² tn The infinitive absolute followed by an imperfect of the same root is an emphatic rhetorical statement: זָכוֹר תִּזְכּוֹר (zakhor tizkor, “continually think”). Although the basic meaning of זָכַר (zakhar) is “to remember, call to mind” (HALOT 270 I זכר), here it refers to consideration of a present situation: “to consider, think about” something present (BDB 270 s.v. זָכַר 5). The referent of the third person feminine singular form of תִּזְכּוֹר (tizkor) is the feminine singular noun נַפְשִׁי (nafshi, “my soul”).

² tn Heb “sons of his quiver.” This idiom refers to arrows (BDB 121 s.v. בֵּן 6). The term “son” (בֵּן, ben) is often used idiomatically with a following genitive, e.g., “son of flame” = sparks (Job 5:7), “son of a constellation” = stars (Job 38:22), “son of a bow” = arrows (Job 41:2), “son of a quiver” = arrows (Lam 3:13), and “son of threshing-floor” = corn (Isa 21:10).

⁶ tn This entire line is an accusative noun clause, functioning as the direct object of the following line: “my enemy has destroyed the perfectly healthy children….” Normal word order in Hebrew is: verb + subject + direct object. Here, the accusative direct-object clause is moved forward for rhetorical emphasis: those whom the Babylonians killed had been children born perfectly healthy and then well raised…what a tragic loss of perfectly good human life!

¹ tn The verbs in this verse and the following are all in the Hebrew perfect tense, a tense often referring to a past action, or a past action with present results. However, as the translator’s notes have indicated, the prophets use this tense to view actions as if they were as good as done (the Hebrew prophetic perfect). The stance here is ideal, viewed as already accomplished.

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).

² tc The reading here and in v. 3 follows the reading of the Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions and the name found in 1 Kgs 11:5, 33 and 2 Kgs 23:13. The Hebrew reads “Malcom” both here, in v. 3, and in Zeph 1:5. This god is to be identified with the one known elsewhere as Molech (cf. 1 Kgs 11:7).

³ tc Heb “Behold, I will punish Amon of No and Pharaoh and Egypt and its gods and its kings and Pharaoh and all who trust in him.” There appears to be a copyist slip involving a double writing of וְעַל־פַּרְעֹה (v^eʿal-parʿoh). The present translation has followed the suggestion of BHS and deleted the first one, since the second is necessary for the syntactical connection, “Pharaoh and all who trust in him.”

¹ sn This statement shows that the preceding “none,” “never again,” and “all” in vv. 26-27 are rhetorical hyperbole: not all but almost all. Very few would survive. The following statement implies that the reason they are left alive is to bear witness to the fact that the Lord’s threats were indeed carried out. See vv. 11-14 for a parallel use of “all” and “none” qualified by a “few.”

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.

¹ tc The translation follows the Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions. The Hebrew text reads, “I will set fire to.” While it would be possible to explain the first person subject here in the same way as in the two verbs in v. 12b, the Hebrew text in transmission may have undergone a metathesis of two letters, י (yod) and ת (tav). The Hebrew reads הִצַּתִּי (hitsatti), and the versions presuppose הִצִּית (hitsit).

¹ tn Or “will follow you right into Egypt,” or “will dog your steps all the way to Egypt”; Heb “cling after.” This is the only case of this verb with this preposition in the Qal stem. However, it is used with this preposition several times in the Hiphil, all with the meaning of “to pursue closely.” See BDB 180 s.v. דָּבַק Hiph.2 and compare Judg 20:45; 1 Sam 14:22; 1 Chr 10:2.

² tn Heb “Now the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah while he…saying.” The form of this clause is disjunctive, showing that it does not follow the preceding events in either chronological or logical sequence. For a discussion of the form and function of such disjunctive clauses, see IBHS 650-52 §39.2.3. This example most closely fits the description and function of example 12, Ruth 4:18, 21-22 on p. 652.

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.

³ sn It is unclear whether this incident preceded or followed those in the preceding chapter. It is known from 52:5-9 that Zedekiah himself had made a trip to Babylon in the same year mentioned in 28:1 and that Jeremiah had used that occasion to address a prophecy of disaster to Babylon. It is not impossible that Jeremiah sent two such disparate messages at the same time (see Jer 25:8-11, 12-14, 17-18, 26).

¹ tn Heb “their pastures,” i.e., the place where they “shepherd” their “flocks.” The verb tenses in this section are not as clear as in the preceding. The participle in this verse is followed by a vav consecutive perfect, like the imperatives in v. 34. The verbs in v. 38 are perfects, but they can be and probably should be understood as prophetic, like the perfect in v. 31 (נְתָנָם, n^etanam), which is surrounded by imperfects, participles, and vav consecutive perfects.

⁵ tn Heb “Drink, and get drunk, and vomit and fall down and don’t get up.” The imperatives following drink are not parallel actions but consequent actions. For the use of the imperative plus the conjunctive “and” to indicate consequent action, even intention, see GKC 324-25 §110.f and compare usage in 1 Kgs 22:12 and Prov 3:3b-4a.

² tn This is an example of a question without the formal introductory particle following a conjunctive vav introducing an opposition. (See Joüon 2:609 §161.a.) It is also an example of the use of the infinitive before the finite verb in a rhetorical question involving doubt or denial. (See Joüon 2:422-23 §123.f, and compare usage in Gen 37:8.)

⁵ sn This has been the constant emphasis in this section. See 22:3 for the demand, 22:15 for its fulfillment, and 22:13 for its abuse. The ideal king would follow in the footsteps of his illustrious ancestor David (2 Sam 8:15), who set this forth as an ideal for his dynasty (2 Sam 23:3). David's son Solomon prayed for it to be true in his reign (Ps 72:1-2).

¹ tn The verb used here is often used of seeking information through a prophet (e.g., 2 Kgs 1:16; 8:8), and hence many translate, “inquire of the Lord for us.” However, it is obvious from the following that they were not seeking information but help. The word is also used for that in Pss 34:4 (34:5 HT); 77:2 (77:3 HT).

⁴ tc The translation follows the almost universally agreed upon correction of the MT. Instead of reading כֻּלֹּה מְקַלְלַונִי (kulloh m^eqal^elavni, “all of him is cursing me”) as the Masoretes proposed (Qere), one should read קִלְלוּנִי (qil^eluni) with the written text (Kethib) and redivide and repoint with the suggestion in BHS כֻּלְּהֶם (qull^ehem, “all of them are cursing me”).