¹ tn The phrase יוֹסִפוּ לַחֲטֹא (yosifu lakhatoʾ, “they add to sin”) is an idiom meaning either (1) “they sin more and more,” or (2) “they continue to sin” (see BDB 415 s.v. יָסַף 2.a; HALOT 418 s.v. יסף 3.b). The English versions are divided: (1) “they sin more and more” (KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV), and (2) “they go on sinning” (NJPS), “they continue to sin” (NAB), and “they (+ “still” in TEV and NCV) keep on sinning” (NRSV, NLT).

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).

² tn For the verb here see HALOT 675 s.v. II נָצָה Nif and compare the usage in Jer 4:7; 9:11 and 2 Kgs 19:25. BDB derives the verb from יָצַת (so BDB 428 s.v. יָצַת Niph, meaning “kindle, burn”) but still gives it the meaning “desolate” here and in 2:15 and 9:11.

¹ sn Even though Jeremiah was confined to the courtyard of the guardhouse, he was still free to entertain visitors (32:2, 8). Moreover, Ebed Melech was an official attached to the royal court and would have had access to the courtyard of the guardhouse (38:7, 13). Jeremiah would not have had to leave the courtyard of the guardhouse to “go and tell” him something.

¹ tn The words “Do you people think” at the beginning of this verse and “Do you really think” at the beginning of the next verse are not in the text but are a way of trying to convey the nature of the rhetorical questions, which expect a negative answer. They are also a way of trying to show that the verses are still connected to the preceding discussion addressed to the people (cf. 23:16, 20).

⁶ sn An ironical wordplay occurs between terms here (“enticed,” “prevail over”) and the same Hebrew words in v. 7 (“coerced,” “prevailed over”), where they describe the Lord coercing Jeremiah into being a spokesman by overcoming his resistance. Jeremiah is lamenting that it was God’s call to speak his word, which he could not (and still cannot) resist, that has led, ironically, to his endangerment.

² sn The word translated “clay” here refers to a clay that has been baked or fired in a kiln. In Jer 18 the clay was still soft and pliable, capable of being formed into different kinds of vessels. Here the clay is set, just as Israel is set in its ways. The word for jar probably refers to a water jug or decanter and is onomatopoeic, vaqbuq, referring to the gurgling sound made by pouring out the water.

² sn Heb “I am forming disaster and making plans against you.” The word translated “forming” is the same as that for “potter,” so there is a wordplay taking the reader back to v. 5. They are in his hands like the clay in the hands of the potter. Since they have not been pliable he forms new plans. He still offers them opportunity to repent, but their response is predictable.

⁴ tn Heb “The fountain of living water.” For an earlier use of this metaphor and the explanation of it, see Jer 2:13 and the notes there. There does not appear to be any way to retain this metaphor in the text without explaining it. In the earlier text the context would show that literal water was not involved. Here it might still be assumed that the Lord merely gives life-giving water.

³ tn Or “did not repent of their wicked ways”; Heb “They did not turn back from their ways.” There is no casual particle here (either כִּי [ki], which is more formally casual, or ו [vav], which sometimes introduces casual circumstantial clauses). The causal idea is furnished by the connection of ideas. If the verbs throughout this section are treated as pasts and this section is seen as a lament, then the clause can be sequential: “but they still did not turn…”

¹ tc The Hebrew text has the plural, “letters.” The final mem (ם) may be dittographic (note the initial mem on the form that immediately follows). Some Greek and Aramaic witnesses have the singular. If so, one still has to deal with the yod that is part of the plural ending. J. N. Oswalt refers to various commentators who have suggested ways to understand the plural form (Isaiah [NICOT], 1:652).

³ tn The first word in the Hebrew text (אֵשֶׁת, ʾeshet) begins with א (ʾalef), the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet. The word אֵשֶׁת, (ʾeshet) can refer to a wife or to a woman. Ruth is called an אֵשֶׁת חַיִל (ʾeshet khayil) “worthy woman” while still a widow. While the term need not refer to a wife, that was certainly the most common status of the adult woman in ancient Israel and the following description portrays a woman who is both wife and mother.

² tn The word “that” does not appear in the Hebrew. This is structured like other metaphorical proverbs (e.g. 26:7, 9, 10) whose first line begins without the word “like,” but still functions as a comparison for the second line which begins with the conjunction vav (“and”). These are often translated as similes, using “like… so….” In this case the verb has a semantic meaning of “like,” so that has not been added at the beginning to avoid redundancy in English.

² sn The twentieth saying, vv. 3-4, concerns the use of wisdom for domestic enterprises. In Prov 9:1 wisdom was personified as a woman who builds a house, but here the emphasis is primarily on the building—it is a sign of security and prosperity (C. H. Toy, Proverbs [ICC], 442). One could still make a secondary application from this line for a household or “family” (cf. NCV, which sees this as a reference to the family).

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).

¹ tn The participle with “suddenly” gives a vivid picture. It depicts the inner change in the man. She had turned him and been enticing him along, but he was still like an ox deciding whether to really follow the call after turning in its direction. Then suddenly, like a switch has been thrown inside, he goes on under his own will power, just like the dumb ox he has become.

¹ tn Heb “Your eyes saw my shapeless form.” The Hebrew noun גֹּלֶם (golem) occurs only here in the OT. In later Hebrew the word refers to “a lump, a shapeless or lifeless substance,” and to “unfinished matter, a vessel wanting finishing” (Jastrow 222 s.v. גּוֹלֶם). The translation employs the dynamic rendering “when I was inside the womb” to clarify that the speaker was still in his mother’s womb at the time he was “seen” by God.

¹ tn This last verse is difficult because it is unbalanced and cryptic. Some have joined the third line of v. 29 with this entire verse to make a couplet. But the same result is achieved by simply regarding this verse as the purpose of v. 29. But there still are some words that must be added. In the first colon, “[he is over the nations]…preventing from ruling.” And in the second colon, “laying” has to be supplied before “snares.”

³ tn This verb was used in Job 13:4 for “plasterers of lies.” The idea is probably that God coats or paints over the sins so that they are forgotten (see Isa 1:18). A. B. Davidson (Job, 105) suggests that the sins are preserved until full punishment is exacted. But the verse still seems to be continuing the thought of how the sins would be forgotten in the next life.

¹ tn The expression is מִי־יִתֵּן (mi yitten, “who will give”; see GKC 477 §151.b). Some commentators (H. H. Rowley and A. B. Davidson) wish to take this as the optative formula: “O that a clean might come out of an unclean!” But that does not fit the verse very well, and still requires the addition of a verb. The exclamation here simply implies something impossible—man is unable to attain purity.