² tn Grk “the promise of my Father,” with τοῦ πατρός (tou patros) translated as a subjective genitive. This is a reference to the Holy Spirit and looks back to how one could see Messiah had come with the promise of old (Luke 3:15-18). The promise is rooted in Jer 31:31 and Ezek 36:26.

³ tn Grk “in order that he might know” (a continuation of the preceding sentence). Due to the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation by supplying the pronoun “he” as subject and the verb “wanted” to convey the idea of purpose.

⁹ tn Grk “for (to do) thus was well pleasing before you,” BDAG 325 s.v. ἔμπροσθεν 1.b.δ states: “as a reverential way of expressing oneself, when one is speaking of an eminent pers., and esp. of God, not to connect the subject directly w. what happens, but to say that it took place ‘before someone.’”

² tn There is some discussion about the grammar of this verse in Greek. If “these” is the subject, then it reads, “These are my mother and brothers, those who.” If “these” is a nominative absolute, which is slightly more likely, then the verse more literally reads, “So my mother and brothers, they are those who.” The sense in either case is the same.

² sn Neither were the detractors happy with Jesus (the Son of Man), even though he represented the opposite of John’s asceticism and associated freely with people like tax collectors and sinners in celebratory settings where the banquet imagery suggested the coming kingdom of God. Either way, God’s messengers were subject to complaint.

² sn There was a recognition that there was great power at work through Jesus, the subject of a great debate in 11:14-23. Luke highlights Jesus’ healing ministry (5:17; 6:18; 7:7; 8:47; 9:11, 42; 14:4; 17:15; 18:42-43; 22:51; Acts 10:38).

⁵ tn Grk “Man, your sins are forgiven you.” Luke stresses the forgiveness of sins (cf. 1:77; 3:3; 24:47). In 5:20 he uses both the perfect ἀφέωνται and the personal pronoun σοι which together combine to heighten the subjective aspect of the experience of forgiveness. The σοι has been omitted in translation in light of normal English style.

¹ tn Grk “everyone, as many as had those being sick.” The use of εἶχον (eichon, “had”) suggests that the subject of the accusative participle ἀσθενοῦντας (asthenountas, “those being sick”) is not simply acquaintances, but rather relatives, perhaps immediate family, and certainly close friends.

³ tn Grk “of age, being.” Due to the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the participle ὤν (ōn) has been translated as a finite verb with the pronoun “he” supplied as subject, and a new sentence begun in the translation at this point.

¹ tn Grk “for (to do) thus was well-pleasing before you,” BDAG 325 s.v. ἔμπροσθεν 1.b.δ states: “as a reverential way of expressing oneself, when one is speaking of an eminent pers., and esp. of God, not to connect the subject directly w. what happens, but to say that it took place ‘before someone.’”

³ sn Neither were the detractors happy with Jesus (the Son of Man), even though he represented the opposite of John’s asceticism and associated freely with people like tax collectors and sinners in celebratory settings where the banquet imagery suggested the coming kingdom of God. Either way, God’s messengers were subject to complaint.

¹ sn The phrase except for immorality (often referred to as the “exception clause”) has been the subject of much debate. One of the best and most comprehensive recent studies which pays particular attention to historical background material, especially Jewish material, is that of D. Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Context (Eerdmans, 2002).

¹ tn The verb זָמַם (zamam) usually means “to plot to do evil,” but with a divine subject (as here), and in light of v. 15 where it means to plan good, the meaning here has to be the implementation of discipline (cf. NCV, CEV “punish”). God may bring hurt but its purpose is redemptive and/or pedagogical.

¹ tc BHS suggests אֶתְכֶם (ʾetkhem, “you”) for the MT אֲבֹתֵיכֶם (ʾavotekhem, “your fathers”) to harmonize with v. 4. In v. 4 the ancestors would not turn but in v. 6 they appear to have done so. The subject in v. 6, however, is to be construed as Zechariah’s own listeners.

⁴ tn The referent of the pronominal subject (“they”) is unclear. It may refer (1) to the shepherds (in which case the first verb should be translated, “pasture their sheep,” cf. NEB), or (2) to the Judahites occupying the area, who are being compared to sheep (cf. NIV, “there they will find pasture”).

⁴ tc The BHS editors propose redividing the singular MT reading וְנוֹדַד (v^enodad, “and it flees”) to the plural וְנוֹדְדוּ (v^enod^edu, “and they flee”) due to the difficulty of a singular verb. However, the LXX supports the singular MT reading. The subject is גוֹב (gov, “swarm”), not individual locusts.

⁵ tc The LXX reflects the plural יוֹסִיפוּ (yosifu, “they shall [never]”). The MT reads the singular יוֹסִיף (yosif, “he shall [never]”) which is also found in the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah). The subject of the verb is the singular noun בְּלִיַּעַל (b^eliyya’al, “the wicked one”) which is also misunderstood by the LXX (see below).

¹ tn Heb “they cried out, each one.” The shift from the plural verb וַיִּזְעֲקוּ (vayyizʿaqu, “they cried out to”) to the singular subject אִישׁ (ʾish, “each one”) is a rhetorical device used to emphasize that each one of the sailors individually cried out. In contrast, Jonah slept.

⁷ sn A treaty of brotherhood. In the ancient Near-Eastern world familial terms were sometimes used to describe treaty partners. In a treaty between superior and inferior parties, the lord would be called “father” and the subject “son.” The partners in a treaty between equals referred to themselves as “brothers.” For biblical examples, see 1 Kgs 9:13 and 20:32-33.

² sn The word order is rhetorical: the construct clause בְנֵי זְנוּנִים (v^ene z^enunim, “sons of adulteries”), which functions as the predicate nominative, is moved forward, before the independent personal pronoun הֵמָּה (hemmah, “they”), which functions as the subject, to focus on the immoral character of her children.