(0.17) | (Dan 2:30) | 2 tn Aram “they might cause the king to know.” The impersonal plural is used here to refer to the role of God’s spirit in revealing the dream and its interpretation to the king. As J. A. Montgomery says, “it appropriately here veils the mysterious agency” (Daniel [ICC], 164-65). Subsequent narratives show both God and angels involved with Nebuchadnezzar, so “they” can be appropriate. |
(0.17) | (Dan 2:1) | 4 tn Heb “his sleep left (?) him.” The use of the verb הָיָה (hayah, “to be”) here is unusual. The context suggests a meaning such as “to be finished” or “gone” (cf. Dan 8:27). Some scholars emend the verb to read נָדְדָה (nadedah, “fled”); cf. Dan 6:19. See further, DCH 2:540 s.v. היה I Ni.3; HALOT 244 s.v. היה nif; BDB 227-28 s.v. הָיָה Niph.2. |
(0.17) | (Eze 36:27) | 2 tn Heb “and I will do that which in my statutes you will walk.” The awkward syntax (verb “to do, act” + accusative sign + relative clause + prepositional phrase + second person verb) is unique, though Eccl 3:14 contains a similar construction. In the last line of that verse we read that “God acts so that (relative pronoun) they fear before him.” However, unlike Ezek 36:27, the statement has no accusative sign before the relative pronoun. |
(0.17) | (Eze 27:32) | 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. |
(0.17) | (Eze 26:17) | 3 tn Heb “she and her inhabitants who placed their terror to all her inhabitants.” The relationship of the final prepositional phrase to what precedes is unclear. The preposition probably has a specifying function here, drawing attention to Tyre’s inhabitants as the source of the terror mentioned prior to this. In this case, one might paraphrase verse 17b: “she and her inhabitants, who spread their terror; yes, her inhabitants (were the source of this terror).” |
(0.17) | (Eze 23:21) | 1 tn Or “you took note of.” The Hebrew verb פָּקַד (paqad) in the Qal implies evaluating something and then acting in light of that judgment; here the prophet depicts Judah as approving of her youthful unfaithfulness and then magnifying it at the present time. Some translations assume the verb should be repointed as a Niphal, rendering “you missed” or by extension “you longed for,” but such an extension of the Niphal “to be missing” is otherwise unattested. |
(0.17) | (Eze 21:27) | 3 tn Horace D. Hummel, Ezekiel (Concordia Commentary), 2:642, states that the suffixed object of the Hebrew verb for “give” (נָתַן, natan) can be indirect: “to him,” while the direct object (“it”) is understood from the preceding “right.” However, a more likely candidate for the understood object would be “this,” the turban/crown and the kingship it implies. The one who comes already has the “right.” |
(0.17) | (Eze 20:25) | 1 sn The content of the verse is shocking: that God would “give” bad decrees. This probably does not refer to the Mosaic law but to the practices of the Canaanites who were left in the land in order to test Israel. See Judg 2:20-23, the note on “decrees” here in Ezek 20:25, and the note on “pass through the fire” in v. 26. |
(0.17) | (Eze 19:7) | 2 tc The Hebrew text reads “widows” instead of “strongholds,” apparently due to a confusion of ר (resh) and ל (lamed). L. C. Allen (Ezekiel [WBC], 1:284) favors the traditional text, understanding “widows” in the sense of “women made widows.” D. I. Block, (Ezekiel [NICOT], 1:602) also defends the Hebrew text, arguing that the image is that of a dominant male lion who takes over the pride and by copulating with the females lays claim to his predecessor’s “widows.” |
(0.17) | (Eze 16:16) | 1 tc The text as written in the MT is incomprehensible (“not coming [plural] and he will not”). Driver has suggested a copying error of similar-sounding words, specifically לֹא (loʾ) for לוֹ (lo). The feminine participle בָאוֹת (vaʾot) has also been read as the feminine perfect בָאת (vaʾt). See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 1:228, n. 15.b, and D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 1:486, n. 137. |
