³ sn Subverting our nation was a summary charge, as Jesus “subverted” the nation by making false claims of a political nature, as the next two detailed charges show.

² sn The proverb Physician, heal yourself! means that Jesus should prove his claims. It is a “Prove it to us!” mentality that Jesus says the people have.

¹ sn Notice again that the “false” prophet uses the same formula and claims the same source for his message as the true prophet has (cf. 27:22).

² tn Heb “in the name of the Lord,” i.e., as his representative and claiming his authority. See the study note on v. 16.

² tn Heb “who are stealing my words from one another.” However, context shows it is their own word that they claim is from the Lord (cf. next verse).

³ tn The words “well enough for that” are implicit and are supplied in the translation for clarity. Jeremiah is not claiming an absolute inability to speak.

¹ tn עֶבְרָה (ʿevrah) often means “anger, fury,” but here it appears to refer to boastful outbursts or excessive claims. See HALOT 782 s.v. עֶבְרָה.

¹ tc Some commentators want to put this verse after v. 6, while others omit the verse entirely. Elihu is claiming here that he is inspired by God.

⁸ tn This causal clause gives the reason for what has just been instructed. Because Yahweh delivered them from bondage, he has the strongest claims on their life.

⁵ sn In 4:20 the author again describes the opponents, who claim to love God. Their failure to show love for their fellow Christians proves their claim to know God to be false: The one who does not love his fellow Christian whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.

⁴ sn A ringleader. Tertullus’ basic argument was that Paul was a major disturber of the public peace. To ignore this the governor would be shunning his duty to preserve the peace and going against the pattern of his rule. In effect, Tertullus claimed that Paul was seditious (a claim the governor could not afford to ignore).

¹ sn Arioch’s claim is self-serving and exaggerated. It is Daniel who came to him, and not the other way around. By claiming to have found one capable of solving the king’s dilemma, Arioch probably hoped to ingratiate himself to the king.

⁵ sn This statement does not necessarily reflect the enemies’ actual belief, but it does reflect the psalmist’s confession. The psalmist’s enemies sarcastically appeal to God to help him because he claims to be an object of divine favor. However, they probably doubted the reality of his claim.

⁴ sn This is the first time the official charge of blasphemy is voiced openly in the Fourth Gospel (although it was implicit in John 8:59). Blasphemy in the NT has a somewhat broader meaning than mere utterances. It could mean to say something that dishonored God, but it could also involve claims to divine prerogatives (in this case, Jesus’ claim to oneness with the Father, v. 30). Such claims were viewed as usurping God’s majesty or honor. The remark here raised directly the issue of the identity of Jesus himself as God’s representative.

³ sn The priests and false prophets claimed that they were speaking in the Lord’s name (i.e., as his representatives and with his authority [see 1 Sam 25:9 and 1 Kgs 21:8; cf. the study note on Jer 23:27]) and felt that Jeremiah’s claims to be doing so were false (see v. 9). Jeremiah (and the Lord) charged that the opposite was the case (cf. 14:14-15; 23:21). The officials and the people, at least at this time, accepted his claims that the Lord had sent him (vv. 12, 15).

⁶ sn I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our ancestors. Once again Paul claimed to be faithful to the Jewish people and to the God of Israel.

² sn Who should be here…and bring charges. Paul was asking, where were those who brought about his arrest and claimed he broke the law? His accusers were not really present. This subtle point raised the issue of injustice.

¹ sn Ritually purified. Paul’s claim here is that he was honoring the holiness of God by being sensitive to issues of ritual purity. Not only was he not guilty of the charges against him, but he was thoroughly devout.

¹ sn Nor can they prove. This is a formal legal claim that Paul’s opponents lacked proof of any wrongdoing. They had no witness who could justify the arrest at the temple.

⁴ sn In violation of the law. Paul was claiming that punishment was given before the examination was complete (m. Sanhedrin 3:6-8). Luke’s noting of this detail shows how quickly the leadership moved to react against Paul.