¹ tn Heb “border.” Cf. NRSV “You must not move your neighbor’s boundary marker.”

¹ tn Or “into the world; again.” Here πάλιν (palin) functions as a marker of contrast, with the implication of a sequence.

² tn Grk “O.” The marker of direct address, ὦ (ō), is functionally equivalent to a vocative and is represented in the translation by “you.”

² tn Grk “O.” The marker of direct address, ὦ (ō), is functionally equivalent to a vocative and is represented in the translation by “you.”

² tn Grk “O.” The marker of direct address, ὦ (ō), is functionally equivalent to a vocative and is represented in the translation by “you.”

³ tn Heb “will you dispossess him [i.e., Israel; or possibly “it,” i.e., the territory]?” There is no interrogative marker in the Hebrew text.

² tn Heb “he makes an outline with the [?].” The noun שֶׂרֶד (shered) occurs only here; it apparently refers to some type of tool or marker. Cf. KJV “with a line”; ASV “with a pencil”; NAB, NRSV “with a stylus”; NASB “with red chalk”; NIV “with a marker.”

² tn Though the Hebrew text has no formal interrogative marker here, the context indicates that the statement should be taken as a rhetorical question anticipating the answer, “Of course not!” (so also NIV, NRSV).

¹ tn BDAG 277-78 s.v. εἰ 2 has “marker of an indirect question as content, that…Sim. also (Procop. Soph., Ep. 123 χάριν ἔχειν εἰ = that) μαρτυρόμενος…εἰ παθητὸς ὁ Χριστός testifying…that the Christ was to suffer…Ac 26:23.”

⁴ sn There is great debate whether this event equals Acts 1:9-11 so that Luke has telescoped something here that he describes in more detail later. The text can be read in this way because the temporal marker in v. 50 is vague.

¹ sn The order of Luke’s temptations differs from Matthew’s at this point as numbers two and three are reversed. It is slightly more likely that Luke has made the change to put the Jerusalem temptation last, as Jerusalem is so important to Luke’s later account. The temporal markers in Matthew’s account are also slightly more specific.

¹ tn Most translations render the verse as a question (“Have you seen…?” so KJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman) while sometimes this construction is turned into a conditional sentence. But the Hebrew has a perfect verb form (רָאִיתָ; raʾita), expecting past time, without an interrogative or conditional marker. See the note at Prov 26:16.

¹ tc The Hebrew text reads, “Elchanan son of Jair killed Lachmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite.” But it is likely that the accusative marker in front of לַחְמִי (lakhmi, “Lachmi”) was originally בֵּית (bet), and that אֶת־לַחְמִי (ʾet lakhmi) should be emended to בֵּית הַלַּחְמִי (bet hallakhmi, “the Bethlehemite”). See 2 Sam 21:19.

¹ tc The MT reading אֶת־בַיַּרְדֵּן (ʾet vayyarden, “in the Jordan”) is odd syntactically. The use of the preposition after the object marker אֶת (ʾet) is difficult to explain. Graphic confusion is likely in the MT; the translation assumes the reading מִיַּרְדֵּן (miyyarden, “from the Jordan”). Another possibility is to read the definite article on the front of “Jordan” (הַיַּרְדֵּן, hayyarden; “the Jordan”).

¹ tn The Masoretic disjunctive accent marker (zaqeph parvum) divides the lines here. Most English versions reflect this line division (KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NKJV). Some extend the line: “Yahweh is better than a fortress” (NJB); “The Lord is good to those who hope in him” (NJPS); and “The Lord is good to those who trust him” (NEB). This issue is complicated by the textual problems in this verse.

¹ tn The translation of this verse is generally based on the parallels in Obad 5. There the second line has an interrogative ה (he) in front of it. The question can still be assumed because questions can be asked in Hebrew without a formal marker (cf. GKC 473 §150.a and BDB 519 s.v. לֹא 1.a[e], and compare usage in 2 Kgs 5:26).

¹ tn Heb “Just as the stars in the sky cannot be numbered and the sand on the seashore cannot be measured, so I will greatly increase [or multiply] the seed of my servant David and the Levites who minister before me.” The word “seed of” does not carry over to the “the Levites” as a noun governing two genitives because “the Levites” has the accusative marker in front of it. The sentence has been broken down in conformity with contemporary English style.

⁴ tn Heb “Returning to me.” The form is the bare infinitive, which the KJV and ASV have interpreted as an imperative: “Yet, return to me!” However, it is more likely that a question is intended, expressing surprise in the light of the law alluded to and the facts cited. For the use of the infinitive absolute in the place of a finite verb, cf. GKC 346 §113.ee. For the introduction of a question without a question marker, cf. GKC 473 §150.a.

³ tc Heb “Hermons.” The plural form of the name occurs only here in the OT. Some suggest the plural refers to multiple mountain peaks (cf. NASB) or simply retain the plural in the translation (cf. NEB), but the final mem (ם) is probably dittographic (note that the next form in the text begins with the letter mem) or enclitic. At a later time it was misinterpreted as a plural marker and vocalized accordingly.

² tc Heb “sons of gods,” or “sons of God.” Though אֵלִים (ʾelim) is vocalized as a plural form (“gods”) in the MT, it is likely that the final mem is actually enclitic, rather than a plural marker. In this case one may read “God.” Some, following a Qumran text and the LXX, also propose the phrase occurred in the original text of Deut 32:8.