¹ tn Or “‘to us personally’…to them personally”; Heb “‘in our ears’…in their ears.” Elsewhere this has been rendered “in the hearing of” or “where they could hear.” All three of those idioms sound unnatural in this context. The mere personal pronoun seems adequate.

¹ tn This is an attempt to render the Hebrew particle כִּי (ki), which is probably being used in the sense that BDB 473-74 s.v. כִּי 3.c notes, i.e., the causal connection is somewhat loose, related here to the prophecies against the nations. “So” seems to be the most appropriate way to represent this.

² tn Heb “they have called after you fully”; or “have lifted up loud voices against you.” The word “against” does not seem quite adequate for the preposition “after.” The preposition “against” would be Hebrew עַל (ʿal). The idea appears to be that they are chasing after him, raising their voices, along with those of the conspirators, to have him killed.

¹ tn Heb “Be on your guard…Do not trust.” The verbs are second masculine plural of direct address and there seems no way to translate literally and not give the mistaken impression that Jeremiah is being addressed. This is another example of the tendency in Hebrew style to turn from description to direct address (a figure of speech called apostrophe).

² sn This appears to be a proverbial statement for “time marches on.” The people seem to be expressing their frustration that the Lord has not gone about his business of rescuing them as they expected. For a similar misguided feeling based on the offering of shallow repentance, see Hos 6:1-3 (and note the Lord’s reply in 6:4-6).

² sn The agricultural imagery seems to be that they are to plow over the thorns and make the ground ready for seeds that will produce a new crop. The spiritual application of breaking up their rebellious will and turning from sin is metaphorically stated in the next verse.

³ tn Heb “she played the prostitute there.” This is a metaphor for Israel’s worship; she gave herself to the worship of other gods like a prostitute gives herself to her lovers. There seems no clear way to completely spell out the metaphor in the translation.

² tn Heb “she played the prostitute there.” This is a metaphor for Israel’s worship; she gave herself to the worship of other gods like a prostitute gives herself to her lovers. There seems no clear way to completely spell out the metaphor in the translation.

³ tn Heb “for the child as a son of one hundred years will die.” The point seems to be that those who die at the age of a hundred will be considered children, for the average life span will be much longer than that. The category “child” will be redefined in light of the expanded life spans that will characterize this new era.

⁴ sn The same statement appears in 29:17b, where, in conjunction with the preceding line, it appears to picture a reversal. Here it seems to depict supernatural growth. The desert will blossom into an orchard, and the trees of the orchard will multiply and grow tall, becoming a forest.

² sn The phrase is quite cryptic, at least to the modern reader. Verse 9 seems to indicate that this message pertains to Babylon. Southern Mesopotamia was known as the Sealand in ancient times because of its proximity to the Persian Gulf. Perhaps the reference to Babylon as a “wilderness” foreshadows the destruction that would overtake the city, making it like an uninhabited wilderness.

¹ tn Heb “like a shoot that is abhorred.” The simile seems a bit odd; apparently it refers to a small shoot that is trimmed from a plant and tossed away. Some prefer to emend נֵצֶר (netser, “shoot”); some propose נֵפֶל (nefel, “miscarriage”). In this case one might paraphrase: “like a horrible-looking fetus that is delivered when a woman miscarries.”

² tn Heb “a cudgel is he, in their hand is my anger.” It seems likely that the final mem (ם) on בְיָדָם (b^eyadam) is not a pronominal suffix (“in their hand”), but an enclitic mem. If so, one can translate literally, “a cudgel is he in the hand of my anger.”

² tc The editors of BHS suggests that גַם אָנִי (gam ʾani, “me also”) should be inserted. Although there is no textual evidence for the insertion, it seems clear that the first person common singular referent is emphatic in MT הַשְׁמִיעִינִי (hashmiʿini, “Let me hear it!”).

¹ tn The Hebrew word could refer (1) to “instruction” by the father (cf. NCV) or (2) the Mosaic law (so most English versions). The chapter seems to be stressing religious obedience, so the referent is probably the law. Besides, the father’s teaching will be what the law demands, and the one who associates with gluttons is not abiding by the law.

² tn The clause begins with פֶּן (pen, “lest”) which seems a bit out of place in this line. C. H. Toy suggests changing it to כִּי (ki, “for”) to make a better connection, instead of supplying an ellipsis: “lest it be said what…” (Proverbs [ICC], 461).

¹ tn The form נָאוֶה (naʾveh) is an adjective meaning “seemly; comely” in the older English versions like KJV, ASV, “fitting” in more recent ones (e.g., NASB, NIV, NRSV). The verbal root נוֹה (noh) only occurs in the Pilel stem, but it also has the basic meaning of “being fitting; being comely.” In this sentence the form is a predicate adjective.

⁴ tn The noun תִּפְאָרָת (tifʾarat) means “beauty; glory” (BDB 802 s.v.). In this passage “glory” seems to be identified with “glorying; boasting”; so a rendering that children are proud of their parents would be in order. Thus, “glory of children” would be a subjective genitive, the glorying that children do.”

³ tc The LXX reads “endures” (from נָשָׂא, nasaʾ) rather than “is hated” (from שָׂנֵא, saneʾ). This change seems to have arisen on the assumption that a contrast was needed. It has: “a man of thought endures.” Other versions take מְזִמּוֹת (m^ezimmot) in a good sense, but antithetical parallelism is unwarranted here.

² tn Or “but after it are the ways of death.” The phrase “ways of death” features the result of these paths. Here death means ruin (cf. Prov 7:27). Possibly the proverb envisions that the initial path which seemed good leads to other paths whose outcomes are all ruinous.