Discovery Box| (0.20) | (1Sa 2:5) | 3 sn The number seven is used here in an ideal sense. Elsewhere in the OT having seven children is evidence of fertility as a result of God’s blessing on the family. See, for example, Jer 15:9, Ruth 4:15. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 2:3) | 2 tn Heb “proudly, proudly.” If MT is original, the repetition of the word is for emphasis, stressing the arrogance of those addressed. However, a few medieval Hebrew manuscripts and some other textual witnesses do not reflect the repetition, suggesting that the Hebrew text may be dittographic. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:28) | 4 sn This Hebrew verb, the Hishtaphel of חָוָה (havah), means “to bow down” or “to prostrate oneself.” When bowing to the Lord it is a gesture of worship. In this context, if Samuel is the subject (see the previous tc note), he demonstrates reverence to the Lord regarding his mother’s vow. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:21) | 2 sn The only vow that has been mentioned so far is Hannah’s. This either implies an additional vow not made known to us, or implies Elkanah’s affirmation of her vow. According to Num 30:6-8 a husband could nullify his wife’s vow, or allow it to stand. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:20) | 1 tc The translation follows the sequence of the LXX. The MT says: “It happened at the turning of the days. Hannah conceived. And she gave birth to a son.” The phrase “at the turning of the days” might refer to the new year or to end of the term of pregnancy. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 4:12) | 2 sn Perez is an appropriate comparison here, because (1) he was an ancestor of Boaz, (2) he was born to Tamar by a surrogate father (Judah) after the death of her husband, and (3) he had an unbroken line of male descendants extending over several generations (see vv. 18-22). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 4:8) | 1 tc The LXX adds “and gave it to him” (cf. TEV, CEV), which presupposes the reading ויתן לו. This seems to be a clarifying addition (see v. 7), but it is possible the scribe’s eye jumped from the final ו (vav) on נַעֲלוֹ (naʿalo, “his sandal”) to the final ו (vav) on לוֹ (lo, “to him”), accidentally omitting the intervening letters. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 3:10) | 6 sn Whether rich or poor. This statement seems to indicate that Ruth could have married anyone. However, only by marrying a גֹּאֵל (goʾel, “family guardian”; traditionally “redeemer”) could she carry on her dead husband’s line and make provision for Naomi. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 3:13) | 1 tn Heb “if he redeems you”; NIV “if he wants to do his duty as your guardian-redeemer”; NRSV “if he will act as next-of-kin for you.” The verb גֹּאֵל (goʾel) here refers generally to fulfilling his responsibilities as a guardian of the family interests. In this case it specifically entails marrying Ruth. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 3:1) | 2 tn Heb “My daughter, should I not seek for you a resting place so that it may go well for you [or which will be good for you]?” The idiomatic, negated rhetorical question is equivalent to an affirmation (see 2:8-9) and has thus been translated in the affirmative (so also NAB, NCV, NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:15) | 3 tn Heb “do not humiliate her”; cf. KJV “reproach her not”; NASB “do not insult her”; NIV “don’t reprimand her.” This probably refers to a verbal rebuke which would single her out and embarrass her (see v. 16). See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 176-77, and F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 126. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:18) | 1 tc MT vocalizes ותרא as the Qal verb וַתֵּרֶא (vattereʾ, “and she saw”), consequently of “her mother-in-law” as subject and “what she gathered” as the direct object: “her mother-in-law saw what she gathered.” A few medieval Hebrew mss (also reflected in Syriac and Vulgate) have the Hiphil וַתַּרְא (vattarʾ, “and she showed”), consequently taking “her mother-in-law” as the direct object and “what she gathered” as the double direct-object: “she showed her mother-in-law what she had gathered” (cf. NAB, TEV, CEV, NLT). Although the latter has the advantage of making Ruth the subject of all the verbs in this verse, it would be syntactically difficult. For one would expect the accusative sign אֶת (ʾet) before “her mother-in-law” if it were the direct object of a Hiphil verb in a sentence with a double direct object introduced by the accusative sign אֶת, e.g., “to show (Hiphil of רָאָה, raʾah) your servant (direct object marked by accusative sign אֶת) your greatness (double direct object marked by accusative sign אֶת) (Deut 3:24). Therefore the MT reading is preferred. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:10) | 3 tn Heb “Why do I find favor in your eyes…?” The expression מָצַא חֵן בְּעֵינֶי (matsaʾ khen beʿeney, “to find favor in the eyes of [someone]”) is often characterized by the following features: (1) A subordinate or servant is requesting permission for something from a superior (master, owner, king). (2) The granting of the request is not a certainty but dependent on whether or not the superior is pleased with the subordinate to do so. (3) The granting of the request by the superior is an act of kindness or benevolence; however, it sometimes reciprocates loyalty previously shown by the subordinate to the superior (e.g., Gen 30:27; 32:6; 33:8, 10, 15; 34:11; 39:4; 47:25, 29; 50:4; Num 32:5; Deut 24:1; 1 Sam 1:18; 16:22; 20:3, 29; 27:3; 2 Sam 14:22; 16:4; 1 Kgs 11:19; Esth 5:8; 7:3; BDB 336 s.v. חֵן). While Boaz had granted her request for permission to glean in his field, she is amazed at the degree of kindness he had shown—especially since she had done nothing, in her own mind, to merit such a display. However, Boaz explains that she had indeed shown kindness to him indirectly through her devotion to Naomi (v. 11). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:8) | 3 tn The switch from the negative particle אַל (ʾal, see the preceding statement, “do not leave”) to לֹא (loʾ) may make this statement more emphatic. It may indicate that the statement is a policy applicable for the rest of the harvest (see v. 21). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:7) | 5 tn Heb “and she came and she stood, from then, the morning, and until now, this, her sitting [in] the house a little.” The syntax of the Hebrew text is awkward and the meaning uncertain. For discussion see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 118-19. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 1:2) | 2 sn The name Naomi (נָעֳמִי, noʿomi) is from the adjective נֹעַם (noʿam, “pleasant, lovely”) and literally means “my pleasant one” or “my lovely one.” Her name will become the subject of a wordplay in 1:20-21 when she laments that she is no longer “pleasant” but “bitter” because of the loss of her husband and two sons. |
| (0.20) | (Jdg 21:22) | 5 tc Heb “You did not give to them, now you are guilty.” The MT as it stands makes little sense. It is preferable to emend לֹא (loʾ, “not”) to לוּא (luʾ, “if”). This particle introduces a purely hypothetical condition, “If you had given to them [but you didn’t].” See G. F. Moore, Judges (ICC), 453-54. |
| (0.20) | (Jdg 19:30) | 3 tc Codex Alexandrinus (A) of the (original) LXX has the following additional words: “And he instructed the men whom he sent out, ‘Thus you will say to every male Israelite: “There has never been anything like this from the day the Israelites left Egypt till the present day.”’” |
| (0.20) | (Jdg 18:4) | 1 tn Heb “He said to them, ‘Such and such Micah has done for me.’” Though the statement is introduced and presented, at least in part, as a direct quotation (note especially “for me”), the phrase “such and such” appears to be the narrator’s condensed version of what the Levite really said. |
| (0.20) | (Jdg 16:24) | 1 tn Most interpret this as a reference to Samson, but this seems premature, since v. 25 suggests he was not yet standing before them. Consequently some prefer to see this statement as displaced and move it to v. 25 (see C. F. Burney, Judges, 387). It seems more likely that the pronoun refers to an image of Dagon. |
