³ tn Alternatively, “gain possession of the land” (cf. NRSV) or “rise up from the land” (cf. NIV). This clause may be understood in two ways: (1) Israel will gain ascendancy over the land or conquer the land (e.g., Exod 1:10; cf. NAB “come up from other lands”) or (2) Israel will be “planted” in the land (Hos 2:22, 23; cf. NLT “will…plant his people”).

¹ tn Or perhaps “in the reign of Darius, even in the reign of Cyrus.” The identity of this Darius is disputed. Some take the name as referring to Cyrus, understanding the following ו (vav “and”) in an epexegetical sense (“even”). Others identify Darius with a governor of Babylon known from extra-biblical records as Gubaru, or with Cambyses, son of Cyrus. Many scholars maintain that the reference is historically inaccurate.

¹ tn As it stands, the meaning of the Hebrew text is unclear. The translation follows the suggestion of M. Dahood, “Accadian-Ugaritic dmt in Ezekiel 27:32, ” Bib 45 (1964): 83-84. Several other explanations and emendations have been offered. See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:83, and D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:85-86, for a list of options.

⁵ tn Heb “the bread of men.” The translation follows the suggestion accepted by M. Greenberg (Ezekiel [AB], 2:509) that this refers to a meal brought by comforters to the one mourning. Some repoint the consonantal text to read “the bread of despair” (see L. C. Allen, Ezekiel [WBC], 2:56), while others, with support from the Targum and Vulgate, emend the consonantal text to read “the bread of mourners” (see D. I. Block, Ezekiel [NICOT], 1:784).

¹ tn The cohortative after a volitive indicates purpose (“so that”). There is a wordplay in Hebrew between “Bring us back” (Hiphil imperative of שׁוּב [shuv, “to return”]) and “let us return” (Qal imperfect of שׁוּב). This repetition of the root שׁוּב is significant; it depicts a reciprocal relationship between God’s willingness to allow the nation to return to him, on the one hand, and its national repentance, on the other.

² tn The two nouns עָנְיִי וּמְרוּדִי (ʿonyi um^erudi, lit., “my poverty and my homelessness”) form a nominal hendiadys in which one noun functions adjectivally and the other retains its full nominal sense: “my impoverished homelessness” or “homeless poor” (GKC 397-98 §124.e). The use of a nearly identical phrase in Lam 1:7 and Isa 58:7 (see GKC 226 §83.c) suggests this was a Hebrew idiom. Jerusalem’s inhabitants were impoverished and homeless.

² tn Heb “their heart” or “from the heart.” Many English versions take the ם (mem) on לִבָּם (libbam) as the third person masculine plural pronominal suffix: “their heart” (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NJPS, CEV). However, others take it as an enclitic or adverbial ending: “from the heart” (cf. RSV, NRSV, TEV, NJPS margin). See T. F. McDaniel, “The Alleged Sumerian Influence upon Lamentations,” VT 18 (1968): 203-4.

⁴ tn The singular noun אֹהֶל (ʾohel, “tent”) may function as a collective, referring to all tents in Judah. A parallel expression occurs in verse 2 using the plural: “all the dwellings of Jacob” (כָּל־נְאוֹת יַעֲקֹב, kol n^eʾot yaʿaqov). The singular “tent” matches the image of “Daughter Zion.” On the other hand, the singular “the tent of Daughter Zion” might be a hyperbolic synecdoche of container (= tent) for contents (= inhabitants of Zion).

³ sn Compare Jer 6:22-24, where almost the same exact words as 50:41-43 are applied to the people of Judah. The repetition of prophecies here and in the following verses emphasizes the talionic nature of God’s punishment of Babylon; as they have done to others, so it will be done to them (cf. 25:14; 50:15).

¹ tn The words “The Lord spoke” and “he said” are not in the text. There is only a title here: “Concerning Damascus.” However, something needs to be supplied to show that these are the Lord’s words of judgment (cf. “oracle of the Lord” in v. 26 and “I” in v. 27). These words have been supplied in the translation for clarity and consistency with the introduction to the other judgment speeches.

² tn Heb “the distresses of the cry of destruction.” Many commentaries want to leave out the word “distresses” because it is missing from the Greek version and the parallel passage in Isa 15:5. However, it is in all the Hebrew mss and in the other early versions, and it is hard to see why it would be added here if it were not original.

² tn Heb “he has let the appointed time pass him by.” It is unclear what is meant by the reference to “appointed time” other than the fact that Pharaoh has missed his opportunity to do what he claimed to be able to do. The Greek text is again different here. It reads, “Call the name of Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt Saon esbeie moed,” reading קִרְאוּ שֵׁם (qirʾu shem) for קָרְאוּ שָׁם (qar^eʾu sham) and transliterating the last line.

¹ tn Or “polish” or “clean.” The other three uses of the verb מָרַק (maraq) refer to scouring or polishing. The context refers to the final stages of battle preparations, so whether it was “polishing,” “drawing,” or “raising” spears (see tc note above), the main point seems to be to have them ready to use. Some translations say “sharpen” (NLT, NRSV), but this meaning does not fit the proposed readings and would be an earlier activity in battle preparations.

² tn Heb “They did not listen or incline their ear [= pay attention] by turning from their wickedness by not sacrificing to other gods.” The ל (lamed) + the negative + the infinitive is again epexegetical. The sentence has been restructured, and more idiomatic English expressions have been used, to better conform with contemporary English style, but an attempt has been made to retain the basic relationships of subordination.

¹ tn Heb “The word came to Jeremiah concerning.” Though the phrase “from the Lord” is missing from this formula, which occurs elsewhere at 7:1; 11:1; 18:1; 21:1; 30:1; 32:1; 34:1, 8; 35:1; 40:1, it is clearly implied from the words that follow. As in these other passages, the more active form has been chosen for the translation to better conform with contemporary English style.

² tn According to BDB 808 s.v. פָּחַד Qal.1 and 40 s.v. אֶל 3.a, this is an example of the “pregnant” use of a preposition, where an implied verb has to be supplied in the translation to conform the normal range of the preposition with the verb that is governing it. The Hebrew text reads: “they feared unto one another.” BDB translates “they turned in dread to each other.” The translation adopted seems more appropriate in this context.

¹ sn The location of the Hill of Gareb and the place called Goah are not precisely known. However, it has been plausibly suggested from the other localities mentioned that the Hill of Gareb is the hill west of the Hinnom Valley mentioned in Josh 15:8. The location of Goah is generally placed south of that near the southwest corner of the Hinnom Valley, which is referred to in the next verse (Jer 31:40).

⁴ tn Heb “the city will be built to [or for] the Lord.” The words “of Jerusalem” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They have been supplied in the translation for clarity. However, the word occurs in a first person speech, so the translation has accommodated the switch in person as it has in a number of other places (compare also NIV, TEV, ICV).

² tn Heb “after those days.” Commentators are generally agreed that this refers to the return from exile and the repopulation of the land referred to in vv. 27-28 and not to something subsequent to the time mentioned in v. 30. This is the sequencing that is also presupposed in other new covenant passages such as Deut 30:1-6; Ezek 11:17-20; 36:24-28.

¹ sn This is a figure emphasizing that they will serve for a long time but not for an unlimited duration. The kingdom of Babylon lasted a relatively short time by ancient standards. It lasted from 605 b.c. when Nebuchadnezzar defeated Necho at Carchemish until the fall of Babylon in 538 b.c. There were only four rulers. Nebuchadnezzar was succeeded by his son, Evil Merodach (cf. 52:31), and two other rulers who were not descended from him.