² tn Or “relatives”; or “colleagues” (cf. NLT “ten other priests”).

¹ tn Grk “we ourselves had the sentence of death within ourselves.” Here ἀπόκριμα (apokrima) is being used figuratively; no actual official verdict had been given, but in light of all the difficulties that Paul and his colleagues had suffered, it seemed to them as though such an official verdict had been rendered against them (L&N 56.26).

¹ tn Heb “So he said, ‘Like this and like this he said to me, saying.’” The words “like this and like this” are probably not a direct quote of Jehu’s words to his colleagues. Rather this is the narrator’s way of avoiding repetition and indicating that Jehu repeated, or at least summarized, what the prophet had said to him.

⁴ tc ‡ Judging by the superior witnesses for the first person pronoun ἡμῶν (hēmōn, “us”; P⁴⁶ א* A B D* F G 326* 1505) vs. the second person pronoun ὑμῶν (humōn, “you”; found in א² C D¹ Ψ 075 33 1175 1739 1881 2464 M lat sy co), ἡμῶν should be regarded as the initial reading. Although it is possible that ἡμῶν was an early alteration of ὑμῶν (either unintentionally, as dittography, since it comes seventeen letters after the previous ἡμῶν; or intentionally, to conform to the surrounding first person pronouns), this supposition is difficult to maintain in light of the varied and valuable witnesses for this reading. Further, the second person is both embedded in the verb ἐμάθετε (emathete) and is explicit in v. 8 (ὑμῶν). Hence, the motivation to change to the first person pronoun is counterbalanced by such evidence. The second person pronoun may have been introduced unintentionally via homoioarcton with the ὑπέρ (huper) that immediately precedes it. As well, the second person reading is somewhat harder for it seems to address Epaphras’ role only in relation to Paul and his colleagues, rather than in relation to the Colossians. Nevertheless, the decision must be based ultimately on external evidence (since the internal evidence can be variously interpreted), and this strongly supports ἡμῶν.