give the idea.

¹ tc The form has a Kethib-Qere problem, but the sentence calls for the Qere, the passive participle in the construct—“the called of….” These men were God’s choice, and not Moses’, or their own choice. He announced who they would be, and then named them. So they were truly “called” (קָרָא, qaraʾ). The other reading is probably due to a copyist’s error.

² tc The MT has here the preposition עַל (ʿal, “on, upon” [i.e., “which covers on the entrails,” as awkward in Hebrew as it is in English]), but Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Targums read אֶת (ʾet), which is what would be expected (i.e., “which covers the entrails”; cf. Lev 3:3, 9, 14). It may have been mistakenly inserted here under the influence of “on (עַל) the entrails” at the end of the verse.

¹ tn The noun “book” would be the scroll just written containing the laws of chaps. 20-23. On the basis of this scroll the covenant would be concluded here. The reading of this book would assure the people that it was the same that they had agreed to earlier. But now their statement of willingness to obey would be more binding because their promise would be confirmed by a covenant of blood.