² tn Heb “and with adulterers [is] your portion.”

⁶ sn Note what the Pharisee assumes about the righteousness of this tax collector by grouping him with extortionists, unrighteous people, and adulterers.

¹ tn Heb “adulterers.” But spiritual adultery is clearly meant, as also in 3:8-9; 9:2, and probably 5:7.

³ tn Heb “they are all adulterers, a congregation of unfaithful people.” However, spiritual adultery is, of course, meant, not literal adultery. So the literal translation would be misleading.

² tc This is not the idea of the adulterer, but of the thief. So some commentators reverse the order and put this verse after v. 14.

⁵ tn Heb “put away her adulteries from her face.” The plural noun זְנוּנֶיהָ (z^enuneha, “adulteries”) is an example of the plural of repeated (or habitual) action: she has had multiple adulterous affairs.

² sn The sentence is rhetorically loaded. It begins with three dangling objects of the verb, all describing their adulterous relationship with the false gods under different figures that are resumed later under the words “your disgusting acts.” The Hebrew sentence reads, “Your adulteries, your neighings, your shameful prostitution, upon the hills in the fields I have seen your disgusting acts.” This sentence drips with explosive disgust at their adulterous betrayal.

² tn The text again has “my son.” In this passage perhaps “son” would be the most fitting because of the warning against going to the adulterous woman. However, since the image of the adulterous woman probably represents all kinds of folly (through personification), and since even in this particular folly the temptation works both ways, the general address to either young men or women should be retained. The text was certainly not intended to convey that only women could seduce men.

¹ tn Heb “How [can there be] peace as long as the adulterous acts of Jezebel your mother and her acts of sorcery [are] many?” In this instance “adulterous acts” is employed metaphorically for idolatry. As elsewhere in the OT, worshiping other gods is viewed as spiritual adultery and unfaithfulness to the one true God. The phrase “many acts of sorcery” could be taken literally, for Jezebel undoubtedly utilized pagan divination practices, but the phrase may be metaphorical, pointing to her devotion to pagan customs in general.

² tn Heb “how I was broken by their adulterous heart.” The image of God being “broken” is startling but perfectly natural within the metaphorical framework of God as offended husband. The idiom must refer to the intense grief that Israel’s unfaithfulness caused God. For a discussion of the syntax and semantics of the Hebrew text, see M. Greenberg, Ezekiel (AB), 1:134.

² tn The text again has “my son.” In this passage perhaps “son” would be the most fitting because of the warning against the adulterous woman. However, since even in this particular folly the temptation works both ways, the general address to either young men or women is retained. Similar warnings would apply to daughters to be warned of smooth-talking, seductive men.

¹ tn The text again has “my son.” In this passage perhaps “son” would be the most fitting because of the warning against the adulterous woman. However, since even in this particular folly the temptation works both ways, the general address to either young men or women is retained. Similar warnings would apply to daughters to be warned of smooth-talking, seductive men.

¹ tc The MT reads מְנָאֲפִים (m^enaʾafim, “adulterers”; Piel participle masculine plural from נָאַף, naʾaf, “to commit adultery”), which does not seem to fit the context. The original reading was probably אוֹפִים (ʾofim, “bakers”; Qal participle masculine plural from אָפַה, ʾafah, “to bake”), which harmonizes well with the baker/oven/fire motif in 7:4-7. The textual deviation was caused by: (1) confusion of נ (nun) and ו (vav), (2) metathesis of נ/ו (nun/vav) and א (alef), and (3) dittography of מ (mem) from the preceding word. Original כֻּלָּם אוֹפִים (kullam ʾofim, “all of them are bakers”) was confused for כֻּלָּם מְנָאֲפִים (“all of them are adulterers”). In spite of this most English versions follow the reading of the MT here.

¹ sn Open theists suggest that passages such as this indicate God has limited foreknowledge; however, more traditional theologians view this passage as an extended metaphor in which God presents himself as a deserted husband, hoping against hope that his adulterous wife might return to him. The point of the metaphor is not to make an assertion about God’s foreknowledge, but to develop the theme of God’s heartbreak due to Israel’s unrepentance.

¹ tc The Hebrew text reads literally, “offspring of an adulterer [masculine] and [one who] has committed adultery.” Perhaps the text has suffered from transposition of vav (ו) and tav (ת) and מְנָאֵף וַתִּזְנֶה (m^enaʾef vattizneh) should be emended to מְנָאֶפֶת וְזֹנָה (m^enaʾefet v^ezonah, “an adulteress and a prostitute”). Both singular nouns would be understood in a collective sense. Most modern English versions render both forms as nouns.

¹ sn Equally amazing is the insensitivity of the adulterous woman to the sin. The use of the word “way” clearly connects this and the preceding material. Its presence here also supports the interpretation of the final clause in v. 19 as referring to sexual intimacy. While that is a wonder of God’s creation, so is the way that human nature has distorted it and ruined it.

² tn Or “for a strange (= adulterous) woman.” Cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NLT; NIV “a wayward woman.” The first noun זָר (zar) “stranger,” “foreigner” is masculine; the second term נָכְרִיָּה (nokhriyyah) “foreigner,” “stranger” is feminine, thus whether the stranger is a man or a woman. The terms do not have to mean a non-Israelite, just someone from outside the community and not well-known.

² sn Even though the text has said that the man caught in adultery ruins his life, it does not mean that he was put to death, although that could have happened. He seems to live on in ignominy, destroyed socially and spiritually. He might receive blows and wounds from the husband and shame and disgrace from the spiritual community. D. Kidner observes that in a morally healthy society the adulterer would be a social outcast (Proverbs [TOTC], 75).

² sn Israel’s backsliding is forgotten and forgiven. They had once been characterized as an apostate people (3:14, 22; the word “apostate” and “unfaithful” are the same in Hebrew) and figuratively depicted as an adulterous wife (3:20). Now they are viewed as having responded to his invitation (compare 31:18-19 with 3:22-25). Hence they are no longer depicted as an unfaithful daughter but as an unsullied virgin (see the literal translation of “my dear children” in vv. 4, 21 and the study note on v. 4.)