³ tn Heb “he has broken my covenant.” The noun בְּרִית (b^erit) here refers to the obligation required by God in conjunction with the covenantal agreement. For the range of meaning of the term, see the note on the word “requirement” in v. 9.

¹ tn The Aramaic verb רְגַשׁ (r^egash) occurs three times in this chapter (vv. 7, 12, 16). Its meaning is widely disputed by commentators, and the versions vary considerably in how they render the word. The suggestion that it means “to come thronging” (BDB 1112 s.v.; cf. NAB) seems inappropriate, since it is unlikely that subordinates would enter a royal court in such a reckless fashion. The ancient versions struggled with the word and are not in agreement in their understanding of its meaning. In this chapter the word apparently means to act in agreement with other parties in the pursuit of a duplicitous goal, namely the entrapment of Daniel; cf. NIV, NCV “went as a group”; NRSV “conspired and came to the king.”

⁵ sn The term “faith” has a variety of meanings in the NT. Here, the faith refers to the doctrinal content embraced by believers rather than the act of believing (see BDAG 820 s.v. 3). Rather than discuss the points of agreement that Jude would have with these believers because of the urgency of the present situation he must assume that these believers were well grounded and press on to encourage them to fight for this common belief.

⁶ tn Grk “so,” with the ἵνα (hina) indicating the result of the “pillars” extending the “right hand of fellowship,” but the translation “they gave…the right hand of fellowship so that we would go” could be misunderstood as purpose here. The implication of the scene is that an agreement, outlined at the end of v. 10, was reached between Paul and Barnabas on the one hand and the “pillars” of the Jerusalem church on the other.

⁷ tn Grk “waiting for your approval,” “waiting for your agreement.” Since it would be possible to misunderstand the literal translation “waiting for your approval” to mean that the Jews were waiting for the commander’s approval to carry out their plot or to kill Paul (as if he were to be an accomplice to their plot), the object of the commander’s approval (their request to bring Paul to the council) has been specified in the translation as “their request.”

³ tn Grk “the message of his grace, which.” The phrase τῷ δυναμένῳ οἰκοδομῆσαι… (tō dunamenō oikodomēsai…) refers to τῷ λόγω (tō logō), not τῆς χάριτος (tēs charitos); in English it could refer to either “the message” or “grace,” but in Greek, because of agreement in gender, the referent can only be “the message.” To make this clear, a new sentence was begun in the translation and the referent “the message” was repeated at the beginning of this new sentence.

² sn Comparison of the usage of the words “know me” in their context in Jer 2:8; 9:3, 6, 24; and here shows that more than mere intellectual knowledge is involved. Also implied is personal commitment to God and obedience to the demands of the agreements with him. The word “know” is used in ancient Near-Eastern treaty contexts of submission to the will of the overlord. See further the notes on 9:3.

¹ tn The words “I said” are not in the text, but there is general agreement that Jeremiah is the speaker. Cf. the lament in 8:18-9:1. These words are supplied in the translation for clarity. Some English versions follow the Greek text which reads a plural imperative here. Since this reading would make the transition between 9:10 and 9:11 easier, it is probably not original but a translator’s way of smoothing over a difficulty.

² tn Elsewhere the noun חֹזֶה (khozeh) refers to a prophet who sees visions. In v. 18 the related term חָזוּת (khazut, “vision”) is used. The parallelism in both verses (note “treaty”) seems to demand a meaning “agreement” for both nouns. Perhaps חֹזֶה and חזוּת are used in a metonymic sense in vv. 15 and 18. Another option is to propose a homonymic root. See J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 1:514, and HALOT 301 s.v. II חֹזֶה.

¹ tc The pronominal suffix is masculine, even though its antecedent appears to be the grammatically feminine noun “world.” Some have suggested that the form עָרָיו (ʿarayv, plural noun with third masculine singular suffix) should be emended to עָרֶיהָ (ʿareha, plural noun with third feminine singular suffix). This emendation may be unnecessary in light of other examples of lack of agreement between a suffix and its antecedent noun.

