¹ tn Heb “Sheol and Abaddon” (שְׁאוֹל וַאֲבַדּוֹן (sh^eʾol vaʾavaddon); so ASV, NASB, NRSV; cf. KJV “Hell and destruction”; NAB “the nether world and the abyss.” These terms represent the remote underworld and all the mighty powers that reside there (e.g., Prov 27:20; Job 26:6; Ps 139:8; Amos 9:2; Rev 9:11). The Lord knows everything about this remote region.

¹ tn Wisdom addresses three types of people: simpletons (פְּתָיִם, p^etayim), scoffers (לֵצִים, letsim) and fools (כְּסִילִים, k^esilim). For the term “simpleton” see note on 1:4. Each of these three types of people is satisfied with the life being led and will not listen to reason. See J. A. Emerton, “A Note on the Hebrew Text of Proverbs 1:22-23, ” JTS 19 (1968): 609-14.

³ tn Heb “and whole.” The vav (ו) is asseverative or appositional (“even”); it is omitted in the translation for the sake of style and smoothness. The substantival adjective תָּמִים (tamim, “whole; perfect; blameless”) is an adverbial accusative describing the condition and state of the object. Used in parallel to חַיִּים (khayyim, “alive”), it must mean “full of health” (BDB 1071 s.v. תָּמִים 2). These cutthroats want to murder people who are full of vigor.

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.

² tn The verbal sequence is perfect + prefixed form with vav (ו) consecutive. Since the psalmist seems to be anticipating the demise of his enemies, he may be using these forms rhetorically to describe the enemies’ defeat as if it were already accomplished. Some emend the text to קָמוּ יֵבֹשׁוּ (qamu yevoshu, “may those who attack me be humiliated”). See L. C. Allen, Psalms 101-150 (WBC), 75.

¹ sn The surging waters here symbolizes the hostile enemies of God who seek to destroy the order he has established in the world (see Pss 18:17; 29:3; 32:6; 77:20; 144:7; Isa 17:13; Jer 51:55; Ezek 26:19; Hab 3:15). But the Lord is depicted as elevated above and sovereign over these raging waters.

¹ tn Heb “our signs we do not see.” Because of the reference to a prophet in the next line, it is likely that the “signs” in view here include the evidence of God’s presence as typically revealed through the prophets. These could include miraculous acts performed by the prophets (see, for example, Isa 38:7-8) or object lessons which they acted out (see, for example, Isa 20:3).

² tn Heb “your ways.” The word “merciful” is added for clarification. God’s “ways” are sometimes his commands, but in this context, where the teaching of God’s ways motivates repentance (see the next line), it is more likely that God’s merciful and compassionate way of dealing with sinners is in view. Thanksgiving songs praising God for his deliverance typically focus on these divine attributes (see Pss 34, 41, 116, 138).

⁴ tc Based on the text critical question in the previous note, some read this as a form related to the noun עֶרֶב (ʿerev, “evening”). These same consonants occur as a verb in Isa 24:11, עָרְבָה (ʿar^evah) from עָרַב (ʿarav, “become evening”). This would give the time frame of their work rather than the location, but the location provides a parallel to “wilderness.”

² tn The text uses לִפְנֵיהֶם עִמָּם (lifnehem ʿimmam, “before them, with them”). Many editors think that these were alternative readings, and so omit one or the other. Dhorme moved עִמָּם (ʿimmam) to the second half of the verse and emended it to read עֹמְדִים (ʿom^edim, “abide”). Kissane and Gordis changed only the vowels and came up with עַמָּם (ʿammam, “their kinfolk”). But Gordis thinks the presence of both of them in the line is evidence of a conflated reading (p. 229).

¹ sn Eliphaz probably thinks that Edom was the proverbial home of wisdom, and so the reference here would be to his own people. If, as many interpret, the biblical writer is using these accounts to put Yahwistic ideas into the discussion, then the reference would be to Canaan at the time of the fathers. At any rate, the tradition of wisdom to Eliphaz has not been polluted by foreigners, but has retained its pure and moral nature from antiquity.

² tn The Hebrew text uses a wordplay here: שֹׁגֵג (shogeg) is “the one going astray,” i.e., the one who is unable to guard and guide his life. The second word is מַשְׁגֶּה (mashgeh), from a different but historically related root שָׁגָה (shagah), which here in the Hiphil means “the one who misleads, causes to go astray.” These two words are designed to include everybody—all are under the wisdom of God.

² tn E. Dhorme (Job, 150) suggests that the relation between these two words is like a hendiadys. In other words, “life,” which he says is made prominent by the shift of the copula, specifies the nature of the grace. He renders it “the favor of life.” D. J. A. Clines at least acknowledges that the expression “you showed loyal love with me” is primary. There are many other attempts to improve the translation of this unusual combination.

⁵ tn In the prepositional phrase עָלַי (ʿalay) the results of a scribal change are found (these changes were called tiqqune sopherim, “corrections of the scribes” made to avoid using improper language about God). The prepositional phrase would have been עָלֶךָ (ʿalekha, “to you,” as in the LXX). But it offended the Jews to think of Job being burdensome to God. Job’s sin could have repercussions on him, but not on God.

⁶ sn The “words” are the divine decrees of God’s providence, the decisions that he makes in his dealings with people. Job cannot conceal these—he knows what they are. What Job seems to mean by this clause in this verse is that there is nothing that would hinder his joy of dying for he has not denied or disobeyed God’s plan.

¹ tn The imperfect verbs in this verse describe the condition of the accursed situation. Some commentators follow the LXX and take these as jussives, making this verse the curse that the man pronounced upon the fool. Rashi adds “This is the malediction with which I have cursed him.” That would make the speaker the one calling down the judgment on the fool rather than responding by observation how God destroyed the habitation of the fool.

¹ sn Those who curse the day are probably the professional enchanters and magicians who were thought to cast spells on days and overwhelm them with darkness and misfortune. The myths explained eclipses as the dragon throwing its folds around the sun and the moon, thus engulfing or swallowing the day and the night. This interpretation matches the parallelism better than the interpretation that says these are merely professional mourners.

¹ sn The text of Esther does not disclose exactly how Mordecai learned about the plot against the king’s life. Ancient Jewish traditions state that Mordecai overheard conspiratorial conversation, or that an informant brought this information to him, or that it came to him as a result of divine prompting. These conjectures are all without adequate support from the biblical text. The author simply does not tell the source of Mordecai’s insight into this momentous event.

² tn The Hebrew text has two imperfects connected by וְגַם (v^egam). These verbs could be translated as specific futures, “you will deceive and also you will prevail,” in which case the Lord is assuring the spirit of success on his mission. However, in a commissioning context (note the following imperatives) such as this, it is more likely that the imperfects are injunctive, in which case one could translate, “Deceive, and also overpower.”

² tn Heb “but you, now, lighten the burdensome work of your father and the heavy yoke which he placed on us, and we will serve you.” In the Hebrew text the prefixed verbal form with vav (וְנַעַבְדֶךָ, v^enaʿav^edekha, “and we will serve you”) following the imperative (הָקֵל, haqel, “lighten”) indicates purpose/result. The conditional sentence used in the present translation is an attempt to bring out the logical relationship between these forms.