¹ tn Or “the wise”; or “the prudent.” Another option is to translate “the successful, prosperous” and understand this as a reference to the rich oppressors. See G. V. Smith, Amos, 169-70. In this case the following verb will also have a different nuance, that is, the wealthy remain silent before the abuses they perpetuate. See the note on the verb translated “keeps quiet” later in this verse.

² sn The following verses explain what it meant to seek the Lord. Israel was to abandon the mere formalism and distorted view of God and reality that characterized religious activity at the worship sites, as well as the social injustice that permeated Israelite society. Instead the people were to repent and promote justice in the land. This call to seek the Lord echoes the challenge in 4:13 to prepare to meet him as he truly is.

² tn The Hiphil infinitive construct is taken adverbially (“kept”) and connected to the activity of the locusts (NJPS). It also could be taken with the preceding sentence and related to the Lord’s interventions (“I kept destroying,” cf. NEB, NJB, NIV, NRSV), or it could be understood substantivally in construct with the following nouns (“Locusts devoured your many orchards,” cf. NASB; cf. also KJV, NKJV).

² tc The MT reads כִּי־בִי בְעֶזְרֶךָ (ki vi veʿezrekha, “but in me is your help”); cf. KJV, NIV, and NLT. The LXX and Syriac reflect an underlying Hebrew text of כִּי־מִי בְעֶזְרֶךָ (ki mi veʿezrekha, “For who will help you?”). The interrogative מִי (“Who?”) harmonizes well with the interrogatives in 13:9-10 and should be adopted, as the BHS editors suggest; the reading is also followed by NAB, NCV, NRSV, and TEV.

¹ tc The MT reads שִׁחֶתְךָ (shikhet^ekha, “he destroyed you”; Piel perfect third person masculine singular from שָׁחַת, shakhat, “to destroy” + second person masculine singular suffix). The BHS editors suggest שׁחתיךָ (“I will destroy you”; Piel perfect first person common singular + second person masculine singular suffix). Contextually, this fits: If the Lord is intent on destroying Israel, there is no one who will be able to rescue her from him. This reading is also followed by NCV, NRSV, and TEV.

¹ tc The MT vocalizes the consonantal text וָיָּשַׂר (vayyasar, vav consecutive + Qal preterite third person masculine singular from שׂוּר, sur, possibly a byform of one or more other roots. Parallelism with שָׂרַה (sarah, “he contended”) in 12:3 suggested that it be vocalized as ויִּשַׂר (vav consecutive + Qal preterite third person masculine singular from שׂרה [“to strive, contend”]). The latter is followed by almost all English versions here.

¹ tc Or “Will they not return to Egypt?” (so NIV). Following the LXX and BHS, the MT לֹא (loʾ, “not”) should probably be read as לוֹ (lo, “to him”) and connected to the end of 11:4 rather than the beginning of 11:5. The textual confusion between לֹא and לוֹ probably reflects an unintentional scribal error due to a mistake in hearing (cf., e.g., Kethib/Qere in Ps 100:3).

² tc The MT reads מִפְּנֵיהֶם (mipp^enehem, “from them”; preposition + masculine plural noun + third person masculine plural suffix); so KJV, ASV, and NASB. However, the LXX and Syriac reflect an alternate Hebrew textual tradition of מִפָּנַי הֵם (mippanay hem, “they [went away] from me”; preposition + masculine plural noun + first person common singular suffix, followed by third person masculine plural independent personal pronoun); cf. NAB, NIV, and NRSV. The textual variant was caused simply by faulty word division.

¹ tc The MT is unintelligible: עַל־טוּב (ʿal tuv, “upon a fine [thing]”?). Cf. KJV “I passed over upon her fair neck,” NRSV “I spared her fair neck.” The BHS editors suggest the revocalization עֹל־טוּב (ʿol tuv, “a fine yoke”), followed by many modern English versions (e.g., NAB, NASB, NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT). The noun עֹל (ʿol, “yoke”) also appears in 11:4 in a metaphor comparing Israel to a young heifer.

