² tn The adverb νυνί (nuni, “now”) is connected with the phrase τῆς πρὸς ὑμᾶς νυνὶ ἀπολογίας (tēs pros humas nuni apologias) rather than the verb ἀκούσατε (akousate), and the entire construction (prepositional phrase plus adverb) is in first attributive position and thus translated into English by a relative clause.

² sn In the name. Note the authority in the name of Jesus the Messiah. His presence and power are at work for the man. The reference to “the name” is not like a magical incantation, but is designed to indicate the agent who performs the healing. The theme is quite frequent in Acts (2:38 plus 21 other times).

² sn The term apostles is rare in the gospels, found only in Matt 10:2, possibly in Mark 3:14, and six more times in Luke (here plus 9:10; 11:49; 17:5; 22:14; 24:10).

¹ tc Heb “I ate,” a first common singular preterite plus paragogic he (ה). The ancient versions read “I ate it,” which is certainly the meaning in the context, and indicates they read the he as a third feminine singular pronominal suffix. The Masoretes typically wrote a mappiq in the he for the pronominal suffix but apparently missed this one.

⁴ tc The translation follows the common emendation of a word normally meaning “place at the head” (מַרְאֲשׁוֹת [marʾashot] plus pronoun = מַרְאֲשׁוֹתֵיכֶם [marʾashotekhem]) to “from your heads” (מֵרָאשֵׁיכֶם, meraʾshekhem) following the ancient versions. The meaning “tiara” is nowhere else attested for this word.

¹ tn The prefixed vav on וְשַׁבְתִּי (v^eshavti, vav plus perfect first person common singular from שׁוּב, shuv, “to turn”) might be: (1) introductory (and left untranslated): “I observed again”; (2) consequence of preceding statement: “So I observed again”; or (3) continuation of preceding statement: “And I observed again.”

¹ tn The vav prefixed to וְגָדַלְתִּי (v^egadalti, vav plus Qal perfect first common singular from גָּדַל, gadal, “to be great; to increase”) functions in a final summarizing sense, that is, it introduces the concluding summary of 2:4-9.

⁶ sn The phrase “to see what is good” (רָאָה, raʾah, “to see” plus טוֹב, tov, “good”) is repeated twice in 2:1-3. This is the key phrase in this section of Ecclesiastes. Qoheleth sought to discover (רָאָה) whether merry-making offered any value (טוֹב) to mankind.

⁴ tc The MT וּמֵאֵת (umeʾet) may be understood in two ways: (1) “and from” (vav conjunction “and,” plus preposition מִן [min] “from,” plus definite direct object marker אֵת) parallel to the preceding מִיַד (miyyad, “from [the hand of]”), suggesting the field would be purchased from Naomi and from Ruth; or (2) “and” (vav [ו] conjunction “and,” plus enclitic mem [ם], plus direct object marker [אֵת]) introducing the second part of the acquisition: the nearest kinsman would be acquiring the field and Ruth (for discussion see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 202). However, the BHS editors suggest reading גם את (“as well as…”; emphatic particle גם [“also”] and the definite direct object marker אֵת) introducing the second part of the acquisition: He would be acquiring the field and Ruth. This alternate reading is reflected in the Vulgate reading quoque (“and also”) and supported by parallel usage in v. 9, “I am acquiring the field from Naomi, and also (גָּם אֵת, gam ʾet) Ruth the Moabitess the wife of the deceased.”

² tn Heb “and the glory of the Lord will appear,” but the construction with the simple vav (ו) plus the imperfect/jussive (וְיֵרָא, v^eyeraʾ; literally, “and he will appear”) suggests purpose in this context, not just succession of events (i.e., “so that he might appear”).

² tn The three verbs in this line are a good example of heterosis of person, that is, a shift from second person masculine singular to first person common plural to third person masculine singular forms: מָשְׁכֵנִי (mash^ekheni, “draw me!”; Qal imperative second person masculine singular from מָשַׁךְ, mashakh, “to draw” plus first person common singular suffix:), נָּרוּצָה (narutsah, “let us run!”; Qal cohortative first person common plural from רוּץ, ruts, “to run”), and הֱבִיאַנִי (heviʾani, “he has brought me” or “bring me!”; Hiphil perfect third person masculine singular בּוֹא, boʾ, “to bring” plus first person common singular suffix). Heterosis from second to third person occurs elsewhere in the Song in 1:2-3; 4:2; 6:6 (e.g, Gen 49:4; Deut 32:15; Ps 23:2-5; Isa 1:29; 42:20; 54:1; Jer 22:24; Amos 4:1; Micah 7:19; Lam 3:1).

