¹ tc The MT has the plural form of the verb, but the final vav (ו) is virtually dittographic. The word that immediately follows in the Hebrew text begins with a yod (י). The form should be emended to the singular, which is consistent in number with the verb (“he broke down”) that follows.

³ tc The MT reading בָּא שָׁנָה (baʾ shanah), “it came, year,” should probably be emended to בְּבָא הַשָּׁנָה (b^evaʾ hashanah), “at the coming [i.e., ‘beginning’] of the year.” See M. Cogan and H. Tadmor, II Kings (AB), 148.

³ tc Heb “in it he walked.” The singular verb (הָלַךְ, halakh) is probably due to an error of haplography and should be emended to the plural (הָלְכוּ, hal^ekhu). Note that a vav immediately follows (on the form וְגַם, v^egam).

³ tn Heb “and.” It is possible that the conjunction is here explanatory, equivalent to English “that is.” In this case the 40 camel-loads constitute the “gift” and one should translate, “He took along a gift, consisting of 40 camel-loads of all the fine things of Damascus.”

³ sn For the third time in this chapter we read the Lord’s sarcastic question to the king and the accompanying announcement of judgment. The repetition emphasizes one of the chapter’s main themes. Israel’s leaders should seek guidance from their own God, not a pagan deity, for Israel’s sovereign God is the one who controls life and death.

² tc The MT reads, “he answered and said to him.” The verb “he answered” (וַיַּעַן, vayyaʿan) probably should be emended to “he went up” (וַיַּעַל, vayyaʿal). See v. 9. One Hebrew ms, the LXX, and Vulgate support וַיַּעַל (vayyaʿal, “he went up”).

² tn Heb “Because you sent away the man of my destruction [i.e., that I determined should be destroyed] from [my/your?] hand, your life will be in place of his life, and your people in place of his people.”

¹ sn The point of the saying is that someone who is still preparing for a battle should not boast as if he has already won the battle. A modern parallel would be, “Don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched.”

¹ tc The MT reads וַיִּרְאוּ (vayyirʾu, “they saw”) the Qal preterite of רָאָה (raʾah, “to see”). Some translations render this as pluperfect “they had seen” (KJV, NASB), but then the verb should have been preceded by a different construction. Other translations (NIV, ESV, NRSV) follow some ancient versions and emend the verbal form to a Hiphil with pronominal suffix וַיַּרְאֻהוּ (vayyarʾuhu, “and they showed him”).

³ tn Either the word “shekels” should be supplied here, or the Hebrew word מִשְׁקַל (mishqal, “weight of”) right before “bronze” is a corrupted form of the word for shekel. If the latter is the case the problem probably resulted from another occurrence of the word מִשְׁקַל just four words earlier in the verse.

¹ tn The translation understands the verb in a desiderative sense, indicating the desire but not necessarily the completed action of the party in question. It is possible, however, that the verb should be given the more common sense of accomplished action, in which case it means here “Why have you cursed us?”

⁴ tn Or perhaps “the men of Tob.” The ancient versions (the LXX, the Syriac Peshitta, and Vulgate) understand the name to be “Ish Tob.” It is possible that “Ish” is dittographic and that we should read simply “Tob,” a reading adopted by a number of recent English versions.

¹ tc The expression “the cities of Hebron” is odd; we would expect the noun to be in the singular, if used at all. Although the Syriac Peshitta has the expected reading “in Hebron,” the MT is clearly the more difficult reading and should probably be retained here.

¹ tn Heb “may he smell.” The implication is that Saul should seek to appease God, for such divine instigation to evil would be a sign of God’s disfavor. For a fuller discussion of this passage see R. B. Chisholm, Jr., “Does God Deceive?” BSac 155 (1998): 19-21.

² tn The infinitive absolute appears before a verb of the same root to emphasize the modality of the verb. Here the imperfect verb expresses obligative modality, prescribing what he should do. So the nuance of the preceding infinitive absolute is “you must,” or “you certainly must.”

¹ tn The Hebrew text has a direct quote, “because they said, ‘Gods have come to the camp.’” Even though the verb translated “have come” is singular, the following subject should be taken as plural (“gods”), as v. 8 indicates. Some emend the verb to a plural form.

² tc The construction is a Piel infinitive absolute followed by a Hiphil imperfect, the only case of such syntax. Normally the infinitive absolute agrees with the verbal stem of the main verb, or sometimes is Qal when the main verb is not. The LXX renders in the passive voice, “the fat should be burned,” probably interpreting the consonants of these verbs as Pual forms.

² tn Heb “My daughter, should I not seek for you a resting place so that it may go well for you [or which will be good for you]?” The idiomatic, negated rhetorical question is equivalent to an affirmation (see 2:8-9) and has thus been translated in the affirmative (so also NAB, NCV, NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT).

¹ sn Plowed with my heifer. This statement emphasizes that the Philistines had utilized a source of information which should have been off-limits to them. Heifers were used in plowing (Hos 10:11), but one typically used one’s own farm animals, not another man’s.

² tn Heb “To everything I said to the woman she should pay attention.” The Hebrew word order emphasizes “to everything,” probably because Manoah’s wife did not tell her husband everything the angel had said to her (cf. vv. 3-5 with v. 7). If she had, Manoah probably would not have been so confused about the child’s mission.