¹ tn The Hebrew word חַיִל (khayil, “strength, wealth”) can, with certain suffixes, look exactly like חֵל (khel, “fortress, rampart”). The chiastic pattern here suggests that not Tyre’s riches but her defenses will be cast into the sea. Thus the present translation renders the term “fortifications” (so also NLT) rather than “wealth” (NASB, NRSV, TEV) or “power” (NAB, NIV).

¹ tn Heb “under the vine and under the fig tree,” with the Hebrew article used twice as a possessive pronoun (cf. NASB “his”). Some English translations render this as second person rather than third (NRSV “your vine”; cf. also NAB, NCV, TEV).

² sn The eighth month of Darius’ second year was late October—late November, 520 b.c., by the modern (Julian) calendar. This is two months later than the date of Haggai’s first message to the same community (cf. Hag 1:1).

² tn Heb “and there was not with you to me.” The context favors the idea that the harvests were so poor that the people took care of only themselves, leaving no offering for the Lord. Cf. KJV and many English versions “yet ye turned not to me,” understanding the phrase to refer to the people’s repentance rather than their failure to bring offerings.

¹ tn Or “holy temple.” The Lord’s heavenly palace, rather than the earthly temple, is probably in view here (see Ps 11:4; Mic 1:2-3). The Hebrew word קֹדֶשׁ (qodesh, “holy”) here refers to the sovereign transcendence associated with his palace.

⁴ tn Heb “in the day of his distress.” In this and the following phrase at the end of v. 13 the suffix is third person masculine singular. As collective singulars both occurrences have been translated as plurals (“they suffered distress…endured distress,” rather than, “he suffered distress…endured distress”).

¹ tn Heb “Did you bring me…?” This rhetorical question expects a negative answer. The point seems to be this: Since sacrifices did not characterize God’s relationship with Israel during the nation’s formative years, the people should not consider them to be so fundamental. The Lord places a higher priority on justice than he does on empty ritual.

¹ tn Heb “to blood,” but no doubt this is intended to indicate by metonymy the color of blood rather than the substance itself. The blood-red color suggests a visual impression here—something that could be caused by fires, volcanic dust, sandstorms, or other atmospheric phenomena.

⁴ sn Heb “the husband of her youth.” The woman described here may already be married, so the reference is to the death of a husband rather than a fiancé (a husband-to-be). Either way, the simile describes a painful and unexpected loss to which the national tragedy Joel is describing may be compared.

¹ tn The shortened form of the prefix-conjugation verb וְיָבֵן (v^eyaven) indicates that it is a jussive rather than an imperfect. When a jussive comes from a superior to an inferior, it may connote exhortation and instruction or advice and counsel. For the functions of the jussive, see IBHS 568-70 §34.3.

² tn In the Hebrew text the accusative direct-object pronoun אֹתָם (ʾotam, “them”) is omitted/elided for balanced poetic parallelism. The LXX supplies αὐτούς (autous, “them”); but it is not necessary to emend the MT because this is a poetic literary convention rather than a textual problem.

⁴ tn Heb “to my man, the first.” Many English translations (e.g., KJV, NAB, NRSV, TEV) take this as “my first husband,” although this implies that there was more than one husband involved. The text refers to multiple lovers, but these were not necessarily husbands.

¹ tc The present translation reads וּצְבָאָהּ נִתַּן (uts^evaʾah nittan, “and its army was given”) for the MT וְצָבָא תִּנָּתֵן (v^etsavaʾ tinnaten, “and an army was being given/will be given”). The context suggests a perfect rather than an imperfect verb.

² tn The Aramaic term מְנֵא (m^eneʾ) is a noun referring to a measure of weight. The linkage here to the verb “to number” (Aram. מְנָה, m^enah) is a case of paronomasia rather than strict etymology. So also with תְּקֵל (t^eqel) and פַרְסִין (farsin). In the latter case there is an obvious wordplay with the name “Persian.”

¹ tc The present translation assumes the reading חֲזִי (khazi, “consider”) rather than the MT חֶזְוֵי (khezve, “visions”). The MT implies that the king required Daniel to disclose both the dream and its interpretation, as in chapter 2. But in the following verses Nebuchadnezzar recounts his dream, while Daniel presents only its interpretation.

¹ tc The Hebrew is difficult here. The Targum envisions a winding ramp or set of stairs, which entails reading the first word as a noun rather than a verb and reading the second word also not as a verb, supposing that an initial mem has been read as vav and nun. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:549.

¹ tc Heb “of the uncircumcised.” The LXX reads, probably correctly, “from of old” rather than “of the uncircumcised.” The phrases are very similar in spelling. The warriors of Meshech Tubal are described as uncircumcised, so it would be odd for them to not be buried with the uncircumcised. Verse 28 specifically says that they would lie with the uncircumcised.

¹ sn Or perhaps “Danel” (so TEV), referring to a ruler known from Canaanite legend. See the note on “Daniel” in 14:14. A reference to Danel (preserved in legend at Ugarit, near the northern end of the Phoenician coast) makes more sense here when addressing Tyre than in 14:14.

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.

² tn The reference here is probably to a civil list (as in Ezra 2:16; Neh 7:64) rather than to a “book of life” (Exod 32:32; Isa 4:3; Ps 69:29; Dan 12:1). This registry may have been established at the making of David’s census (2 Sam 24:2, 9).