Discovery Box| (0.20) | (Hab 3:5) | 2 sn There are mythological echoes here, for in Canaanite literature the god Resheph aids Baal in his battles. See J. Day, “New Light on the Mythological Background of the Allusion to Resheph in Habakkuk III 5, ” VT 29 (1979): 353-55. |
| (0.20) | (Hab 2:18) | 3 tn Heb “or a metal image, a teacher of lies.” The words “What good is” in the translation are supplied from the previous parallel line. “Teacher of lies” refers to the false oracles that the so-called god would deliver through a priest. See J. J. M. Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah (OTL), 126. |
| (0.20) | (Mic 4:13) | 4 sn In vv. 11-13 the prophet jumps from the present crisis (which will result in exile, v. 10) to a time beyond the restoration of the exiles when God will protect his city from invaders. The Lord’s victory over the Assyrian armies in 701 b.c. foreshadowed this. |
| (0.20) | (Mic 1:5) | 6 sn In vv. 2-5 Micah narrows the scope of God’s judgment from the nations (vv. 2-4) to his covenant people (v. 5). Universal judgment is coming, but ironically Israel is the focal point of God’s anger. In v. 5c the prophet includes Judah within the scope of divine judgment, for Judah has followed in the pagan steps of the northern kingdom. He accomplishes this with rhetorical skill. In v. 5b he develops the first assertion of v. 5a (“All of this is because of Jacob’s rebellion”). One expects in v. 5c an elaboration of the second assertion in v. 5a (“and the sins of the nation of Israel”), which one assumes, in light of v. 5b, pertains to the northern kingdom. But the prophet makes it clear that “the nation of Israel” includes Judah. Verses 6-7 further develop v. 5b (judgment on the northern kingdom), while vv. 8-16 expand on v. 5c (judgment on Judah). |
| (0.20) | (Mic 1:2) | 4 tn Heb “the Lord from his majestic palace.” The verb is supplied from the previous line by the convention of ellipsis and double duty. Cf. CEV “the Lord God accuses you from his holy temple,” TEV “He speaks from his holy temple.” |
| (0.20) | (Jon 3:2) | 3 tn The verb קָרָא (qaraʾ, “proclaim”) is repeated from 1:2 but with a significant variation. The phrase in 1:2 was the adversative קְרָא עָל (qeraʾ ʿal, “proclaim against”), which often designates an announcement of threatened judgment (1 Kgs 13:4, 32; Jer 49:29; Lam 1:15). However, here the phrase is the more positive קְרָא אֶל (qeraʾ ʿel, “proclaim to”), which often indicates an oracle of deliverance or a call to repentance with an accompanying offer of deliverance either stated or implied (Deut 20:10; Isa 40:2; Zech 1:4; HALOT 1129 s.v. קרא 8; BDB 895 s.v. קָרָא 3.a). This shift from the adversative preposition עַל (“against”) to the more positive preposition אֶל (“to”) might signal a shift in God’s intentions, or perhaps it simply makes his original intention more clear. While God threatened to judge Nineveh, he was very willing to relent and forgive when the people repented from their sins (3:8-10). Jonah later complains that he knew all along that God was likely to relent from the threatened judgment (4:2). |
| (0.20) | (Jon 1:6) | 4 tn Or “give thought to us.” The verb is found only here in the OT. Related nouns are in Job 12:5 and Ps 146:4. The captain hopes for some favorable attention from a god who might act on behalf of his endangered crewmen. |
| (0.20) | (Oba 1:15) | 1 sn The term יוֹם (yom, “day”) is repeated ten times in vv. 11-14, referring to the time period when Judah/Jerusalem suffered calamity that Edom exploited for its own sinful gain. In each of those cases יוֹם was qualified by a following genitive to describe Judah’s plight, e.g., “in the day of your brother’s calamity” (v. 12). Here it appears again but now followed by the divine name to describe the time of God’s judgment against Edom for its crimes against humanity: “the day of the Lord.” In the present translation, the expression בְּיוֹם (beyom; literally, “In the day of”) appears as “When…” in vv. 11-14. However, here it is translated more literally because the expression “the day of the Lord” is a well-known technical expression for a time of divine intervention in judgment. While this expression sometimes refers to the final eschatological day of God’s judgment, it may also refer occasionally to historical acts of judgment. |
| (0.20) | (Amo 9:6) | 1 tc The MT reads “his steps.” If this is correct, then the reference may be to the steps leading up to the heavenly temple or the throne of God (cf. 1 Kgs 10:19-20). The prefixed מ (mem) may be dittographic (note the preceding word ends in mem). The translation assumes an emendation to עֲלִיָּתוֹ (ʿaliyyato, “his upper rooms”). |
