³ tn Heb “We must certainly report to the king all these things.” Here the word דְּבָרִים (d^evarim) must mean “things” (cf. BDB 183 s.v. דָּבָר IV.3) rather than “words,” because a verbatim report of all the words in the scroll is scarcely meant. The present translation has chosen to use, instead of the indefinite “things,” a form that suggests a summary report of all the matters spoken about in the scroll.

¹ tn Again the particle כִּי (ki) appears to be intensive rather than causal. Compare the translator’s note on v. 12. It is possible that it has an adversative sense in an implicit contrast with v. 13, which expresses these concepts in the negative (cf. BDB 474 s.v. כִּי 3.e, for this use in statements that are contextually closer to one another).

¹ tn For the translation of this particle, which is normally translated “therefore” and often introduces an announcement of judgment, compare the usage at Jer 16:14 and the translator’s note there. Here as there it introduces a contrast, a rather unexpected announcement of salvation. For a similar use see also Hos 2:14 (2:16 HT). Recognition of this usage makes unnecessary the proposed emendation of BHS of לָכֵן כָּל (lakhen kol) to וְכָל (v^ekhol).

¹ tn Heb “I spoke to you in your security.” The reference is to the sending of the prophets. Compare this context with the context of 7:25. For the nuance “security” for this noun (שַׁלְוָה, shalvah), rather than “prosperity” as many translate, see Pss 122:7; 30:6; and the related adjective (שָׁלֵו, shalev) in Jer 49:31; Job 16:2; and 21:23.

³ tn The usage of the preposition בּ (bet) to introduce the material from which something is made in Exod 38:8 and 1 Kgs 15:22 should lay to rest the rather forced construction that some (like J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 121) put on the variant כַּחֹמֶר (kakhomer) found in a few Hebrew mss. Bright renders that phrase as an elliptical “as clay sometimes will.” The phrase is missing from the Greek version.

¹ tn Heb “do not be a source of dismay for me.” For this nuance of מְחִתָּה (m^ekhittah) rather than “terror,” as many of the English versions have it, see BDB 370 s.v. מְחִתָּה 1.b and the usage in Prov 21:15. Compare also the usage of the related verb that occurs in the next verse (see also BDB 369 s.v. חָתַת Qal.2).

³ tn Some interpret this as a resignation to the punishment inflicted and translate, “But I said, ‘This is my punishment, and I will just need to bear it.’” This is unlikely given the meaning and usage of the word rendered “sickness” (חֳלִי, kholi), the absence of the pronoun “my,” and the likelihood that the particle אַךְ (ʾak) means “only” rather than “indeed” (cf. BDB s.v. אַךְ 2.b and compare its usage in v. 24).

⁴ tn Heb “my inheritance.” Or “the land [i.e., inheritance] I gave you,” reading the pronoun as indicating source rather than possession. The parallelism and the common use in Jeremiah of the term to refer to the land or people as the Lord’s (e.g., 12:7, 8, 9; 16:18; 50:11) make the possessive use more likely here.

³ sn The Lord admits he did divorce Zion, but that too was the result of the nation’s sins. The force of the earlier rhetorical question comes into clearer focus now. The question does not imply that a certificate does not exist and that no divorce occurred. Rather, the question asks for the certificate to be produced so the accuser can see the reason for the divorce in black and white. The Lord did not put Zion away arbitrarily.

¹ tn Heb “Therefore the Lord waits to show you mercy, and therefore he is exalted to have compassion on you.” The logical connection between this verse and what precedes is problematic. The point seems to be that Judah’s impending doom does not bring God joy. Rather the prospect of their suffering stirs within him a willingness to show mercy and compassion, if they are willing to seek him on his terms.

² tn Heb “as a result they will go and stumble backward.” Perhaps an infant falling as it attempts to learn to walk is the background image here (cf. v. 9b). The Hebrew term לְמַעַן (l^emaʿan) could be taken as indicating purpose (“in order that”), rather than simple result. In this case the people’s insensitivity to the message is caused by the Lord as a means of expediting their downfall.

³ sn In ancient Near Eastern love literature it was common to use wild animals to symbolize potential problems which could separate lovers and destroy their love. For instance, in Egyptian love songs it is the crocodile, rather than the foxes, which were used as figures for obstacles which might threaten a couple’s love. Here the “foxes” are probably used figuratively to represent potentially destructive problems which could destroy their romantic relationship and which could hinder it from ripening into marriage.

⁴ tn Heb “and know that concerning all these God will bring you into judgment.” The point is not that following one’s impulses and desires is inherently bad and will bring condemnation from God. Rather the point seems to be: As you follow your impulses and desires, realize that all you think and do will eventually be evaluated by God. So one must seek joy within the boundaries of God’s moral standards.

¹ tn Heb “and the fool multiplies words.” This line is best taken as the third line of a tricola encompassing 10:13-14a (NASB, NRSV, NJPS, Moffatt) rather than the first line of a tricola encompassing 10:14 (KJV, NEB, RSV, NAB, ASV, NIV). Several versions capture the sense of this line well: “a fool prates on and on” (Moffatt) and “Yet the fool talks and talks!” (NJPS).

² sn The picture is one of seizing a thornbush and having the thorn pierce the hand (עָלָה בְיַד־, ʿalah v^eyad). A drunk does not know how to handle a thornbush because he cannot control his movements and so gets hurt (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 599). C. H. Toy suggests that this rather means a half-crazy drunken man brandishing a stick (Proverbs [ICC], 475). In this regard cf. NLT “a thornbush brandished by a drunkard.”

³ tn Or “is satisfied.” The translation understands שָׂבַע (savaʿ) as stative “to be satisfied; be filled” rather than fientive, “to satisfy oneself,” so that the imperfect form is future. An imperfect verb may be future for both stative and dynamic verbs, and may be present for dynamic verbs. It is not possible to tell by morphological criteria whether the verb שָׂבַע is stative or dynamic, but elsewhere it behaves similarly to a stative.

⁴ tn There is debate about the nature of the parallelism between lines 4a and 4b. The major options are: (1) synonymous parallelism, (2) antithetical parallelism (e.g., NAB, NIV, NCV) or (3) formal parallelism. Normally a vav (ו) would begin an antithetical clause; the structure and the ideas suggest that the second colon continues the idea of the first half, but in a parallel way rather than as additional predicates. The metaphors used in the proverb elsewhere describe the wise.

¹ sn The words for “laborer” (עָמֵל; ʿamel) and “labored” (עָמַל; ʿamal) are less common Hebrew terms for work. The root idea refers to exertion, or toil, and sometimes to anxiety. In Eccl. 2:11 the Preacher refers to all his many building projects with this verb for hard work. This proverb pictures hard work being done of necessity rather than for the satisfaction of doing the work itself.

³ tc It has been reasonably proposed, based on Greek witnesses, that the verb can be read as a Niphal rather than a Qal. The proposal keeps the same consonants for this verb (but reads different vowels), however the Greek implies that the noun “knowledge” should be emended to a participle (requires adding a מ, [mem]). The meaning of this reading is “I reveal myself (or “am found”) making discretion known.

¹ tn Heb “chastens.” The verb יָכַח (yakhakh) here means “to chasten; to punish” (HALOT 410 s.v. יכח 1) or “to correct; to rebuke” (BDB 407 s.v. 6). The context suggests some kind of corporeal discipline rather than mere verbal rebuke or cognitive correction. This verse is quoted in Heb 12:5-6 to show that suffering in the service of the Lord is a sign of membership in the covenant community (i.e., sonship).