³ tc In the MT the verb lacks agreement with the two nouns in either gender or number so that there is no clear subject: “but he breathes lies, deceit.” Revocalizing the consonants from וְיָפִחַ (v^eyafiakh, “and he breathes/testifies”) to וִיפֵחַ (vifeakh, “and a witness [of lies]”) and from מִרְמָה (mirmah, “deceit”) to the Piel participle מְרַמֶּה (m^erammeh, “betrays, deceives, leads astray”) produces a grammatically acceptable text. One may also supply by parallelism “…betrays lives.”

¹ tn That is, “all the earth” in the first line of v. 8. The apparent antecedent of the masculine subject of the verbs in v. 9 (note וַיֶּהִי [vayyehiy] and וַיַּעֲמֹד [vayyaʿamod]) is “earth” or “world,” both of which are feminine nouns. However, כָּל (kol, “all”) may be the antecedent, or the apparent lack of agreement may be explained by the collective nature of the nouns involved here (see GKC 463 §145.e).

² tn The LXX understands this word as a prepositional phrase (“in peace”) rather than as a proper name (“Bishlam”). Taken this way it would suggest that Mithredath was “in agreement with” the contents of Tabeel’s letter. Some scholars regard the word in the MT to be a textual variation of an original “in Jerusalem” (i.e., “in the matter of Jerusalem”) or “in the name of Jerusalem.” The translation adopted above follows the traditional understanding of the word as a name.

² tn The traditional rendering of the title as “Almighty” is reflected in LXX and Jerome. But there is still little agreement on the etymology and exact meaning of אֵל־שַׁדַּי (ʾel shadday). Suggestions have included the idea of “mountain God,” meaning the high God, as well as “the God with breasts.” But there is very little evidence supporting such conclusions and not much reason to question the ancient versions.

¹ tn The Hebrew verb is plural. This may be a case of grammatical agreement with the name for God, which is plural in form. However, when this plural name refers to the one true God, accompanying predicates are usually singular in form. Perhaps Abraham is accommodating his speech to Abimelech’s polytheistic perspective. (See GKC 463 §145.i.) If so, one should translate, “when the gods made me wander.”

² sn John does not mention that Mary Magdalene was accompanied by any of the other women who had been among Jesus’ followers. The synoptic accounts all mention other women who accompanied her (although Mary Magdalene is always mentioned first). Why John does not mention the other women is not clear, but Mary probably becomes the focus of the author’s attention because it was she who came and found Peter and the beloved disciple and informed them of the empty tomb (20:2). Mary’s use of the plural in v. 2 indicates there were others present, in indirect agreement with the synoptic accounts.

² sn There is now significant agreement among scholars that the house of Simon Peter in Capernaum has been found beneath the ruins of a fifth-century Byzantine church some 84 ft south of the synagogue. At the bottom of several layers of archaeological remains is a first-century house that apparently was designated for public viewing sometime in the mid-first century, and continued to be so in subsequent centuries. For details see S. Loffreda, “Capernaum — Jesus’ Own City,” Bible and Spade 10.1 (1981): 1-17.

¹ sn An allusion to Deut 24:1. The Pharisees were all in agreement that the OT permitted a man to write a certificate of dismissal and divorce his wife (not vice-versa) and that remarriage was therefore sanctioned. But the two rabbinic schools of Shammai and Hillel differed on the grounds for divorce. Shammai was much stricter than Hillel and permitted divorce only in the case of sexual immorality. Hillel permitted divorce for almost any reason (cf. the Mishnah, m. Gittin 9.10).

³ sn The Herodians are mentioned in the NT only once in Matt (22:16 = Mark 12:13) and twice in Mark (3:6; 12:13; some mss also read “Herodians” instead of “Herod” in Mark 8:15). It is generally assumed that as a group the Herodians were Jewish supporters of the Herodian dynasty (or of Herod Antipas in particular). In every instance they are linked with the Pharisees. This probably reflects agreement regarding political objectives (nationalism as opposed to submission to the yoke of Roman oppression) rather than philosophy or religious beliefs.

³ sn There is now significant agreement among scholars that the house of Simon Peter in Capernaum has been found beneath the ruins of a fifth-century Byzantine church some 84 ft south of the synagogue. At the bottom of several layers of archaeological remains is a first-century house that apparently was designated for public viewing sometime in the mid-first century, and continued to be so in subsequent centuries. For details see S. Loffreda, “Capernaum — Jesus’ Own City,” Bible and Spade 10.1 (1981): 1-17.