⁴ tn The tribe (מַטֶּה, matteh or שֵׁבֶט, shevet) is the main category. The family groups or clans (מִשְׁפְּחֹת, mishp^ekhot) and the households or families (בֵּית אֲבֹת, bet ʾavot) were sub-divisions of the tribe.

² tn Heb “Because of the many harlotries of the harlot.” The MT connects v. 4 with vv. 5-6; however, the LXX connects v. 4 with vv. 1-3. The Masoretic division is followed by NRSV and NJPS; the LXX division is followed by KJV and NIV; and the NASB division equivocates on the issue. It is best to connect v. 4 with vv. 5-6 (following the MT) because: (1) vv. 1-3 constitute a self-contained woe-oracle; and (2) the theme of the harlot unifies vv. 4-6: the accusation against the harlot (v. 4) and the stereotypical punishment of the harlot (vv. 5-6).

¹ sn The name הַמַּחְלְקוֹת סֶלַע (selaʿ hammakhleqot) probably means “Rock of Divisions” in Hebrew, in the sense that Saul and David parted company there (cf. NAB “Gorge of Divisions”; TEV “Separation Hill”). This etymology assumes that the word derives from the Hebrew root II חָלַק (khalaq, “to divide”; HALOT 322 s.v. II חלק). However, there is another root I חלק, which means “to be smooth or slippery” (HALOT 322 s.v. I חלק). If the word is taken from this root, the expression would mean “Slippery Rock.”

¹ sn This mission statement, “I have come to bring fire on the earth,” looks to the purging and division Jesus causes: See Luke 3:9, 17; 9:54; 17:29 for fire, 5:32; 7:34; 9:58; 12:51 for the topic of mission.

¹ sn The antecedent of the pronoun “I” is the angel, not Daniel. The traditional chapter division at this point, and the presence of a chronological note in the verse similar to ones used elsewhere in the book to position Daniel’s activities in relation to imperial affairs, sometimes lead to confusion on this matter.

² tc The Hebrew reads, “Your deck they made ivory, daughter of Assyria.” The syntactically difficult “ivory” is understood here as dittography and omitted, though some construe this to refer to ivory inlays. “Daughter of Assyria” is understood here as improper word division, and the vowels are repointed as “cypresses” and translated as “cypress wood.”

¹ tc The Hebrew text reads “in your blood,” but most emend to “in your vineyard,” assuming a ב/כ (beth/kaph) confusion. See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 1:284. Another attractive emendation assumes a faulty word division and yields the reading “like a vine full of tendrils, which/because…”; see D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 1:607, n. 68.

¹ sn In BHS the chapter division occurs in a different place from the English Bible: 64:1 ET (63:19b HT) and 64:2-12 (64:1-11 HT). Beginning with 65:1 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Hebrew Bible are again the same.

¹ sn In the Hebrew text (BHS) the chapter division comes one verse later than in the English Bible; 9:1 (8:23 HT). Thus 9:2-21 in the English Bible = 9:1-20 in the Hebrew text. Beginning with 10:1 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Hebrew Bible are again the same.

¹ sn The chapter division comes one verse earlier in the Hebrew text (BHS) than in the English Bible; 6:13 ET = 7:1 HT, 7:1 ET = 7:2 HT, through 7:13 ET = 7:14 HT. Beginning with 8:1 the verse numbers in the Hebrew Bible and the English Bible are again the same.

¹ sn The Hebrew term means “divided”; they go forward in orderly divisions, or ranks (C. H. Toy, Proverbs [ICC], 535). Joel 1:4 describes their order and uses it as a picture of a coming invasion (e.g., Joel 2:7, 8). Therefore the wisdom of the locust is in their order and cooperation.

² tc Heb “and its end, joy, is grief.” The suffix may be regarded as an Aramaism, a proleptic suffix referring to “joy.” Or it may be considered a case of wrong word division, moving the ה (he) to read אַחֲרִית הַשִּׂמְחָה (ʾakharit hassimkhah, “after the joy [may be] grief”) rather than אַחֲרִיתָהּ שִׂמְחָה (ʾakharitah simkhah, “after it, joy, grief”).

² tc The MT’s “he will not lift the face of all of compensation” is probably a case of wrong word division. If the two letters of the word כֹל (kol, “all”) are divided and joined to the previous and following words, the text reads לֹא יִשָּׂא פָנֶיךָ לְכֹפֶר (loʾ yissaʾ faneka l^ekofer) “he will not lift your face for [any] compensation.”

⁴ sn The final verse (v. 48) is a conclusion to this fourth “book” (or major editorial division) of the Psalter. Similar statements appear at or near the end of each of the first, second and third “books” of the Psalter (see Pss 41:13; 72:18-19; 89:52, respectively).

¹ sn The final verse of Ps 89, v. 52, is a conclusion to this third “book” (or major editorial division) of the Psalter. Similar statements appear at or near the end of each of the first, second and fourth “books” of the Psalter (see Pss 41:13; 72:18-19; 106:48, respectively).

¹ tn This would appear to refer to geographical boundaries, such as mountains, rivers, and seacoasts. However, since the day-night cycle has just been mentioned (v. 16) and the next line speaks of the seasons, it is possible that “boundaries” here refers to the divisions of the seasons. See C. A. Briggs and E. G. Briggs, Psalms (ICC), 2:156.

¹ tn Heb “and they put aside the burnt offering[s] to give them to the divisions of the house of the fathers for the sons of the people to bring near to the Lord as it is written in the scroll of Moses—and the same with the cattle.”

¹ tn Heb “in addition enrolling them by males from a son of three years and upwards, to everyone who enters the house of the Lord for a matter of a day in its day, for their service by their duties according to their divisions.”

⁵ tc Against the MT, this word is better read without the definite article. The MT reading is probably here the result of wrong word division, with the letter ה (he) belonging with the preceding word שָׁם (sham) as the he directive (i.e., שָׁמָּה, samah, “to there”).

¹ sn Divide…scatter. What is predicted here is a division of their tribes. Most commentators see here an anticipation of Levi being in every area but not their own. That may be part of it, but not entirely what the curse intended. These tribes for their ruthless cruelty would be eliminated from the power and prestige of leadership.