² tn On the use of the masculine pronoun to refer to the beast, see the note on the word “It” in 13:1.

² sn By form the word is the feminine plural of the Hebrew word for “beast.” Here it is an abstract word—a title.

¹ tn This word for “animal” refers to land animal quadrupeds, not just any beast that dwells on the land (cf. 11:2).

² tn Grk “killed to death,” an expression emphatic in its redundancy. The phrase behind this translation is ὡς ἐσφαγμένον (hōs esphagmenon). The particle ὡς is used in Greek generally for comparison, and in Revelation it is used often to describe the appearance of what the author saw. In this instance, the appearance of the beast’s head did not match reality because the next phrase shows that in fact it did not die. This text does not affirm that the beast died and was resurrected, but some draw this conclusion because of the only other use of the phrase, which refers to Jesus in 5:6.

³ tn Grk “and it had,” a continuation of the preceding sentence. On the use of the pronoun “he” to refer to the second beast, see the note on the word “It” in 13:1.

¹ tn Grk “and there was given to him.” Here the passive construction has been simplified, the referent (the beast) has been specified for clarity, and καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

¹ tn Grk “one of its heads”; the referent (the beast) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

¹ tn The word rendered “fangs” actually means “teeth,” i.e., the molars probably; it is used frequently of the teeth of wild beasts. Of course, the language is here figurative, comparing the oppressing enemy to a preying animal.

² sn The figure used now is that of a wild beast. God’s affliction of Job is compared to the attack of such an animal. Cf. Amos 1:11.

¹ tn The exact expression is “from man even to beast.” R. J. Williams lists this as an example of the inclusive use of the preposition מִן (min) to be rendered “both…and” (Hebrew Syntax, 57, §327).

¹ tn The text simply has “from man to beast, to creatures, and to birds of the air.” The use of the prepositions עַד…מִן (min…ʿad) stresses the extent of the judgment in creation.

³ tn Some translations take the ὅτι (hoti) here as causal: “because he was, and is not, but is to come” (so NIV, NRSV), but it is much more likely that the subject of the ὅτι clause has been assimilated into the main clause: “when they see the beast, that he was…” = “when they see that the beast was” (so BDAG 732 s.v. ὅτι 1.f, where Rev 17:8 is listed).

⁴ tn On the phrase “the whole world followed the beast in amazement,” BDAG 445 s.v. θαυμάζω 2 states, “wonder, be amazed…Rv 17:8. In pregnant constr. ἐθαυμάσθη ὅλη ἡ γῆ ὀπίσω τ. θηρίου the whole world followed the beast, full of wonder 13:3 (here wonder becomes worship: cp. Ael. Aristid. 13 p. 290 D.; 39 p. 747 of Dionysus and Heracles, οἳ ὑφ᾿ ἡμῶν ἐθαυμάσθησαν. Sir 7:29; Jos., Ant. 3, 65.—The act. is also found in this sense: Cebes 2, 3 θ. τινά = ‘admire’ or ‘venerate’ someone; Epict. 1, 17, 19 θ. τὸν θεόν).”

³ tn Heb “Go, gather all the beasts of the field [= wild beasts]. Bring them to devour.” The verbs are masculine plural imperatives addressed rhetorically to some unidentified group (the heavenly counsel?). See the notes on 5:1 for further discussion. Since translating literally would raise a question about who the commands are addressed to, they have been turned into passive third person commands to avoid confusion. The metaphor has likewise been turned into a simile to help the modern reader. By the way, the imperatives here implying future action argue that the passage is future and that it is correct to take the verb forms as prophetic perfects.

² tn Heb “from my hand you exacted it.” The imperfect verbal form again indicates that this was a customary or typical action. The words “for every missing animal” are supplied in the translation for clarity; the following clause in Hebrew, “stolen by day or stolen by night,” probably means “stolen by wild beasts” and refers to the same animals “torn by wild beasts” in the previous clause, although it may refer to animals stolen by people. The translation used here, “missing,” is ambiguous enough to cover either eventuality.

¹ tn Grk “and it was given to him to go to war.” Here the passive construction has been simplified, the referent (the beast) has been specified for clarity, and καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

⁴ tn Heb “Fields will be bought in this land of which you [masc. pl.] are saying, ‘It will be desolate [a perfect of certainty or prophetic perfect], without man or beast; it will be given into the hand of the Chaldeans.’” The original sentence has been broken down to better conform to contemporary English style.

¹ tn The Niphal participle is from רָפַס (rafas), which means “to stamp; to tread; to foul by treading [or, by stamping].” BDB 952 s.v. defines it here as a “fountain befouled.” The picture is one of a spring of water where men and beasts gather and muddy it by their trampling in and out of it.

² tn The word בַּעַר (baʿar, “stupid, brutish”) comes from בְּעִיר (b^eʿir, “beast, cattle). It refers to a lack of rationality (Ps 49:10; 73:22; 92:7; 30:2). The verbal derivative is used to convey “deficiency in moral and religious, rather than intellectual aspects” (NIDOTTE 679 s.v. בָּעַר).

¹ tn Heb “she has slaughtered her slaughter [animals].” English does not prefer to use a cognate verb and noun for butchering an animal in food preparation. Cf. KJV “hath killed her beasts”; NAB “has dressed her meat”; NASB “has prepared her food.”