² tn Heb “the tumult of foreigners.”

³ tn Heb “a sound, tumult of kingdoms.”

¹ tn Heb “at the sound of tumult the nations run away.”

⁴ sn They all shouted…for about two hours. The extent of the tumult shows the racial and social tensions of a cosmopolitan city like Ephesus, indicating what the Christians in such locations had to face.

² tn L&N 39.43 has “‘the uproar spread throughout the whole city’ (literally ‘the city was filled with uproar’) Ac 19:29.” BDAG 954 s.v. σύγχυσις has “confusion, tumult.”

⁴ tn Or “in the tumult.” This word refers to the harsh confusion of sounds that characterized an ancient battle—a mixture of war cries, shouts, shrieks of pain, clashes of weapons, etc.

² tn The only other occurrence of the Hebrew word translated “tumult” is in Jer 11:16. It indicates a noise like that of the turmoil of a military camp or the sound of an army on the march.

³ tn Heb “and her splendor and her masses will go down, and her tumult and the one who exults in her.” The antecedent of the four feminine singular pronominal suffixes used in v. 14b is unclear. The likely referent is personified Zion/Jerusalem (see 3:25-26; 4:4-5).

¹ tn Traditionally this difficult form has been derived from a hypothetical root הָמוֹן (hamon), supposedly meaning “be in tumult/uproar,” but such a verb occurs nowhere else. It is more likely that it is to be derived from a root מָנוֹן (manon), meaning “disdain” (see L. C. Allen, Ezekiel [WBC], 1:52). A derivative from this root is used in Prov 29:21 of a rebellious servant. See HALOT 600 s.v. מָנוֹן.

¹ tn For the meaning “multitude” here rather than “tumult,” see BDB 242 s.v. הָמוֹן 3.c, which says that this refers to a great throng of people under the figure of an overwhelming mass of waves. The word is used of a multitude of soldiers, or a vast army, in 1 Sam 14:16 and 1 Kgs 20:13, 18 (cf. BDB 242 s.v. הָמוֹן 3.a for further references).

¹ sn The Hebrew verb means “to rage; to quake; to be in tumult.” The sage is using humorous and satirical hyperbole to say that the changes described in the following verses shake up the whole order of life. The sayings assume that the new, elevated status of the individuals was not accompanied by a change in nature. For example, it was not completely unknown in the ancient world for a servant to become king, and in the process begin to behave like a king.

² tc The LXX reads “neither tumult nor birth pains.” The LXX varies at many points from the MT in this chapter. The context suggests that one or both of these would be present on a day of judgment, thus favoring the MT. Perhaps more significant is the absence of “the mountains” in the LXX. If the ר (resh) in הָרִים (harim, “the mountains” not “on the mountains”) were a ד (dalet), which is a common letter confusion, then it could be from the same root as the previous word, הֵד (hed), meaning “the day is near—with destruction, not joyful shouting.”

² tn The phrase נֶהְפַּךְ עָלַי לִבִּי (nehpakh ʿalay libbi) is an idiom that can be taken in two ways: (1) a tumult of emotions, not just a clash of ideas, that are afflicting a person (Lam 1:20; HALOT 253 s.v. הפך 1.c) and (2) a decisive change of policy, that is, a reversal of sentiment from amity to hatred (Exod 14:5; Ps 105:25; BDB 245 s.v. הָפַךְ 1; HALOT 253 s.v. 3). Some English versions express God’s emotional discomfort and tension over the prospect of destroying Israel: “mine heart is turned within me” (KJV), “my heart recoils within me” (RSV, NRSV), “My heart is turned over within Me” (NASB), and “My heart is torn within me” (NLT). Others stress volitional reversal of a previous decision to totally destroy Israel: “I have had a change of heart” (NJPS), “my heart is changed within me” (NIV), and “my heart will not let me do it!” (TEV). Both BDB 245 s.v. 1.b and HALOT 253 s.v. 3 suggest that the idiom describes a decisive change of heart (reversal of decision to totally destroy Israel once and for all) rather than God’s emotional turbulence, shifting back and forth between whether to destroy or spare Israel. This volitional nuance is supported by the modal function of the first person common singular imperfects in 11:8 (“I will not carry out my fierce anger…I will not destroy Ephraim…I will not come in wrath”) and by the prophetic announcement of future restoration in 11:10-11. Clearly, a dramatic reversal both in tone and in divine intention occurs between 11:5-11.