² sn This marriage of Herod to his brother Philip’s wife was a violation of OT law (Lev 18:16; 20:21). In addition, both Herod Antipas and Herodias had each left marriages to enter into this union.

⁴ sn See the note on synagogues in 4:23. Jesus undoubtedly took the opportunity on this occasion to speak about his person and mission, and the relation of both to OT fulfillment.

¹ sn The one who sent me refers to God. Reception of the messengers (and by implication, the message they bring) is equivalent to reception of both Jesus and God the Father himself.

³ sn The passive verbs revealed and made known suggest the revelation comes from God. The text is both a warning about bad things being revealed and an encouragement that good things will be made known.

² tn Or “your heavenly Father gives them food to eat.” L&N 23.6 has both “to provide food for” and “to give food to someone to eat.”

³ tn Or “will be preserved.” In the immediate context this probably refers to physical preservation through both the present oppression and the coming judgment (see Hab 3:16-19).

⁴ tn Traditionally, “counselor” (cf. KJV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). This refers to the king mentioned in the previous line; the title points to the king’s roles as chief strategist and policy maker, both of which required extraordinary wisdom.

² sn The suffixes on the nouns אֲחֵיכֶם (ʾakhekhem, “your brother”) and אֲחוֹתֵיכֶם (ʾakhotekhem, “your sister”) are both plural forms. The brother/sister imagery is being applied to Israel and Judah collectively.

² tn Heb “Chaldeans.” The term Chaldeans (Hebrew כַּשְׂדִּים, kasdim) is used in the book of Daniel both in an ethnic sense and, as here, to refer to a caste of Babylonian wise men and astrologers.

¹ tc The Kethib is וְנָשׁוּב (v^enashuv, “and we will return”), a simple vav + imperfect. The Qere is וְנָשׁוּבָה (v^enashuvah, “and let us return”), vav + cohortative. Both are from שׁוּב (shuv, “to return”).

³ tn Heb “my terrors” or “my enemies.” The expression מְגוּרַי (m^eguray, “my terrors”) is difficult and may refer to either enemies, the terror associated with facing enemies, or both.

³ tn The juxtaposition of גַם…גַם (gam…gam), often “both…and,” here indicates correspondence. See BDB 169 s.v. גַּם 4. Appropriately, Babylon will fall slain just as her victims, including God’s covenant people, did.

² tn The words “as he pleased” are not in the text but are implicit in the idiom, both in Hebrew and in English. They have been supplied in the translation for clarity and the sake of English idiom.

¹ tn The verbs here are both direct imperatives, but it sounds awkward in contemporary English to say, “You and Jeremiah, go and hide.” The same force is accomplished by phrasing the statement as strong advice.

¹ tn Heb “with the house of Israel.” All commentators agree that the term here refers to both the whole nation, which was divided into the house of Israel and the house of Judah in v. 30.

² tn According to E. W. Bullinger (Figures of Speech, 954), both this question and the one in v. 13 are examples of rhetorical questions of prohibition: “don’t let this city be made a pile of rubble.”

² tn Heb “aliens, orphans, or widows,” treating the terms as generic or collective. However, the term “alien” carries faulty connotations, and the term “orphan” is not totally appropriate because the Hebrew term does not necessarily mean that both parents have died.

¹ tn The word “starvation” has been translated “famine” elsewhere in this passage. It is the word that refers to hunger. The “starvation” here may be war induced and not simply that which comes from famine per se. “Starvation” will cover both.

² tn In a sense this phrase, which is literally “according to thus” or simply “thus,” points both backward and forward: backward to the acted-out parable and forward to the explanation which follows.

⁴ tn Heb “do not know.” But here as elsewhere the word “know” is more than an intellectual matter. It is intended here to summarize both “know” and “follow” (Heb “observe”) in the preceding lines.