¹ tn Heb “a shelter it will be for shade by day from heat, and for a place of refuge and for a hiding place from cloudburst and rain.” Since both of the last nouns of this verse can mean rain, they can either refer to the rain storm and the rain as distinct items or together refer to a heavy downpour. Regardless, they do not represent unrelated phenomena.

⁷ sn The repetition of the noun כֶּרֶם (kerem, “vineyard”) and the verb נָטַר (natar, “to keep, maintain”) creates a series of eloquent wordplays. The first occurrence of כֶּרֶם (“vineyard”) and נָטַר (“to keep”) is literal, the second occurrence of both is figurative (hypocatastasis). Her brothers forced her to work outside in the sun, taking care of the vineyards; as a result, she was not able to take care of her appearance (“my own vineyard I could not keep”).

⁴ tn The expression “to see the sun” (both רָאָה הָשָּׁמֶשׁ, raʾah hashamesh, and חָזָה הַשָּׁמֶשׁ, khazah hashamesh) is an idiom meaning “to be alive” (e.g., Ps 58:9; Eccl 6:5; 7:11; 11:7); cf. BDB 1039 s.v. שֶׁמֶשׁ 4.b. The opposite idiom, “the sun is darkened,” refers to the onset of old age and death (Eccl 12:2).

¹ sn So what advantage does the wise man have over a fool? The rhetorical question in Hebrew implies a negative answer: the wise man has no absolute advantage over a fool in the sense that both will share the same fate: death. Qoheleth should not be misunderstood here as denying that wisdom has no relative advantage over folly; elsewhere he affirms that wisdom does yield some relative benefits in life (7:1-22). However, wisdom cannot deliver one from death.

¹ tn Or “my works”; or “my accomplishments.” The term מַעֲשָׂי (maʿasay, “my works”) has been handled in two basic ways: (1) great works or projects, and (2) possessions. The latter assumes a metonymy, one’s effort standing for the possessions it produces. Both interpretations are reflected in the major English translations: “works” (KJV, NEB, NAB, ASV, NASB, MLB, RSV, Douay, Moffatt), “projects” (NIV), and “possessions” (NJPS).

³ tn The first word in the Hebrew text (אֵשֶׁת, ʾeshet) begins with א (ʾalef), the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet. The word אֵשֶׁת, (ʾeshet) can refer to a wife or to a woman. Ruth is called an אֵשֶׁת חַיִל (ʾeshet khayil) “worthy woman” while still a widow. While the term need not refer to a wife, that was certainly the most common status of the adult woman in ancient Israel and the following description portrays a woman who is both wife and mother.

¹ tn The verb אֵדָע (ʾedaʿ) is the imperfect form of the stative verb יָדָע (yadaʿ) “to know.” The imperfect form of a stative verb should be understood as future or modal and is translated here as an abilitive modal. By using a perfect verb for past time in the first half and in imperfect form in the second half, the verb is strongly negative, denying both learning in the past and the possibility of learning in the future.

¹ tn Heb “A prince lacking of understanding [is] also a great oppressor” (both KJV, ASV similar) The last clause, “and a great oppressor,” appears to modify “the prince.” There is little difference in meaning, only in emphasis. The LXX has “lacks income” (reading תְּבוּאוֹת [t^evuʾot] instead of תְּבוּנוֹת [t^evunot]). C. H. Toy (Proverbs [ICC], 501) suggests deleting the word for “prince” altogether, but this emendation is gratuitous.

¹ tn The Hebrew participles provide the subject matter in this contrast. On the one hand is the person who covers over (מְכַסֶּה, m^ekhasseh) his sins. This means refusing to acknowledge them in confession, and perhaps rationalizing them away. On the other hand there is the one who both “confesses” (מוֹדֶה, modeh) and “forsakes” (עֹזֵב, ʿozev) the sin. To “confess” sins means to acknowledge them, to say the same thing about them that God does.