(0.17) | (Eze 14:7) | 1 sn The ger (גֵּר) “resident foreigner” had a different status in different countries. In Israel the foreigners going by this term are (or are supposed to be) fully integrated into Israel’s social fabric and worshipers of Yahweh. Such an attachment to the Lord is a prior condition to the possibility of separating from the Lord. See also the notes at Exod 12:19 and Deut 29:11. |
(0.17) | (Eze 10:14) | 2 sn The living creature described here is thus slightly different from the one described in Ezek 1:10, where an ox’s face appeared instead of a cherub’s. Note that some English versions harmonize the two descriptions and read the same here as in 1:10 (cf. NAB, NLT “an ox”; TEV, CEV “a bull”). This may be justified based on v. 22, which states the creatures’ appearance was the same. |
(0.17) | (Eze 1:20) | 3 tn Or “wind.” The Hebrew is difficult since the text presents four creatures and then talks about “the spirit” (singular) of “the living being” (singular). According to M. Greenberg (Ezekiel [AB], 1:45) the Targum interprets this as “will.” Greenberg views this as the spirit of the one enthroned above the creatures, but one would not expect the article when the one enthroned has not yet been introduced. |
(0.17) | (Eze 1:4) | 3 tn Heb “fire taking hold of itself,” perhaps repeatedly. The phrase occurs elsewhere only in Exod 9:24 in association with a hailstorm. The LXX interprets the phrase as fire flashing like lightning, but it is possibly a self-sustaining blaze of divine origin. The LXX also reverses the order of the descriptors, i.e., “light went around it, and fire flashed like lightning within it.” |
(0.17) | (Eze 1:1) | 1 sn The meaning of the thirtieth year is problematic. Some take it to mean the age of Ezekiel when he prophesied (e.g., Origen). The Aramaic Targum explains the thirtieth year as the thirtieth year dated from the recovery of the book of the Torah in the temple in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 22:3-9). The number seems somehow to be equated with the fifth year of Jehoiachin’s exile in 1:2, i.e., 593 b.c. |
(0.17) | (Eze 1:3) | 3 tn Heb “Chaldeans.” The name of the tribal group ruling Babylon, “Chaldeans” is used as metonymy for the whole empire of Babylon. The Babylonians worked with the Medes to destroy the Assyrian Empire near the end of the 7th century b.c. Then, over the next century, the Babylonians dominated the West Semitic states (such as Phoenicia, Aram, Moab, Edom, and Judah in the modern countries of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel) and made incursions into Egypt. |
(0.17) | (Lam 5:17) | 1 tn Heb “are faint” or “are sick.” The adjective דַּוָּי (davvay, “faint”) is used in reference to emotional sorrow (e.g., Isa 1:5; Lam 1:22; Jer 8:18). The related adjective דָּוֶה (daveh) means “(physically) sick” and “(emotionally) sad,” while the related verb דָּוָה (davah) means “to be sad.” The cognate Aramaic term means “sorrow,” and the cognate Syriac term refers to “misery.” |
(0.17) | (Lam 4:1) | 3 tn Heb “had grown dim.” The verb יוּעַם (yu’am), Hophal imperfect third person masculine singular from עָמַם (’amam, “to conceal, darken”), literally means “to be dimmed” or “to be darkened.” Most English versions render this literally: the gold has “become dim” (KJV, NKJV), “grown dim” (RSV, NRSV), “is dulled” (NJPS), and “grown dull” (TEV); however, the NIV has captured the sense well: “How the gold has lost its luster.” |
(0.17) | (Lam 3:54) | 2 tn Heb “I was about to be cut off.” The verb נִגְזָרְתִּי (nigzarti), Niphal perfect first person common singular from גָּזַר (gazar, “to be cut off”), functions in an ingressive sense: “about to be cut off.” It is used in reference to the threat of death (e.g., Ezek 37:11; Ps 88:5). To be “cut off” from the land of the living means to experience death (Isa 53:8). |
(0.17) | (Lam 3:13) | 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). |