² tc Heb “pouring out your anger and also making drunk”; or “pouring out your anger and [by] rage making drunk.” The present translation assumes that the final khet (ח) on מְסַפֵּחַ (m^esappeakh, “pouring”) is dittographic and that the form should actually be read מִסַּף (missaf, “from a bowl”).

² tn The translation assumes that the phrase אֶל־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ (ʾel y^ehvah ʾelohenu, “to the Lord our God”) goes with what precedes. Another option is to take the phrase with the following verb, in which case one could translate, “to the Lord our God they will turn in dread.”

² tn The meaning of the Hebrew term וְתַסֵּג (v^etasseg) is unclear. The translation assumes it is a Hiphal imperfect from נָסַג/נָשַׂג (nasag/nasag, “reach; overtake”) and that hunting imagery is employed. (Note the reference to hunger in the first line of the verse.) See D. R. Hillers, Micah (Hermeneia), 80.

¹ tc The first Hebrew term in the line (וְיֶשְׁחֲךָ, v^eyeshkhakha) is obscure. HALOT 446 s.v. יֶשַׁח understands a noun meaning “filth,” which would yield the translation, “and your filth is inside you.” The translation assumes an emendation to כֹּחַוְיֶשׁ (v^eyesh koakh, “and [if] there is strength inside you”).

³ tc The MT reads, “Listen, tribe (or staff) and who appointed it.” Verse 10 then begins with עוֹד (ʿod, “still” or “again”). The LXX reads, “who will set the city in order?” The translation assumes an emendation of וּמִי יְעָדָהּ. עוֹד (umi y^eʿadah. ʿod…, “and who appointed it. Still…”) to וּמוֹעֵד הָעִיר(umoʿed haʿir, “and the assembly of the city”).

² tn The precise meaning of this difficult form is uncertain. The present translation assumes the form is a Niphal participle of an otherwise unattested denominative verb הָלָא (halaʾ, “to be far off”; see BDB 229 s.v.), but attractive emendations include הַנַּחֲלָה (hannakhalah, “the sick one[s]”) from חָלָה (khalah) and הַנִּלְאָה (hannilʾah, “the weary one[s]”) from לָאָה (laʾah).

³ tc The translation assumes a masculine plural imperative. If one were to emend בְּבֵית (b^evet) to בֵית (vet), Beth Leaphrah would then be the addressee and the feminine singular imperative (see Qere) could be retained, “O Beth Leaphrah, sit in the dust.”

¹ tc The MT reads “his steps.” If this is correct, then the reference may be to the steps leading up to the heavenly temple or the throne of God (cf. 1 Kgs 10:19-20). The prefixed מ (mem) may be dittographic (note the preceding word ends in mem). The translation assumes an emendation to עֲלִיָּתוֹ (ʿaliyyato, “his upper rooms”).

³ tn Or “his thoughts.” The translation assumes that the pronominal suffix refers to God and that divine self-revelation is in view (see 3:7). If the suffix refers to the following term אָדַם (ʾadam, “men”), then the expression refers to God’s ability to read men’s minds.

⁴ sn The “weak” individual mentioned here is apparently the farmer who has little or no military prowess or prior fighting experience. Under ordinary circumstances such a person would be ill-prepared for assuming the role of a soldier. However, in the scene that Joel is describing here even the most unlikely candidate will become a participant to be reckoned with in this final conflict.

¹ tn Heb “put on.” There is no object present in the Hebrew text, but many translations assume “sackcloth” to be the understood object of the verb “put on.” Its absence in the Hebrew text of v. 13 is probably due to metrical considerations. The meter here is 3 + 3, and that has probably influenced the prophet’s choice of words.

² tn The introductory deictic particle אִם (ʾim) functions as an interrogative and introduces an interrogative clause: “Is there…?” (see HALOT 60 s.v. אִם 5; BDB 50 s.v. אִם 2). The LXX assumed that אִם was being used in its more common function as a conditional particle: “If there….”

¹ tn Heb “take away the heart of my people.” The present translation assumes that the first word of v. 12 in the Hebrew text is to be construed with the noun at the end of v. 11 (so also TEV, CEV, NLT).

¹ tc The present translation assumes the reading חֲזִי (khazi, “consider”) rather than the MT חֶזְוֵי (khezve, “visions”). The MT implies that the king required Daniel to disclose both the dream and its interpretation, as in chapter 2. But in the following verses Nebuchadnezzar recounts his dream, while Daniel presents only its interpretation.

¹ tc Many Hebrew mss, Aquila’s Greek translation, and the Syriac version read “Edom.” The LXX reads “man,” a translation that assumes the same consonants as Edom. This reading is supported from the context as the text deals with Damascus, the capital of Syria (Aram), later (in v. 18).

¹ tc The MT leaves v. 18 as an incomplete sentence and begins v. 19 with “and Dan and Javan [Ionia] from Uzal.” The LXX mentions “wine.” The translation follows an emendation assuming some confusions of vav and yod. See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:82.

³ tn In the Hebrew text there is no conjunction before “their sons and daughters.” For this reason one might assume that the preceding descriptive phrases refer to the sons and daughters, but verse 21 suggests otherwise. The descriptive phrases appear to refer to the “stronghold,” which parallels “my sanctuary” in verse 21. The children constitute a separate category.

² tc The term in the MT occurs only here and in Eccl 9:12, where it refers to a net for catching fish. The LXX translates this as “prison,” which assumes a confusion of dalet and resh took place in the MT.

² tc The MT reads גְאֻלָּתֶךָ (g^eʾullatekha, “your redemption-men”), referring to the relatives responsible for deliverance in times of hardship (see Lev 25:25-55). The LXX and Syriac read “your fellow exiles,” assuming an underlying Hebrew text of גָלוּתֶךָ (galutekha) or having read the א (alef) as an internal mater lectionis for holem.

² tn There is no main verb in the verse; it is an extended prepositional phrase. One must either assume a verbal idea such as, “But it happened due to…,” or connect the verse to the following verses, which themselves are quite difficult. The former option was employed in the present translation.