² tn Heb “the ruin of the two of them.” Judgment is sent on the rebels both by God and the king. The term פִּיד (pid, “ruin; disaster”) is a metonymy of effect, the cause being the sentence of judgment (= “ruinous judgment” in the translation; cf. NLT “punishment”). The word “two of them” is a subjective genitive—they two bring the disaster on the rebels. The referents (the Lord and the king) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn The noun רֵעַ (reaʿ) refers to a “companion, associate, friend, neighbor.” It has a wide range of meaning depending on context, but generally “those persons with whom one is brought into contact and with whom one must live on account of the circumstances of life” (HALOT 1253 s.v. II רֵעַ). Some translations employ the word “friend” in both halves of the verse, obscuring the distinction between them. This term speaks of association, not necessarily friendship.

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.

¹ tn Heb “he who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous” (so NASB). The first colon uses two Hiphil participles, מַצְדִּיק (matsdiq) and מַרְשִׁיעַ (marshiaʿ). The first means “to declare righteous” (a declarative Hiphil), and the second means “to make wicked [or, guilty]” or “to condemn” (i.e., “to declare guilty”). To declare someone righteous who is a guilty criminal, or to condemn someone who is innocent, are both abominations for the Righteous Judge of the whole earth.

¹ tn The form קְנֹה (q^enoh) is an infinitive; the Greek version apparently took it as a participle, and the Latin as an imperative—both working with an unpointed קנה, the letter ה (he) being unexpected in the form if it is an infinitive construct (the parallel clause has קְנוֹת [q^enot] for the infinitive, but the ancient versions also translate that as either a participle or an imperative).

¹ sn The lines contrast the modest income with the abundant income, but the real contrast is between righteousness and the lack of justice (or injustice). “Justice” is used for both legal justice and ethical conduct. It is contrasted with righteousness in 12:5 and 21:7; it describes ethical behavior in 21:3. Here the point is that unethical behavior tarnishes the great gain and will be judged by God.

³ tn Heb “Then you will wake up. It (the instruction) will talk to you.” In both of the preceding cola an infinitive construct was used for the temporal clauses. Now the construction uses a perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive. The verb “wake up” is consecutive to “lie down [to sleep].” But it is also the circumstance for the following verb “will talk,” so it is has been subordinated here as a temporal clause.

² tn The text again has “my son.” In this passage perhaps “son” would be the most fitting because of the warning against going to the adulterous woman. However, since the image of the adulterous woman probably represents all kinds of folly (through personification), and since even in this particular folly the temptation works both ways, the general address to either young men or women should be retained. The text was certainly not intended to convey that only women could seduce men.

² tc MT reads וּכְאָב (ukh^eʾav, “and like a father”) but the LXX reflects the Hiphil verb וְיַכְאִב (v^eyakhʾiv, “and scourges every son he receives”). Both readings fit the parallelism; however, it is unnecessary to emend MT which makes perfectly good sense. The fact that the writer of Hebrews quotes this passage from the LXX and it became part of the inspired NT text does not mean that the LXX reflects the original Hebrew reading here.

⁴ tn The phrase עַל־דִּבְרָתִי (ʿal divrati) is a variant of עַל־דִּבְרָת (ʿal divrat; the final י [yod] being an archaic genitive ending), which in turn is a variant of עַל דָּבַר (ʿal davar). Both phrases can mean “concerning” or “because of,” but neither of these nuances fits the use of עַל־דִּבְרָתִי in Ps 110:4. Here the phrase probably carries the sense “according to the manner of.” See L. C. Allen, Psalms 101-150 (WBC), 81.

⁵ sn The Davidic king’s priestly role is analogous to that of Melchizedek, who was both “king of Salem” (i.e., Jerusalem) and a “priest of God Most High” in the time of Abraham (Gen 14:18-20). Like Melchizedek, the Davidic king was a royal priest, distinct from the Aaronic line (see Heb 7). The analogy focuses on the king’s priestly role; the language need not imply that Melchizedek himself was “an eternal priest.”