² sn That David’s sons could have been priests, in light of the fact that they were not of the priestly lineage, is strange. One must assume either (1) that the word “priest” (כֹּהֵן, kohen) during this period of time could be used in a broader sense of “chief ruler” (KJV); “chief minister” (ASV, NASB), or “royal adviser” (NIV84), perhaps based on the parallel passage in 1 Chr 18:17 which has “the king’s leading officials”, or (2) that in David’s day members of the king’s family could function as a special category of “priests” (cf. NLT “priestly leaders”). The latter option seems to be the more straightforward way of understanding the word in 2 Sam 8:18.

² tc The LXX reads “your king” rather than the MT’s “your fathers.” The latter makes little sense here. Some follow MT, but translate “as it was against your fathers.” See P. K. McCarter, 1 Samuel (AB), 212.

⁴ tn The imperfect verbal forms in this and the next line are understood as indicating what is anticipated and translated with the future tense because at the time of Hannah’s prayer Israel did not yet have a king.

¹ sn Jephthah argues that the Ammonite king should follow the example of Balak, who, once thwarted in his attempt to bring a curse on Israel, refused to attack Israel and returned home (Num 22-24).

¹ sn Abimelech commanded Israel. Perhaps while ruling as king over the city-state of Shechem, Abimelech also became a leader of the Israelite tribal alliance (see R. G. Boling, Judges [AB], 175).

³ tn Heb “and it drove them out from before you, the two kings of the Amorites, not by your sword and not by your bow.” The words “I gave you the victory” are supplied for clarification.

² tn Heb “he”; the implied subject may be Israel, or Joshua (as the commanding general of the army). So also for “They did to its king” and “they had done.”

¹ tn Heb “he was king.” The present translation avoids the sudden shift in person and the mistaken impression that Moses is the referent by specifying the referent as “the Lord.”

⁴ tn The form is the Piel cohortative וַאֲשַׁלְּחָה (vaʾashall^ekhah) with the vav (ו) continuing the sequence from the request and its purpose. The cohortative here stresses the resolve of the king: “and (then) I will release.”

¹ sn The Hebrew term cupbearer corresponds to the Egyptian wb’, an official (frequently a foreigner) who often became a confidant of the king and wielded political power (see K. A. Kitchen, NBD³ 248). Nehemiah held this post in Persia.

² sn The covenant I made with Israel. Apart from the legal profession and Jewish and Christian tradition, the term “covenant” may not be too familiar. There were essentially three kinds of “covenants” referred to under the Hebrew term used here: (1) “Parity treaties,” or “covenants” between equals in which each party pledged itself to certain agreed-upon stipulations and took an oath to it in the name of their god or gods (cf. Gen 31:44-54); (2) “Suzerain-vassal treaties,” or “covenants” in which a great king pledged himself to protect the vassal’s realm and his right to rule over his own domain in exchange for sovereignty over the vassal, including the rendering of absolute loyalty and submission to the great king’s demands spelled out in detailed stipulations; and (3) “Covenants of grant,” in which a great king granted to a loyal servant or vassal king permanent title to a piece of land or dominion over a specified realm in recognition of past service. It is generally recognized that the Mosaic covenant, which is being referred to here, is of the second type, resembling in form the ancient Near Eastern suzerain-vassal treaties. These treaties typically contained the following elements: (1) a preamble identifying the great king (cf. Exod 20:2a; Deut 1:1-4); (2) a historical prologue summarizing the great king’s past benefactions as motivation for future loyalty (cf. Exod 20:2b; Deut 1:5-4:43); (3) the primary stipulation of absolute and unconditional loyalty (cf. Exod 20:3-8; Deut 5:1-11:32); (4) specific stipulations governing future relations between the vassal and the great king and the vassal’s relation to other vassals (cf. Exod 20:22-23:33; Deut 12:1-26:15); (5) the invoking of curses on the vassal for disloyalty and the pronouncing of blessing on him for loyalty (cf. Lev 26; Deut 27-28); (6) the invoking of witnesses to the covenant, often the great king’s and the vassal’s gods (cf. Deut 30:19; 31:28, where the reference is to the “heavens and the earth” as enduring witnesses). It is also generally agreed that the majority of the threats of punishment by the prophets refer to the invocation of these covenant curses for disloyalty to the basic stipulation, that of absolute loyalty.

³ tn Or more generally, “dwelling”; perhaps, “royal tent.” According to BDAG 928 s.v. σκηνή the word can mean “tent” or “hut,” or more generally “lodging” or “dwelling.” In this verse (a quotation from Amos 9:11) BDAG refers this to David’s ruined kingdom; it is possibly an allusion to a king’s tent (a royal tent). God is at work to reestablish David’s line (Acts 2:30-36; 13:32-39).

⁴ tn The imperfect verb נֹאבֵד (noʾved, “we might die”) functions in a modal sense, denoting possibility. The king’s hope parallels that of the ship’s captain in 1:6. See also Exod 32:7-14; 2 Sam 12:14-22; 1 Kgs 8:33-43; 21:17-29; Jer 18:6-8; Joel 2:11-15.

² tn Aram “the queen” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). In the following discourse this woman is able to recall things about Daniel that go back to the days of Nebuchadnezzar, things that Belshazzar does not seem to recollect. It is likely that she was the wife not of Belshazzar but of Nabonidus or perhaps even Nebuchadnezzar. In that case, “queen” here means “queen mother” (cf. NCV “the king’s mother”).

² tn Aram “they might cause the king to know.” The impersonal plural is used here to refer to the role of God’s spirit in revealing the dream and its interpretation to the king. As J. A. Montgomery says, “it appropriately here veils the mysterious agency” (Daniel [ICC], 164-65). Subsequent narratives show both God and angels involved with Nebuchadnezzar, so “they” can be appropriate.

¹ sn The king’s garden is mentioned again in Neh 3:15 in conjunction with the pool of Siloam and the stairs that go down from the City of David. This would have been in the southern part of the city near the Tyropean Valley, which agrees with the reference to the “two walls,” which were probably the walls on the eastern and western hills.

³ sn The Holy One of Israel is a common title for the Lord in the book of Isaiah. It is applied to the Lord only here and in 51:5 in the book of Jeremiah. It is a figure where an attribute of a person is put as a title of a person (compare “your majesty” for a king). It pictures the Lord as the sovereign king who rules over his covenant people and exercises moral authority over them.

¹ tn Heb “the daughters of the king.” Most commentators do not feel that this refers to the actual daughters of Zedekiah, since they would have been too politically important to have escaped exile with their father. As noted in the translator’s note on 36:26, this need not refer to the actual daughters of the king but may refer to other royal daughters, i.e., the daughters of other royal princes.

¹ sn The king’s garden is mentioned again in Neh 3:15 in conjunction with the pool of Siloam and the stairs that go down from the City of David. This would have been in the southern part of the city near the Tyropean Valley. The location agrees with the reference to the “two walls,” which were probably the walls on the eastern and western hills.

³ tn Heb “And the king was sitting in the Benjamin Gate.” This clause is circumstantial to the following clause, thus signifying, “while the king was…” Most commentators agree that the reference to sitting in the gate here likely refers to the same kind of judicial context that has been posited for 26:10 (see the translator’s note there for further references). Hence the translation renders “sitting” with the more technical “holding court” to better reflect the probable situation.