⁷ tc The MT vocalizes consonantal ותפר as וְתָפֵר (v^etafer, conjunction plus Hiphil imperfect third person feminine singular from פָּרַר, parar, “to burst”). However, an alternate vocalization tradition of וְתֻפַּר (v^etupar, conjunction plus Hophal imperfect third person feminine singular “to be broken down”) is reflected in the LXX which reads καὶ διασκεδασθῇ (kai diaskedasthē, “is scattered”) and Symmachus καὶ διαλυθῇ (kai dialuthē, “is broken up”) which is followed by the Syriac. On the other hand, Aquila’s καὶ καρπεύσει (kai karpeusei, “are enjoyed,” of fruits) reflects וְתִפְרֶה (Qal imperfect third person feminine singular from פָרַה, “to bear fruit”); this does not reflect an alternate reading but a translator’s error in word division between וְתָפֵר הָאֲבִיּוֹנָה (v^etafer haʾaviyyonah, “the caper berry bursts”) and וְתִפְרֶה אֲבִיּוֹנָה (v^etifreh ʾaviyyonah, “the caper berry bears fruit”).

⁴ tn Or perhaps “by God.” It is possible that ἐν (en) plus the dative here indicates agency, that is, that God has performed the action of hiding the mystery. However, this usage of the preposition ἐν is quite rare in the NT, and even though here it does follow a perfect passive verb as in the Classical idiom, it is more likely that a different nuance is intended.

³ tn Grk “about whom.” The relative pronoun (“whom”) was replaced by the pronoun “him” and a new sentence was begun in the translation at this point to improve the English style, due to the length of the sentence in Greek. The verb εἶπεν (eipen) has not been translated (literally “he said testifying”) because it is redundant when combined with the participle μαρτυρήσας (marturēsas, “testifying”). Instead the construction of verb plus participle has been translated as a single English verb (“testified”).

² tn Or perhaps “because they had been bewildered and helpless.” The grammatical issue is whether the perfect participles are to be regarded as predicate adjectives or as pluperfect periphrastic constructions (i.e., εἰμί in the indicative plus a perfect participle). Wallace regards these as pluperfect periphrastics, stating: “There may be a hint in Matthew’s use of the pluperfect, esp. in collocation with the shepherd-motif, that this situation would soon disappear” (ExSyn 584).

³ tn This plus “Things will go well with you” is in essence the substance of the oath. The pronouns are emphatic: “And I, behold I will stay…and you, you may gather.” The imperatives in the second half of the verse are more a form of permission than of command or advice (cf. NJPS, REB, TEV and compare the usage in 40:4 and the references in the translator’s note there).

¹ tn Heb “We have not drunk wine all our days.” Actually, vv. 8b-9a are a series of infinitive constructs plus the negative לְבִלְתִּי (l^evilti) that explain the particulars of how they have obeyed, i.e., by not drinking wine…and by not building….” The more direct declarative statement is used here to shorten the sentence and is more in keeping with contemporary style.

⁵ tn Heb “Drink, and get drunk, and vomit and fall down and don’t get up.” The imperatives following drink are not parallel actions but consequent actions. For the use of the imperative plus the conjunctive “and” to indicate consequent action, even intention, see GKC 324-25 §110.f and compare usage in 1 Kgs 22:12 and Prov 3:3b-4a.

¹ tn Or “They went backward and not forward”; Heb “They were to the backward and not to the forward.” The two phrases used here appear nowhere else in the Bible, and the latter preposition plus adverb elsewhere is used temporally meaning “formerly” or “previously.” The translation follows the proposal of J. Bright, Jeremiah (AB), 57. Another option is, “they turned their backs to me, not their faces,” understanding the line as a variant of a line in 2:27.

¹ tn Heb “he must give.” The third person masculine singular suffix on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yitt^enennu, Qal imperfect third person masculine singular from נָתַן, natan, “to give” plus third person masculine singular suffix) refers back to עֲמָלוֹ (ʿamalo, “his labor”) which is treated in this line as a metonymy of cause for effect, that is, “he must give it” = “he must give his labor” = “he must give the fruit of his labor.”