⁴ tc The MT vocalizes the consonantal text as נָשָׂא (nasaʾ, “he exalted”; Qal perfect third person masculine singular), which is syntactically awkward. The LXX and Syriac reflect a vocalization tradition of נִשָּׂא (nisaʾ, “he was exalted”; Niphal perfect third person masculine singular). The BHS editors suggest that this revocalization should be adopted, and it has been followed by NAB, NIV, and NRSV.

⁴ sn Although the word times is vocalized in the MT as a plural, it probably should be regarded as a dual. The Masoretes may have been influenced here by the fact that in late Aramaic (and Syriac) the dual forms fall out of use. The meaning would thus be three and a half “times.”

³ tn Heb “Why should he see your faces thin from the young men who are according to your age?” The term translated “thin” occurs only here and in Gen 40:6, where it appears to refer to a dejected facial expression. The word is related to an Arabic root meaning “be weak.” See HALOT 277 s.v. II זעף.

² tn The exact identification of each gemstone is uncertain. The list should be compared to that of the priest in Exod 28:17-20, which lists twelve stones in rows of three. The LXX apparently imports the Exod 28 list. See reference to the types of stones in L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:91.

¹ sn The people of Judah should not place false hope in their king, symbolized by his royal scepter, for God’s judgment (symbolized by fire and then a sword) would destroy every tree (see 20:47), symbolizing the righteous and wicked (see 21:3-4).

¹ tn Most modern translations take the statement as a comparison (“how is vine wood better than any forest wood?”) based on the preposition מִן (min). But a comparison should have a word as an adjective or stative verb designating a quality, i.e., a word for “good/better” is lacking. The preposition is translated above in its partitive sense.

¹ tc Heb “each had two wings covering and each had two wings covering,” a case of dittography. On the analogy of v. 11 and the support of the LXX, which reads the same for v. 11 and this verse, one should perhaps read “each had two wings touching another being and each had two wings covering.”

⁶ tc The BHS editors and many commentators suggest that the fourth bicolon in 2:19 is a late addition and should be deleted. Apart from the four sets of bicola in 1:7 and 2:19, every stanza in chapters 1-4 consists of three sets of bicola.

⁴ tn The infinitive absolute emphasizes the following finite verb. Another option is to translate, “he certainly pays one back.” The translation assumes that the imperfect verbal form here describes the Lord’s characteristic actions. Another option is to take it as referring specifically to his judgment on Babylon, in which case one should translate, “he will pay (Babylon) back in full.”

¹ tc The translation here assumes that the Hebrew בֹּאוּ (boʾu; a Qal imperative masculine plural) should be read בָּאוּ (baʾu; a Qal perfect third plural). This reading is presupposed by the Greek version of Aquila, the Latin version, and the Targum (see BHS note a, which mistakenly assumes that the form must be imperfect).

¹ tn Heb “his.” This should not be viewed as a textual error but as a distributive singular use of the suffix, i.e., the wives of each of the kings of Judah (cf. GKC 464 §145.l and the usage in Isa 2:8 and Hos 4:8).

³ sn The priest Zephaniah son of Maaseiah, a member of the earlier delegation (21:2), was the chief of security in the temple to whom the Babylonian false prophet wrote a letter complaining that Jeremiah should be locked up for his treasonous prophecies (29:25-26). See the study notes on 21:2 and 29:25 for further details.

¹ tn The Hebrew text has a compound object, the two terms of which have been synonyms in vv. 14, 15. G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 189) make the interesting observation that these two terms (Heb “brother” and “neighbor”) emphasize the relationships that should have taken precedence over their being viewed as mere slaves.

² tn The verb here should be identified as a Niphal perfect of the verb אָנַח (ʾanakh) with the א (aleph) left out (so BDB 336 s.v. חָנַן Niph and GKC 80 §23.f, n. 1). The form is already translated that way by the Greek, Latin, and Syriac versions.

¹ tn Heb “to make known your name to your adversaries.” Perhaps the infinitive construct with preposition לְ (lamed) should be construed with “come down” in v. 1a, or subordinated to the following line: “To make known your name to your adversaries, let the nations shake from before you.”

¹ tc The Hebrew text has literally, “one who creates fruit of lips.” Perhaps the pronoun אֲנִי (ʾani) should be inserted after the participle; it may have been accidentally omitted by haplography: נוּב שְׂפָתָיִם [אֲנִי] בּוֹרֵי (boreʾ [ʾani] nuv s^efatayim). “Fruit of the lips” is often understood as a metonymy for praise; perhaps it refers more generally to joyful shouts (see v. 18).

¹ tc The Hebrew text reads literally, “For [or “indeed”] the waters of Noah [is] this to me.” כִּי־מֵי (ki-me, “for the waters of”) should be emended to כִּימֵי (kime, “like the days of”), which is supported by the Qumran scroll 1QIsa^a and all the ancient versions except LXX.

² tn Heb “Who are you that you are afraid of man who dies, and of the son of man who [as] grass is given up?” The feminine singular forms should probably be emended to the masculine singular (see v. 13). They have probably been influenced by the construction אַתְּ־הִיא (ʾat-hiʾ) in vv. 9-10.

² tn The Hebrew text as vocalized reads literally “will not gaze,” but this is contradictory to the context. The verb form should be revocalized as תְּשֹׁעֶינָה (t^eshoʿenah) from שָׁעַע (shʿaʿa, “be blinded”); see Isa 6:10; 29:9.

¹ tc The Hebrew text has a third person verb form, which does not agree with the first person suffix that precedes. The form should be emended to יֹסֵד (yosed), a Qal active participle used in a present progressive or imminent future sense.