(0.20) | (Jer 14:16) | 3 tn Heb “their evil.” Hebrew words often include within them a polarity of cause and effect. Thus the word for “evil” includes both the concept of wickedness and the punishment for it. Other words that function this way are “iniquity” = “guilt [of iniquity]” = “punishment [for iniquity].” Context determines which nuance is proper. |
(0.20) | (Jer 12:14) | 5 sn There appears to be an interesting play on the Hebrew word translated “uproot” in this verse. In the first instance it refers to “uprooting the nations from upon their lands,” i.e., to exiling them. In the second instance it refers to “uprooting the Judeans from the midst of them,” i.e., to rescuing them. |
(0.20) | (Jer 12:6) | 2 tn Heb “they have called after you fully”; or “have lifted up loud voices against you.” The word “against” does not seem quite adequate for the preposition “after.” The preposition “against” would be Hebrew עַל (ʿal). The idea appears to be that they are chasing after him, raising their voices, along with those of the conspirators, to have him killed. |
(0.20) | (Jer 12:4) | 5 sn The words here may be an outright rejection of the Lord’s words in Deut 32:20, which is part of a song that was to be taught to Israel in the light of their predicted rejection of the Lord. |
(0.20) | (Jer 12:4) | 4 tn Heb “he.” The referent is usually identified as God and is supplied here for clarity. Some identify the referent with Jeremiah. If that is the case, then he returns to his complaint about the conspirators. It is more likely, however, that it refers to God and Jeremiah’s complaint that the people live their lives apart from concern about God. |
(0.20) | (Jer 11:18) | 2 tn Heb “Then you showed me their deeds.” This is another example of the rapid shift in person that is common in Jeremiah. As elsewhere, it has been resolved, for the sake of avoiding confusion for the English reader, by leveling the referent to the same person throughout. The text again involves an apostrophe, a shift from talking about the Lord to addressing him. |
(0.20) | (Jer 9:21) | 1 sn Here Death is personified (treated as though it were a person). Some have seen as possible background to this lament an allusion to Mesopotamian mythology where the demon Lamastu climbs in through the windows of houses and over their walls to kill children and babies. |
(0.20) | (Jer 8:20) | 2 sn This appears to be a proverbial statement for “time marches on.” The people seem to be expressing their frustration that the Lord has not gone about his business of rescuing them as they expected. For a similar misguided feeling based on the offering of shallow repentance, see Hos 6:1-3 (and note the Lord’s reply in 6:4-6). |
(0.20) | (Jer 6:8) | 2 sn The wordplay begun with “sound…in Tekoa” in v. 1 and continued with “encamp” (they will pitch [their tents]) in v. 3 is concluded here with “turn away in disgust” (תֵּקַע [teqaʿ]), which uses the same consonants although built now on the root יָקַע (yaqaʿ). |
(0.20) | (Jer 6:3) | 1 tn Heb “Shepherds and their flocks will attack it.” Rulers are often depicted as shepherds; see BDB 945 s.v. רָעָה 1.d(2) (cf. Jer 12:10). The translation of this verse attempts to clarify the point of this extended metaphor. |
(0.20) | (Jer 5:14) | 4 tn Heb “you have spoken.” The text here דַּבֶּרְכֶם (dabberekhem, “you have spoken”) is either a case of a scribal error for דַּבֶּרָם (dabberam, “their speaking”; preceding יַעַן [ya‘an] would function as a preposition meaning “because of”) or an example of the rapid shift in addressee which is common in Jeremiah. |
(0.20) | (Jer 4:3) | 2 sn The agricultural imagery seems to be that they are to plow over the thorns and make the ground ready for seeds that will produce a new crop. The spiritual application of breaking up their rebellious will and turning from sin is metaphorically stated in the next verse. |
(0.20) | (Jer 2:11) | 1 tn Heb “have exchanged their glory [i.e., the God in whom they glory].” This is a case of a figure of speech where the attribute of a person or thing is put for the person or thing. Compare the common phrase in Isaiah, the Holy One of Israel, obviously referring to the Lord, the God of Israel. |
(0.20) | (Jer 2:9) | 2 sn The passage reflects the Hebrew concept of corporate solidarity: The actions of parents had consequences for their children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. Compare the usage in the ten commandments (Deut 5:10) and note the execution of the children of Dathan and Abiram (Deut 11:6) and of Achan (Josh 7:24-25). |
(0.20) | (Jer 2:6) | 3 sn The context suggests that the question is related to a lament where the people turn to God in their troubles, asking him for help and reminding him of his past benefactions. See for example Isa 63:11-19 and Ps 44. It is an implicit prayer for his intervention; compare 2 Kgs 2:14. |
(0.20) | (Jer 1:15) | 1 tn Heb “they will each set up.” The pronoun “they” refers back to the “kingdoms” in the preceding sentence. However, kingdoms do not sit on thrones; their kings do. This is an example of a figure of speech called metonymy, where the kingdom is put for its king. For a similar use see 2 Chr 12:8. |
(0.20) | (Isa 59:21) | 1 sn The Lord promises the repentant (note “to them”) that they and their offspring will possess his spirit and function as his spokesmen. In this regard they follow in the footsteps of the Lord’s special servant. See 42:1; 49:2; 51:16. |
(0.20) | (Isa 53:1) | 2 sn The speaker shifts here from God to an unidentified group (note the first person plural pronouns throughout vv. 1-6). The content of the speech suggests that the prophet speaks here as representative of the sinful nation Israel. The group acknowledges its sin and recognizes that the servant suffered on their behalf. |
(0.20) | (Isa 51:11) | 1 tn Heb “[will be] on their head[s].” “Joy” may be likened here to a crown (cf. 2 Sam 1:10). The statement may also be an ironic twist on the idiom “earth/dust on the head” (cf. 2 Sam 1:2; 13:19; 15:32; Job 2:12), referring to a mourning practice. |
(0.20) | (Isa 50:1) | 2 sn The Lord admits that he did sell the Israelites, but it was because of their sins, not because of some debt he owed. If he had sold them to a creditor, they ought to be able to point him out, but the preceding rhetorical question implies they would not be able to do so. |