² tc The MT preserves the enigmatic כְּמוֹ תַנּוּר בֹּעֵרָה מֵ (k^emo tannur boʿerah me, “Like a burning oven, from…?”). The adjectival participle בֹּעֵרָה (“burning”) is feminine while the noun תַנּוּר (tannur, “oven”) that it modifies is masculine. The BHS editors solve this problem by simply redividing the words: כְּמוֹ תַנּוּר בֹּעֵר הֵם (k^emo tannur boʿer hem, “they are like a burning oven”). This solution is followed by many English versions (e.g., NCV, NRSV, NLT).

¹ tn The meaning of Aramaic דַּחֲוָה (dakhavah) is a crux interpretum. Suggestions include “music,” “dancing girls,” “concubines,” “table,” “food”—all of which are uncertain. The translation employed here, suggested by earlier scholars, is deliberately vague. A number of recent English versions follow a similar approach with “entertainment” (e.g., NASB, NIV, NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT). On this word see further, HALOT 1849-50 s.v.; E. Vogt, Lexicon linguae aramaicae, 37.

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.

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 sn The meanings of the Babylonian names are more conjectural than is the case with the Hebrew names. The probable etymologies are as follows: Belteshazzar means “protect his life,” although the MT vocalization may suggest “Belti, protect the king” (cf. Dan 4:8); Shadrach perhaps means “command of Aku”; Meshach is of uncertain meaning; and Abednego means “servant of Nego.” Assigning Babylonian names to the Hebrew youths may have been an attempt to erase from their memory their Israelite heritage.

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.

³ tn Heb “and I will place beauty.” This reading makes little sense; many, following the lead of the LXX, emend the text to read: “nor will you stand,” with the negative particle before the preceding verb understood by ellipsis; see L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:73. D. I. Block (Ezekiel [NICOT], 2:47) offers another alternative, taking the apparent first person verb form as an archaic second feminine form and translating “nor radiate splendor.”

¹ tn Heb “(with) toil she has wearied.” The meaning of the statement is unclear in the Hebrew text; some follow the LXX and delete it. The first word in the statement (rendered “toil” in the literal translation above) occurs only here in the OT, and the verb “she has wearied” lacks a stated object. Elsewhere the Hiphil of the verb refers to wearying someone or trying someone’s patience. The feminine subject is apparently the symbolic pot.

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 As it stands in the MT, the syntax is difficult. Most translations say something like “groan in silence,” but this is problematic. According to their form, the two verbs that begin the verse, הֵאָנֵק (heʾanek; to groan) and דֹּם (dom; to be silent), may each be parsed as either imperative or infinitive construct. This allows four possible sequences. An infinitive followed by an infinitive would lack a main verb and can be dismissed. An infinitive followed by an imperative is improper syntax and nowhere occurs with both in the same clause. An imperative followed by an infinitive is very rare. The only three clear cases (Ps 33:3; Isa 1:16; 23:16) appear to involve infinitive complements, which does not fit these terms. Two imperatives back to back are common, occurring over 200 times, but in no case does the second imperative tell the manner of the action in the first (except perhaps a couple disputable parsings of מַהֵר (maher; be quick). So there is no combination of the forms in the MT that supports the common translation. It may also be said that groaning and being silent are mutually exclusive concepts. However, there is a rare homonym, also attested in the cognate languages Ugaritic and Akkadian, another root דמם (dmm), which means to moan. The translation above follows the suggestion of M. Greenberg that דֹּם מֵתִים (dom metim) be taken together and דֹּם be derived from דָּמַם (damam, “to moan, murmur”) meaning: “Groan a moaning for the dead.” See M. Greenberg, Ezekiel (AB), 2:508. Note that in verse 23 Ezekiel affirms that the people will moan to each other (though there the root is נָהַם, naham); therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that Ezekiel is moaning here, since his actions forecast theirs.

³ tn Heb “has laid it on him.” The verb נָטַל (natal) is used four times in Biblical Hebrew; the related noun refers to heaviness or a burden. The entry of BDB 642 s.v. is outdated, while HALOT 694 s.v. נטל is acceptable for the Qal. See D. R. Hillers, Lamentations (AB), 57. Hillers’ suggestion of a stative meaning for the Qal is followed here, although “impose” is also possible based on 2 Sam 24:12.