¹ tn The idea of the “snare” is to lure them to judgment; God is apparently warning about contact with the Canaanites, either in worship or in business. They were very syncretistic, and so it would be dangerous to settle among them.

¹ sn The instructions here call for the altar to be made of natural things, not things manufactured or shaped by man. The altar was either to be made of clumps of earth or natural, unhewn rocks.

³ tn The clause begins with the disjunctive vav (ו) on the noun, signaling either a circumstantial clause or a new beginning. It could be rendered, “Although the Egyptians…Yahweh…” or “as the Egyptians….”

² tn The infinitive absolute functions as the finite verb here, and “every male” could be either the object or the subject (see GKC 347 §113.gg and 387 §121.a).

² tn The Hebrew noun is singular and can refer to either a lamb or a goat. Since English has no common word for both, the phrase “a lamb or young goat” is used in the translation.

² tn The form וְנַעֲשֶׂה (v^enaʿaseh, from the verb עָשָׁה [ʿasah], “do, make”) could be either the imperfect or the cohortative with a vav (ו) conjunction (“and let us make…”). Coming after the previous cohortative, this form expresses purpose.

⁵ tn Or “destructive opinions,” “destructive viewpoints.” The genitive ἀπωλείας (apōleias) could be taken either attributively (“destructive”) or as a genitive of destination (“leading to destruction”). Although the preferable interpretation is a genitive of destination, especially because of the elaboration given at the end of the verse (“bringing swift destruction on themselves”), translating it attributively is less cumbersome in English. Either way, the net result is the same.

¹ tn The phrase ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ Χριστοῦ (hē agapē tou Christou, “the love of Christ”) could be translated as either objective genitive (“our love for Christ”) or subjective genitive (“Christ’s love for us”). Either is grammatically possible, but with the reference to Christ’s death for all in the following clauses, a subjective genitive (“Christ’s love for us”) is more likely.

² tn Or “let it fall away.” According to BDAG 308 s.v. ἐκπίπτω 1 and 2 the meaning of the verb in this verse could be either “fall away” or “drift away.” Either meaning is acceptable, and the choice between them depends almost entirely on how one reconstructs the scene. Since cutting the boat loose would in any case result in it drifting away (whether capsized or not), the meaning “drift away” as a nautical technical term has been used here.

¹ tn The term ἄνθρωποι (anthrōpoi) used here can mean either “people” (when used generically) or “men” (though there is a more specific term in Greek for adult males, ανήρ [anēr]). Thus the woman could have been speaking either (1) to all the people or (2) to the male leaders of the city as their representatives. However, most recent English translations regard the former as more likely and render the word “people” here.

² tn Or “gods” (CEV, NLT). The plural noun אֱלֹהִים (ʾelohim) might be functioning either as a plural of number (“gods”) or a plural of majesty (“god”) – the form would allow for either. As members of a polytheistic culture, each sailor might appeal to several gods. However, individuals could also look to a particular god for help in trouble. Tg. Jonah 1:5 interpretively renders the line, “Each man prayed to his idols, but they saw that they were useless.”

⁴ tn In each of the three cases of the verb translated with forms of “to come,” the form may either be a participle (“comes/is coming”) or a perfect (“has come”). Either form would indicate that the end is soon to arrive. This last form appears also to be feminine, although “end” is masculine. This shift may be looking ahead to the next verse, whose first noun (“Doom”) is feminine.

¹ tn There are two ways to take this word: either as “fools” or as “foolish ways.” The spelling for “foolishness” in v. 13 differs from this spelling, and so some have taken that as an indicator that this should be “fools.” But this could still be an abstract plural here as in 1:22. Either the message is to forsake fools (i.e., bad company; cf. KJV, TEV) or forsake foolishness (cf. NAB, NASB, NIV, NCV, NRSV, NLT).

² tn Heb “cut off.” The verb כָּרַת (karat, “to be cut off”) indicates either that the guilty will (1) die prematurely, (2) be excommunicated from the community or (3) be separated eternally in judgment. The Mishnah devoted an entire tractate (m. Keritot) to this topic. The context suggests that the guilty will be “removed” from the land where the righteous dwell in security either through death or expulsion.

¹ tn The verb is either a prophetic perfect (“will appear to you”) as in the MT (cf. IBHS §30.5.1.e; so many English versions), or a futurum instans participle (“is going to appear to you”) as in the LXX and several other versions (see the BHS footnote; cf. IBHS 627 §37.6f). In either case, the point is that Moses was anticipating that the Lord would indeed appear to them on this day (cf. vv. 6, 22-24).

⁴ tn Heb “quickly, [the] plunder; it hurries, [the] loot.” The first word (מַהֵר, maher) is either a Piel imperative (“hurry [to]”) or infinitive (“hurrying,” or “quickly”). The third word (חָשׁ, khash) is either a third masculine singular perfect or a masculine singular participle, in either case from the root חוּשׁ (khush, “hurry”). Perhaps it is best to translate, “One hastens to the plunder, one hurries to the loot.” In this case מַהֵר is understood as an infinitive functioning as a verb, the subject of חוּשׁ is taken as indefinite, and the two nouns are understood as adverbial accusatives. As we discover in v. 3, this is the name of the son to be born to Isaiah through the prophetess.

¹ tc The ὅτι (hoti) before ἐπ᾿ ἐσχάτου χρόνου (ep eschatou chronou, “at the end of time”), found in the NA²⁷ text, can either be translated as “that” or left untranslated as a marker of direct discourse. The NA²⁸ has dropped the ὅτι, though with a diamond preceding it in the apparatus indicating a toss-up on the initial wording. Without the conjunction, direct discourse is surely meant, and with it it is just as likely as indirect discourse. The translation above makes no decision on the presence or absence of the conjunction, but renders either variant as direct discourse.

² tn The genitive in the phrase τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ (tēn hupomonēn tou Christou, “the endurance of Christ”) could be translated as either a subjective genitive (“Christ’s endurance”) or an objective genitive (“endurance for Christ”). Either is grammatically possible. This is possibly an instance of a plenary genitive (see ExSyn 119-21; M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek, §§36-39). If so, the emphasis would be on believers being directed toward the endurance Christ showed which in turn produces endurance in them for him.

¹ tn The genitive in the phrase τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ (tēn agapēn tou theou, “the love of God”) could be translated as either a subjective genitive (“God’s love”) or an objective genitive (“your love for God”). Either is grammatically possible. This is possibly an instance of a plenary genitive (see ExSyn 119-21; M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek, §§36-39). If so, the emphasis would be on believers being directed toward the love God gives which in turn produces increased love in them for him.

² tn The genitive in the phrase τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ (to euangelion tou theou, “the gospel of God”) could be translated as either a subjective genitive (“the gospel which God brings”) or an objective genitive (“the gospel about God”). Either is grammatically possible. This is possibly an instance of a plenary genitive (see ExSyn 119-21; M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek, §§36-39). If so, an interplay between the two concepts is intended: The gospel which God brings is in fact the gospel about himself. This same phrase occurs in vv. 8 and 9 as well.