⁴ tn Heb “and it is to cause to crash into heaps of ruins fortified cities.” The subject of the third feminine singular verb תְּהִי (t^ehi) is the implied plan, referred to in the preceding lines with third feminine singular pronominal suffixes.

² tc Heb “and let them go and let them live there, and let him teach them the requirements of the God of the land.” The two plural verbs seem inconsistent with the preceding and following contexts, where only one priest is sent back to Samaria. The singular has the support of Greek, Syriac, and Latin witnesses.

³ tn Heb “they were unable to fight.” The object must be supplied from the preceding sentence. Elsewhere when the Niphal infinitive of לָחָם (lakham) follows the verb יָכֹל (yakhol), the infinitive appears to have the force of “prevail against.” See Num 22:11; 1 Sam 17:9; and the parallel passage in Isa 7:1.

³ tc The MT of v. 18 ends with the words, “all his days.” If this phrase is taken with what precedes, then one should translate, “[who encouraged Israel to sin] throughout his reign.” However, it may be preferable to emend the text to בְּיֹמָיו (b^eyomayv), “in his days,” and join the phrase to what follows. The translation assumes this change.

² tn The MT has simply “with the kings of Israel,” which appears to stand in apposition to the immediately preceding “with his fathers.” But it is likely that the words “and he was buried in Samaria” have been accidentally omitted from the text. See 13:13 and 14:16.

³ tn Heb “and they came to the city of the house of Baal.” It seems unlikely that a literal city is meant. Some emend עִיר (ʿir), “city,” to דְּבִיר (d^evir) “holy place,” or suggest that עִיר is due to dittography of the immediately preceding עַד (ʿad) “to.” Perhaps עִיר is here a technical term meaning “fortress” or, more likely, “inner room.”

² tn After Jehu’s order (“kill him too”), the MT has simply, “to the chariot in the ascent of Gur which is near Ibleam.” The main verb in the clause, “they shot him” (וַיַּכֻּהוּ, vayyakkuhu), has been accidentally omitted by virtual haplography/homoioteleuton. Note that the immediately preceding form הַכֻּהוּ (hakkuhu), “shoot him,” ends with the same suffix.

¹ tn Heb “and [on] every good portion they were throwing each man his stone and they filled it.” The vav + perfect (“and they filled”) here indicates customary action contemporary with the situation described in the preceding main clause (where a customary imperfect is used, “they were throwing”). See the note at 3:4.

¹ tc The MT reads וַיִּרְאוּ (vayyirʾu, “they saw”) the Qal preterite of רָאָה (raʾah, “to see”). Some translations render this as pluperfect “they had seen” (KJV, NASB), but then the verb should have been preceded by a different construction. Other translations (NIV, ESV, NRSV) follow some ancient versions and emend the verbal form to a Hiphil with pronominal suffix וַיַּרְאֻהוּ (vayyarʾuhu, “and they showed him”).

² tc Heb “the two of Ariel, Moab.” The precise meaning of אריאל is uncertain; some read “warrior.” The present translation assumes that the word is a proper name and that בני, “sons of,” has accidentally dropped from the text by homoioarcton (note the preceding שׁני), so originally: שְׁנֵי בְנֵי אֲרִיאֵל (sh^ene v^ene ʾariʾel).

² tn Heb “you lift me up.” In light of the preceding and following references to deliverance, the verb רוּם (rum) probably here refers to being rescued from danger (see Ps 9:13). However, it could mean “exalt; elevate” here, indicating that the Lord has given him victory over his enemies and forced them to acknowledge the psalmist’s superiority.

³ tc The Lucianic Greek recension and Vulgate understand this verb to be second person rather than third person as in the MT. But this is probably the result of reading the preceding word “Lord” as a vocative under the influence of the vocative in the first part of the verse.

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 tn After the preceding imperfect verbal form, the subordinated imperative indicates purpose/result. S. R. Driver comments, “…the imper. is used instead of the more normal voluntative, for the purpose of expressing with somewhat greater force the intention of the previous verb” (S. R. Driver, Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel, 350).

¹ tn Heb “and he cursed and threw stones, opposite him, pelting [them] with dirt.” The offline veqatal construction in the last clause indicates an action that was complementary to the action described in the preceding clause. He simultaneously threw stones and dirt.

² tc The translation follows the Qere and many medieval Hebrew mss in reading וְהַלֶּחֶם (v^ehallekhem, “and the bread”) rather than וּלְהַלֶּחֶם (ul^ehallekhem, “and to the bread”) of the Kethib. The syntax of the MT is confused here by the needless repetition of the preposition, probably taken from the preceding word.

² tn The infinitive absolute appears before a verb of the same root to emphasize the modality of the verb. Here the imperfect verb expresses obligative modality, prescribing what he should do. So the nuance of the preceding infinitive absolute is “you must,” or “you certainly must.”

¹ tn Naomi uses the feminine form of the word “servant” (as Boaz did earlier, see v. 8), in contrast to Ruth’s use of the masculine form in the preceding verse. Since she is concerned for Ruth’s safety, she may be subtly reminding Ruth to stay with the female workers and not get too close to the men.

¹ tn The infinitive absolute precedes the finite verb for emphasis. Here שָׁלַל (shalal, “pull out”) is a homonym of the more common Hebrew verb meaning “to plunder.” An Arabic cognate is used of drawing a sword out of a scabbard (see BDB 1021 s.v.).

³ tn The switch from the negative particle אַל (ʾal, see the preceding statement, “do not leave”) to לֹא (loʾ) may make this statement more emphatic. It may indicate that the statement is a policy applicable for the rest of the harvest (see v. 21).