| (0.20) | (Amo 5:26) | 4 tn The Hebrew term כִּיּוּן (kiyyun) apparently refers to the Mesopotamian god Kayamanu, or Saturn. The name, like “Sikkuth” in the previous line, is vocalized in the Hebrew text after the pattern of שִׁקּוּץ (shiqquts, “detestable thing”). See S. M. Paul, Amos (Hermeneia), 195-96. Some versions translate as “pedestal” (NEB, NIV), relating the term to the root כּוּן (kun). |
| (0.20) | (Amo 4:4) | 2 tn The Hebrew word translated “rebel” (also in the following line) could very well refer here to Israel’s violations of their covenant with God (see also the term “crimes” in 1:3 [with note] and the phrase “covenant transgressions” in 2:4 [with note] and 3:14). |
| (0.20) | (Joe 2:28) | 4 tn Heb “all flesh.” As a term for humanity, “flesh” suggests the weakness and fragility of human beings as opposed to God, who is “spirit.” The word “all” refers not to all human beings without exception (cf. NAB, NASB “all mankind,” NLT “all people”), but to all classes of human beings without distinction (cf. NCV). |
| (0.20) | (Joe 1:16) | 2 tn Heb “joy and gladness from the house of our God?” Verse 16b is a continuation of the rhetorical question begun in v. 16a but has been translated as an affirmative statement to make the meaning clear. The words “There is no longer any” are not in the Hebrew text but have been supplied in the translation for clarity. |
| (0.20) | (Hos 11:5) | 3 tn Heb “return” (so KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV). The root שׁוּב (shuv, “to turn, return”) appears at the beginning and ending of this verse, creating an inclusio. This repetition produces an ironic wordplay: because Israel refuses to “return” to God or “turn” from its sin, it will “return” to Egypt. The punishment fits the crime. |
| (0.20) | (Hos 9:8) | 1 tc The Leningrad Codex (the MT ms used for BHS) and Aleppo Codex both place the atnakh (colon divider) after אלהי (“my God”) and connect נָבִיא (naviʾ, “prophet”) with the following colon. On the other hand, BHS suggests that נָבִיא belongs with the first colon. For discussion of this syntactical problem, see F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman, Hosea (AB), 533-34. |
| (0.20) | (Dan 9:18) | 3 tn Heb “over which your name is called.” Cf. v. 19. This expression implies that God is the owner of his city, Jerusalem. Note the use of the idiom in 2 Sam 12:28; Isa 4:1; Amos 9:12. |
| (0.20) | (Dan 8:12) | 2 tn Heb “in (the course of) rebellion.” The meaning of the phrase is difficult to determine. It could mean “due to rebellion,” referring to the failures of the Jews, but this is not likely since it is not a point made elsewhere in the book. The phrase more probably refers to the rebellion against God and the atrocities against the Jews epitomized by Antiochus. |
| (0.20) | (Dan 3:17) | 2 tn The Aramaic expression used here is very difficult to interpret. The question concerns the meaning and syntax of אִיתַי (ʾitay, “is” or “exist”). There are several possibilities. (1) Some interpreters take this word closely with the participle later in the verse יָכִל (yakhil, “able”), understanding the two words to form a periphrastic construction (“if our God is…able”; cf. H. Bauer and P. Leander, Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramäischen, 365, §111b). But the separation of the two elements from one another is not an argument in favor of this understanding. (2) Other interpreters take the first part of v. 17 to mean “If it is so, then our God will deliver us” (cf. KJV, ASV, RSV, NASB). However, the normal sense of ʾitay is existence; on this point see F. Rosenthal, Grammar, 41, §95. The present translation maintains the sense of existence for the verb (“If our God…exists”), even though the statement is admittedly difficult to understand in this light. The statement may be an implicit reference back to Nebuchadnezzar’s comment in v. 15, which denies the existence of a god capable of delivering from the king’s power, thus their statement is rhetorically adapted to the perspective of the person they are addressing. |
| (0.20) | (Dan 2:36) | 1 tn Various suggestions have been made concerning the plural “we.” It could be an editorial plural translatable as “I.” However, Daniel has portrayed himself as an agent of God, who revealed the matter (vv. 28, 30), so we can express that reality. |
| (0.20) | (Eze 37:23) | 1 tc Heb “their dwellings.” The text as it stands does not make sense. Based on the LXX, a slight emendation of two vowels, including a mater lectionis, yields the reading “from their turning,” a reference here to their turning from God and deviating from his commandments. See BDB 1000 s.v. מְשׁוּבָה, and D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:407. |
