¹ tc The expression “and his divisions and those numbered of them” is somewhat tautological. The words are synonyms used for statistical purposes, and so neither should be simply deleted.

² sn That is, when the lay people eat portions of offerings that should have been eaten only by priests and those who belonged to priestly households.

⁴ sn God will not declare right the one who is in the wrong. Society should also be consistent, but it cannot see the intents and motives, as God can.

² tn The imperfect tense here should be given a potential nuance: “What can we drink?” since the previous verse reports that they were not able to drink the water.

² tn The construction is an adverbial accusative of time, answering how long the routine should be followed (see GKC 374 §118.k).

¹ tn The verb נֵלֵךְ (nelekh) is a Qal imperfect of the verb הָלַךְ (halakh). Here it should be given the modal nuance of obligation: “we must go.”

¹ tn The preposition bet (ב) in this construction should be classified as a bet essentiae, a bet of essence (see also GKC 379 §119.i).

³ sn The construction of these clauses is similar to (ironically) the words of Moses: “Who am I that I should go?” (3:11).

⁴ tn The imperfect tense here has a deliberative nuance (“should”), for Moses is wondering what would be best to say when the Israelites want proof of the calling.

³ tn The verb is a Niphal imperfect; it should be classified here as a historic future, future from the perspective of a point in a past time narrative.

⁵ sn The expression except the food he ate probably refers to Potiphar’s private affairs and should not be limited literally to what he ate.

² tn The Hebrew text simply has בָּנוּ (banu), but since v. 8 says they left off building the city, an ingressive idea (“had started building”) should be understood here.

² tn Although it is possible to argue that ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos) should be translated “person” here since it is not necessarily masculinity that is in view in Caiaphas’ statement, “man” was retained in the translation because in 11:47 “this man” (οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, outos ho anthrōpos) has as its referent a specific individual, Jesus, and it was felt this connection should be maintained.

¹ sn Jeremiah appears to be complaining like Job that God cares nothing about the prosperity of the wicked, but watches Jeremiah’s every move. The reverse ought to be true. Jeremiah should not be suffering the onslaughts of his fellow countrymen as he is. The wicked who are prospering should be experiencing punishment.

¹ sn The idea of “answer” in this line is that of responding to the summons, i.e., appearing in court. This preterite and the perfect before it have the nuance of hypothetical perfects since they are in conditional clauses (GKC 330 §111.x). D. J. A. Clines (Job [WBC], 219) translates literally, “If I should call and he should answer.”

² tn Heb “Are the palms of Zebah and Zalmunna now in your hand, that we should give to your army bread?” Perhaps the reference to the kings’ “palms” should be taken literally. The officials of Sukkoth may be alluding to the practice of mutilating prisoners or enemy corpses (see R. G. Boling, Judges [AB], 155).

³ tn Heb “and one shall be a sin offering and the one a burnt offering.” The versions struggle with whether or not “one” should or should not have the definite article in its two occurrences in this verse (KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB all have the English definite article with both). The MT has the first without and the second with the article.

³ tn The imperfect tense here receives the classification of obligatory imperfect. The verb שָׁמַע (shamaʿ) followed by “in the voice of” is idiomatic; rather than referring to simple audition—“that I should hear his voice”—it conveys the thought of listening that issues in action—“that I should obey him.”

¹ tn Heb “And Abraham.” The disjunctive clause is probably causal, giving a reason why God should not hide his intentions from Abraham. One could translate, “Should I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, seeing that Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation?”

¹ tn The verbs in this section function either as past definite actions (describing a past situation) or as hypothetical past actions (describing an imaginary hypothetical situation for the sake of illustration). The LXX uses subjunctives throughout vv. 14-15 to depict the scenario as a hypothetical situation: “Suppose there was a little city, and a few men [lived] in it; and there should come against it a great king, and surround it, and build great siege-works against it; and should find in it a poor wise man, and he should save the city through his wisdom; yet no man would remember that poor man.”