² tn Heb “and I will do that which in my statutes you will walk.” The awkward syntax (verb “to do, act” + accusative sign + relative clause + prepositional phrase + second person verb) is unique, though Eccl 3:14 contains a similar construction. In the last line of that verse we read that “God acts so that (relative pronoun) they fear before him.” However, unlike Ezek 36:27, the statement has no accusative sign before the relative pronoun.

¹ tn Heb “Nazirites” (so KJV). The Nazirites were consecrated under a vow to refrain from wine, contact with the dead, and cutting their hair. In Gen 49:26 and Deut 33:16, Joseph, who was not a Nazirite, is called the “Nazir” of his brothers. From context, many translate this as “prince” (e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT), though the nuance is uncertain. If it is valid, then princes might be understood in this context as well.

² tc The LXX and Vulgate (dependent on the LXX) include a preface that is lacking in the MT: “And it came to pass after Israel had been taken captive and Jerusalem had been laid waste, Jeremiah sat weeping and lamented this lament over Jerusalem, and said….” Scholars generally view the preface in the LXX and Vulgate as a later addition, though the style is Hebrew rather than Greek.

¹ tn Heb “The word came to Jeremiah concerning.” Though the phrase “from the Lord” is missing from this formula, which occurs elsewhere at 7:1; 11:1; 18:1; 21:1; 30:1; 32:1; 34:1, 8; 35:1; 40:1, it is clearly implied from the words that follow. As in these other passages, the more active form has been chosen for the translation to better conform with contemporary English style.

¹ sn Even though Jeremiah was confined to the courtyard of the guardhouse, he was still free to entertain visitors (32:2, 8). Moreover, Ebed Melech was an official attached to the royal court and would have had access to the courtyard of the guardhouse (38:7, 13). Jeremiah would not have had to leave the courtyard of the guardhouse to “go and tell” him something.

¹ tn The verbal forms emphasize that each word came from his mouth. The first verb is an imperfect, which emphasizes repeated action in past time, and the second verb is a participle, which emphasizes ongoing action. However, it is a little awkward to try to express this nuance in contemporary English. Even though it is not reflected in the translation, it is noted here for future reference.

¹ tn It would be difficult to render accurately the Hebrew particle כִּי (ki) that introduces this verse without lengthening the English line unduly. It probably means something like “This is true, even though I…,” i.e., the particle is concessive (cf. BDB s.v. כִּי 2.c). No other nuance seems appropriate. The particle is left out of the translation, but its presence is acknowledged here.

¹ sn Heb “Do not blot out their sins from before you.” For this anthropomorphic figure that looks at God’s actions as though connected with record books, i.e., a book of wrongdoings to be punished and a book of life for those who are to live, see, e.g., Exod 32:32, 33, Pss 51:1 (51:3 HT); and 69:28 (69:29 HT).

¹ tn The form for “queen” (מְלֶכֶת [m^elekhet]), occurring 5 times in Scripture and all in Jeremiah, is not the expected construct form (מַלְכַּת [malkat]). It is as though the Masoretes wanted to read with “heaven” the word for “work” (מְלֶאכֶת [m^eleʾkhet]), i.e., the “hosts of,” a word that several Hebrew mss read and an understanding the LXX reflects. The other ancient and modern versions generally, however, accept it as a biform for the word “queen.”

³ tn Heb “Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, and your sacrifices are not pleasing to me.” The shift from “their” to “your” is an example of the figure of speech (apostrophe) where the speaker turns from talking about someone to addressing him/her directly. Though common in Hebrew style, it is not common in English. The shift to the third person in the translation is an accommodation to English style.

³ tn The precise meaning of לִילִית (lilit) is unclear, though in this context the word certainly refers to some type of wild animal or bird. The word appears to be related to לַיְלָה (laylah, “night”). Some interpret it as the name of a female night demon, on the basis of an apparent Akkadian cognate used as the name of a demon. Later Jewish legends also identified Lilith as a demon. Cf. NRSV “Lilith.”

² tn Heb “and this [is] all the fruit of removing his sin.” The meaning of the statement is not entirely clear, though “removing his sin” certainly parallels “Jacob’s sin will be removed” in the preceding line. If original, “all the fruit” may refer to the result of the decision to remove sin, but the phrase may be a textual variation of an original לְכַפֵּר (l^ekhapper, “to atone for”), which in turn might be a gloss on הָסִר (hasir, “removing”).

¹ tc The pronominal suffix is masculine, even though its antecedent appears to be the grammatically feminine noun “world.” Some have suggested that the form עָרָיו (ʿarayv, plural noun with third masculine singular suffix) should be emended to עָרֶיהָ (ʿareha, plural noun with third feminine singular suffix). This emendation may be unnecessary in light of other examples of lack of agreement between a suffix and its antecedent noun.

³ tn Or perhaps, “land” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NLT). Even though the heading and subsequent context (see v. 17) indicate Babylon’s judgment is in view, the chapter has a cosmic flavor suggesting that the coming judgment is universal in scope. Perhaps Babylon’s downfall occurs in conjunction with a wider judgment, or the cosmic style is poetic hyperbole used to emphasize the magnitude and importance of the coming event.

³ tn Or “land” (NAB, NCV, CEV). It is uncertain if the passage is picturing universal dominion or focusing on the king’s rule over his covenant people. The reference to God’s “holy mountain” in v. 9 and the description of renewed Israelite conquests in v. 14 suggest the latter, though v. 10 seems to refer to a universal kingdom (see 2:2-4).

⁴ tn Heb “for no one sees sleep with their eyes either day or night.” The construction גַםכִּי (ki gam) expresses a concessive sense: “even though” (e.g., Ps 23:4; Prov 22:6; Eccl 4:14; Isa 1:15; Lam 3:8; Hos 8:10; 9:16); cf. HALOT 196 s.v. גַּם 9; BDB 169 s.v. גַּם 6; 473 s.v. כִּי 2.c.

³ tn The imperfect verb יִכְבֶּה (yikbeh) is used in its past habitual sense. The verbs describing the woman from verses 12-29 include 19 perfects and 9 preterites which describe actions with past time references. Thus the four imperfect verbs that describe her (vv. 14, 18, 21, 27) should be understood as modal and operating in a past time frame. Technically this verb does not describe her directly, though it refers to her lamp.

¹ tn Heb “an evil eye.” This is the opposite of the “good eye” which meant the generous man. The “evil eye” refers to a person who is out to get everything for himself (cf. NASB, NCV, CEV “selfish”). He is ill-mannered and inhospitable (e.g., Prov 28:22). He is up to no good—even though he may appear to be a host.

¹ tn Heb “of the Lord.” The victory being “of the Lord” means that it is accomplished by him. Ultimate success comes from the Lord and not from human efforts. The faithful have acknowledged this down through the ages, even though they have been responsible and have prepared for the wars. Without this belief there would have been no prayer on the eve of battle (e.g., Pss 20:7; 33:17).

⁵ sn The proverb is a continuous sentence teaching that there must be cross-examination to settle legal disputes. There are two sides in any disputes, and so even though the first to present his case sounds right, it must be challenged. The verb הָקַר (haqar, translated “cross-examines”) is used for careful, diligent searching and investigating to know something (e.g., Ps 139:1).