¹ tn Heb “who does.” It is common for such doxologies to begin with participles; they follow the pattern of the psalms in this style. Because of the length of the sentence in Hebrew and the conventions of English style, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

² tn This word is אֱוִיל (ʾevil), the same word for the “senseless man” in the preceding verse. Eliphaz is citing an example of his principle just given—he saw such a fool for a brief while appearing to prosper (i.e., taking root).

⁴ sn Job employs here the mythological figure Leviathan, the monster of the deep or chaos. Job wishes that such a creation of chaos could be summoned by the mourners to swallow up that day. See E. Ullendorff, “Job 3:8, ” VT 11 (1961): 350-51.

² sn The detailed introduction to the speech with “he opened his mouth” draws the readers attention to what was going to be said. As the introduction to the poetic speech that follows (3:3-26), vv. 1-2 continue the prose style of chapters 1-2. Each of the subsequent speeches is introduced by such a prose heading.

² sn Both wind and lightning (v. 16) were employed by Satan as his tools. God can permit him such control over factors of the weather when it suits the divine purpose, but God retains ultimate control (see 28:23-27; Prov 30:4; Luke 8:24-25).

⁴ tn Since v. 7 seems to interrupt the flow of the narrative, many scholars have suggested that it is a late addition to the text. But there is not enough evidence to warrant such a conclusion. Even though its placement is somewhat awkward, the verse supplies to the reader an important piece of chronological information.

² sn Management of the provinces that were distantly removed from the capital was difficult, and insurrection in such places was a perennial problem. The language used in this report about Jerusalem (i.e., “rebellious,” “odious”) is intentionally inflammatory. It is calculated to draw immediate attention to the perceived problem.

³ sn According to Lev 25:4, the land was to remain uncultivated every seventh year. Lev 26:33-35 warns that the land would experience a succession of such sabbatical rests if the people disobeyed God, for he would send them away into exile.

¹ sn The thorn bush in the allegory is Judah. Amaziah’s success had deceived him into thinking he was on the same level as the major powers in the area (symbolized by the cedar). In reality he was not capable of withstanding an attack by a real military power such as Israel (symbolized by the wild animal).

³ tn Heb “inquire for the Lord’s message.” Jehoshaphat is requesting a prophetic oracle revealing the Lord’s will in the matter and their prospects for success. For examples of such oracles, see 2 Sam 5:19, 23-24.

² sn No such Mesopotamian god is presently known. Perhaps the name Nisroch is a textual variation of Nusku, the Mesopotamian god of light and fire. Other proposals have tried to relate the name to Ashur, the chief god of the Assyria, or to Ninurta, the Assyrian god of war.

² sn Judah is the thorn in the allegory. Amaziah’s success has deceived him into thinking he is on the same level as the major powers in the area (symbolized by the cedar). In reality he is not capable of withstanding an attack by a real military power such as Israel (symbolized by the wild animal).

¹ tn Heb “the gate of Sur” (followed by many English versions) but no such gate is mentioned elsewhere in the OT. The parallel account in 2 Chr 23:5 has “Foundation Gate.” סוּר (sur), “Sur,” may need to be emended to יְסוֹד (y^esod) “foundation,” involving in part dalet-resh confusion.

¹ tn The Hebrew word used here, גִלּוּלִים (gillulim) is always used as a disdainful reference to idols. It is generally thought to have originally referred to “dung pellets” (cf. KBL 183 s.v. גִלּוּלִים). It is only one of several terms used in this way, such as אֱלִילִים (ʾelilim, “worthless things”) and הֲבָלִים (havalim, “vanities” or “empty winds”).

¹ tn The word used here, גִלּוּלִים [gillulim], is always used as a disdainful reference to idols. It is generally thought to have originally referred to “dung pellets” (cf. KBL 183 s.v. גִלּוּלִים). It is only one of several terms used in this way, such as “worthless things” (אֱלִילִים, ʾelilim), “vanities” or “empty winds” (הֲבָלִים, havalim).

³ sn This accusation against Abner is a very serious one, since an act of sexual infringement on the king’s harem would probably have been understood as a blatant declaration of aspirations to kingship. As such it was not merely a matter of ethical impropriety but an act of grave political significance as well.

¹ sn The name Ish Bosheth means in Hebrew “man of shame.” It presupposes an earlier form such as Ish Baal (“man of the Lord”), with the word “baal” being used of Israel’s God. But because the Canaanite storm god was named “Baal,” that part of the name was later replaced with the word “shame.”

¹ tn Heb “may he smell.” The implication is that Saul should seek to appease God, for such divine instigation to evil would be a sign of God’s disfavor. For a fuller discussion of this passage see R. B. Chisholm, Jr., “Does God Deceive?” BSac 155 (1998): 19-21.

¹ sn The name נָבָל (Nabal) means “foolish” or “senseless” in Hebrew, and as an adjective the word is used especially of persons who have no perception of ethical or religious claims. It is an apt name for this character, who certainly typifies such behavior.

² tn The Hebrew has two infinitive absolutes ‏הָלֹךְ וְגָעוֹ (halok v^egaʿo) walking and bellowing. In such a pairing, the infinitive ‏הָלֹךְ (halok) often indicates going on more and more (increasing) in the activity mentioned by the other infinitive. Cf. Gen 26:13; 1 Sam 14:19).