¹ tn The verb is a third person imperative, but the common translation “let each of you be baptized” obscures the imperative force in English, since it sounds more like a permissive (“each of you may be baptized”) to the average English reader.

⁶ tn Grk “asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and they might be taken down.” Here because of the numerous ambiguous third person references it is necessary to clarify that it was the crucified men whose legs were to be broken and whose corpses were to be removed from the crosses.

¹ tn As a third person imperative in Greek, ἀκολουθείτω (akoloutheitō) is usually translated “let him follow me.” This could be understood by the modern English reader as merely permissive, however (“he may follow me if he wishes”). In this context there is no permissive sense, but rather a command, so the translation “he must follow me” is preferred.

² sn This is best taken as a parenthetical note by the author. Although some would attribute these words to Jesus himself, the switch from first person in Jesus’ preceding and following remarks to third person in v. 46 suggests that the author has added a clarifying comment here.

¹ tn Grk “saying that,” but this would be redundant in English. Although the translation represents this sentence as indirect discourse, the Greek could equally be taken as direct discourse: “Remember how he told you, while he was still in Galilee: ‘the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and on the third day rise again.’”

³ tn The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 8:8).

⁴ sn The third day is a figurative reference to being further on in time, not a reference to three days from now. Jesus is not even in Jerusalem yet, and the events of the last days in Jerusalem take a good week.

⁵ tn The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 14:35).

¹ tn Grk “And if.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style. This is a first class condition, but the next two conditional clauses are third class conditions, so that stylistic variation is probably at work.

¹ tn The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 13:9, 43; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 8:8; 14:35).

¹ sn The order of the second and third temptations are reversed in Luke’s account (4:5-12) from the order given in Matthew. Scholars differ on which account represents the original order of the temptations, but it seems likely that whichever is original, the other was changed by the author of that gospel for literary reasons.

¹ tc The MT first person pronoun (“I”), which seems to shift the subject too abruptly, becomes third person masculine singular (“he”) in the LXX (הִכְרִית, hikhrit, presupposed for הִכְרַתִּי, hikhratti). However, the Lord is the subject of v. 8, which speaks of his protection of Jerusalem, so it is not surprising that he is the subject in v. 10 as well.

³ tn Heb “Damascus its resting place.” The third person masculine singular suffix on “resting place” (מְנֻחָתוֹ, m^enukhato), however, precludes “land” or even “Hadrach,” both of which are feminine, from being the antecedent. Most likely “word” (masculine) is the antecedent, i.e., the “word of the Lord” is finding its resting place, that is, its focus in or on Damascus.

¹ tn Heb “he.” Since the third person pronoun refers to the Lord, it has been translated as a first person pronoun (“I”) to accommodate English style, which typically does not exhibit switches between persons of pronouns in the same immediate context as Hebrew does.

¹ tn Heb “under the vine and under the fig tree,” with the Hebrew article used twice as a possessive pronoun (cf. NASB “his”). Some English translations render this as second person rather than third (NRSV “your vine”; cf. also NAB, NCV, TEV).

³ tn The occurrence of the infinitive absolute here for an expected imperfect first person common singular (or even imperative second person masculine plural or preterite third person masculine plural) is well-attested elsewhere. Most English translations render this as first person singular (“and I will clothe”), but cf. NAB “Take off…and clothe him.”

¹ sn My Spirit. It is theologically anachronistic to understand “Spirit” here in the NT sense as a reference to third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit; nevertheless during this postexilic period the conceptual groundwork was being laid for the doctrine of the Holy Spirit later revealed in the NT.

⁵ tn It is not certain where the Lord’s words end and the prophet’s words begin. It is possible that Zephaniah begins speaking in the middle of v. 17 or at the beginning of v. 18 (note the third person pronouns referring to the Lord).

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.

⁴ tn Heb “she.” This has been translated as a relative pronoun for stylistic reasons. The shift from second person feminine singular (“you”) to third person feminine singular (“she”) is an example of heterosis of persons, a common literary/poetic device used in Hebrew poetry and prophetic literature.