⁴ tn Grk “whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses.” The two consecutive relative clauses make for awkward English style, so the second was begun as a new sentence with the words “to this fact” supplied in place of the Greek relative pronoun to make a complete sentence in English.

³ tc Heb “beneath me I shook, which….” The Hebrew term אֲשֶׁר (’asher) appears to be a relative pronoun, but a relative pronoun does not fit here. The translation assumes a reading אֲשֻׁרָי (’ashuray, “my steps”) as well as an emendation of the preceding verb to a third plural form.

² tn Heb “hate him.” The verb שָׂנֵא (saneʾ) may be nuanced “reject” here (metonymy of effect, cf. CEV). The kind of “dislike” or “hatred” family members show to a poor relative is to have nothing to do with him (NIV “is shunned”). If relatives do this, how much more will the poor person’s friends do so.

² tn The expression יִשְׁאַף־צֵל (yishʾaf tsel, “longing for the evening shadow”) could also be taken as a relative clause (without the relative pronoun): “as a servant [who] longs for the evening shadow” (see GKC 487 §155.g). In either case, the expressions in v. 2 emphasize the point of the comparison, which will be summed up in v. 3.

⁴ tn Heb “but if he will not redeem, tell me.” Most English versions emend the third person verb form (“he”) to the second person form because Boaz is addressing the closer relative. But it is possible that he briefly addresses the witnesses and refers to the closer relative in the third person. See J. M. Sasson, Ruth, 118.

² tc The marginal reading (Qere) is מוֹדַע (modaʿ, “relative”), while the consonantal text (Kethib) has מְיֻדָּע (mᵉyuddaʿ, “friend”). The textual variant was probably caused by orthographic confusion between consonantal מְיֻדָּע and מוֹדַע. Virtually all English versions follow the marginal reading (Qere), e.g., KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV “kinsman”; NIV, NCV, NLT “relative.”

¹ tn The clause is a relative clause modifying “those things,” the direct object of the verb “eat.” The relative clause has a resumptive pronoun: “which atonement was made by them” becomes “by which atonement was made.” The verb is a Pual perfect of כִּפֵּר (kipper, “to expiate, atone, pacify”).

² tn Heb “which not was like it in Egypt.” The pronoun suffix serves as the resumptive pronoun for the relative particle: “which…like it” becomes “the like of which has not been.” The word “hail” is added in the translation to make clear the referent of the relative particle.

³ tn The form is the Hiphil participle מַעֲבִדִים (maʿavidim, “causing to serve”). The participle occurs in a relative clause that modifies “the Israelites.” The clause ends with the accusative “them,” which must be combined with the relative pronoun for a smooth English translation. So “who the Egyptians are enslaving them,” results in the translation “whom the Egyptians are enslaving.”

¹ tn The phrase “This is what we proclaim to you” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to clarify the English. The main verb which governs all of these relative clauses is ἀπαγγέλλομεν (apangellomen) in v. 3. This is important for the proper understanding of the relative clauses in v. 1, because the main verb ἀπαγγέλλομεν in v. 3 makes it clear that all of the relative clauses in vv. 1 and 3 are the objects of the author’s proclamation to the readers rather than the subjects. To indicate this the phrase “This is what we proclaim to you” has been supplied at the beginning of v. 1.

⁶ tn Grk “the [rich] knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Verse 8 in Greek does not make a full stop (period), for v. 9 begins with a subordinate relative pronoun. Contemporary English convention requires a full stop in translation, however.

² tn Or “fights,” although this could suggest weapons and blows, whereas in the present context this is not the primary focus. Although “quarrel” is frequently used here (NAB, NIV, NRSV) it may be understood to refer to a relatively minor disagreement.

¹ tn Grk “which.” All of 1 Tim 6:15 is a relative clause which refers back to “appearing” in v.14. The phrase “whose appearing” was supplied to clarify this connection.

¹ tn Though προσευχόμενοι (proseuchomenoi) is an adverbial participle related to the previous imperative, προσκαρτερεῖτε (proskartereite), it is here translated as an independent clause due to requirements of contemporary English style.

¹ tn Verse 5 is a relative clause, subordinate to the thought of v. 4, but it is also parenthetical, interrupting the thought of vv. 4-6. This has been indicated by the parentheses in the translation.

² sn The idea of all in all is either related to the universe (hence, he fills the whole universe entirely) or the church universal (hence, Christ fills the church entirely with his presence and power).

¹ sn Cephas. This individual is generally identified with the Apostle Peter (L&N 93.211). Both the Aramaic name “Cephas” and the Greek name “Peter” are related to words in each language which mean “rock.”

¹ sn Cephas. This individual is generally identified with the Apostle Peter (L&N 93.211). Both the Aramaic name “Cephas” and the Greek name “Peter” are related to words in each language which mean “rock.”

² sn Cephas. This individual is generally identified with the Apostle Peter (L&N 93.211). Both the Aramaic name “Cephas” and the Greek name “Peter” are related to words in each language which mean “rock.”

² tn Grk “concerning which I keep boasting to the Macedonians about you.” A new sentence was started here and the translation was simplified by removing the relative clause and repeating the antecedent “this eagerness of yours.”