¹ tc This is the same verb as in Ps 37:4. G. R. Driver suggests the word comes from another root that means “abandon oneself to, depend on” (“Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 84).

² sn Job here clearly states that his problems have come from the Almighty, which is what Eliphaz said. But whereas Eliphaz said Job provoked the trouble by his sin, Job is perplexed because he does not think he did.

¹ tn Or “of Miniamin,…; of Moadiah, Piltai,” where the name of the leader of the family of Miniamin has dropped out of the text due to a problem in transmission.

¹ tn The name “Bani” appears in both v. 29 and v. 34. One of these names has probably undergone alteration in the transmission process, but it is not clear exactly where the problem lies or how it should be corrected.

² tc The consonantal text (Kethib) suggests, “and they went, striking down,” but the marginal reading (Qere) is “they struck down, striking down.” For a discussion of the textual problem, see M. Cogan and H. Tadmor, II Kings (AB), 46.

³ tn The words “it is” have been supplied. See the notes on Lev 1:9 and 2:3. There is no text critical problem here, but the syntax suggests the same translation.

² sn On the cultural background of the story of Sarai’s childlessness see J. Van Seters, “The Problem of Childlessness in Near Eastern Law and the Patriarchs of Israel,” JBL 87 (1968): 401-8.

³ sn In ancient Near Eastern love literature it was common to use wild animals to symbolize potential problems which could separate lovers and destroy their love. For instance, in Egyptian love songs it is the crocodile, rather than the foxes, which were used as figures for obstacles which might threaten a couple’s love. Here the “foxes” are probably used figuratively to represent potentially destructive problems which could destroy their romantic relationship and which could hinder it from ripening into marriage.

¹ tn Punctuating vv. 6 and 7 is difficult. One must consider the difficult textual problem of v. 7 (see tc note on the word “children” in that verse) as well as the grammar of the verse. In the translation above, “little children” is understood to be a predicate nominative connected to the verb “became.” This allows a full stop to be placed at the end of v. 6 and before the phrase “like a nursing mother” in v. 7. This separates the two metaphors which impact the textual problem and allows for greater clarity in the way the sentence is read.

⁴ tn The words “that he could” are not in the Greek text, but are implied as the (understood) subject of the infinitive εὑρεῖν (heurein). This understands David’s request as asking that he might find the dwelling place. The other possibility would be to supply “that God” as the subject of the infinitive: “and asked that God find a dwelling place.” Unfortunately this problem is complicated by the extremely difficult problem with the Greek text in the following phrase (“house of Jacob” vs. “God of Jacob”).

¹ sn The relationship of the phrase keep on walking to if we say is very important for understanding the problem expressed in 1:6. If one should say (εἴπωμεν, eipōmen) that he has fellowship with God, and yet continues walking (περιπατῶμεν, peripatōmen) in the darkness, then it follows (in the apodosis, the “then” clause) that he is lying and not practicing the truth.

² sn Taken as predicate adjectives, the terms alive, holy, and pleasing are showing how unusual is the sacrifice that believers can now offer, for OT sacrifices were dead. As has often been quipped about this text, “The problem with living sacrifices is that they keep crawling off the altar.”

⁵ sn The nature of Alexander’s defense is not clear. It appears he was going to explain, as a Jew, that the problem was not caused by Jews, but by those of “the Way.” However, he never got a chance to speak.

¹ sn The point is a dilemma. In a world arguing a person should have one spouse, whose wife will she be in the afterlife? The question was designed to show that (in the opinion of the Sadducees) resurrection leads to a major problem.

¹ tc ‡ A difficult textual problem is found here, involving three different variants: καὶ λέγουσιν (kai legousin) is found in א; οἱ δὲ εἶπον (hoi de eipon) is the reading of P⁴⁵ A D W Θ ƒ^1,13 33 M it; and καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ (kai legousin autō) is supported by B C L (Δ 579 892). The first two variants would not be translated differently; the third reading, however, would add “to him” after “they replied.” What complicates the issue is that the external evidence is fairly evenly split between the second and third readings, though the first reading is in agreement with the second reading in lacking the dative pronoun. Indeed, another layout of the problem here could treat this as two distinct problems: καὶ λέγουσιν vs. οἱ δὲ εἶπον and αὐτῷ vs. omission of the word. In this second arrangement of the problem, the reading without the pronoun has slightly stronger support (P⁴⁵ א A D W Θ ƒ^1,13 33 M it). Internally, Mark never elsewhere uses the form εἶπον for the third person plural indicative form of this verb (it is always εἶπαν [eipan]). And although only one other time in Mark is the object lacking after λέγουσιν (6:38), it is a similar context (viz., the disciples’ response before Jesus feeds the 5000). Very tentatively, the reading that is followed here is καὶ λέγουσιν. NA²⁸ puts αὐτῷ in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

¹ tc Heb “I will strengthen them in the Lord.” Because of the perceived problem of the Lord saying he will strengthen the people “in the Lord,” both BHK and BHS suggest emending גִּבַּרְתִּים (gibbartim, “I will strengthen them”) to גְּבֻרָתָם (gevuratam, “their strength”). This is unnecessary, however, for the Lord frequently refers to himself in that manner (see Zech 2:11).

¹ tc For the MT reading אֲמֻצִּים (ʾamutsim, “strong”) Aquila and Syriac presuppose אֲדֻמִּים (ʾadummim, “red”), thus giving the red horse an assignment and eliminating the problem of a fifth, “spotted” horse. The fourth would be a mottled red horse according to this view. There is, however, no manuscript support for this interpretation.

³ tc A scribal emendation (tiqqun sopherim) has apparently altered an original “my eye” to “his eye” in order to allow the prophet to be the speaker throughout vv. 8-9. This alleviates the problem of the Lord saying, in effect, that he has sent himself on the mission to the nations.

¹ sn The plural years suggests that the plague to which Joel refers was not limited to a single season. Apparently the locusts were a major problem over several successive years. One season of drought and locust invasion would have been bad enough. Several such years would have been devastating.

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.