8:13 I will take away their harvests, 4 says the Lord.
There will be no grapes on their vines.
There will be no figs on their fig trees.
Even the leaves on their trees will wither.
The crops that I gave them will be taken away.’” 5
1:7 They 6 have destroyed our 7 vines; 8
they have turned our 9 fig trees into mere splinters.
They have completely stripped off the bark 10 and thrown them aside;
the 11 twigs are stripped bare. 12
1:12 The vine has dried up;
the fig tree languishes –
the pomegranate, date, and apple 13 as well.
In fact, 14 all the trees of the field have dried up.
Indeed, the joy of the people 15 has dried up!
2:22 Do not fear, wild animals! 16
For the pastures of the wilderness are again green with grass.
Indeed, the trees bear their fruit;
the fig tree and the vine yield to their fullest. 17
3:17 When 18 the fig tree does not bud,
and there are no grapes on the vines;
when the olive trees do not produce, 19
and the fields yield no crops; 20
when the sheep disappear 21 from the pen,
and there are no cattle in the stalls,
1 tn The words “he promises” do not appear in the Hebrew text but are needed in the translation to facilitate the transition from the condition (v. 13) to the promise and make it clear that the Lord is speaking the words of vv. 14-15.
2 tn Heb “the rain of your land.” In this case the genitive (modifying term) indicates the recipient of the rain.
3 sn The autumn and the spring rains. The “former” (יוֹרֶה, yoreh) and “latter” (מַלְקוֹשׁ, malqosh) rains come in abundance respectively in September/October and March/April. Planting of most crops takes place before the former rains fall and the harvests follow the latter rains.
4 tn Or “I will completely destroy them.” The translation which is adopted is based on the revocalization of the MT which appears to mean literally “gathering I will sweep them away,” a rather improbable grammatical combination. It follows the suggestion found in HALOT 705 s.v. סוּף (Hiph) of reading אֹסֵף אֲסִיפָם (’ose, a first singular Qal imperfect of אָסַף [’asaf] followed by a noun אָסִיף [’asif] with possessive suffix) instead of the MT’s אָסֹף אֲסִיפֵם (’aspf ’asifem, a Qal infinitive absolute of אָסַף [’asaf] followed by the Hiphil imperfect of סוּף [suf] plus suffix). For parallel usage of the verb אָסַף (asaf) see BDB 62 s.v. אָסַף Qal.4, and for a similar form of the verb see Mic 4:6. The alternate translation follows the suggestion in BDB 692 s.v. סוּף Hiph: אָסֹף (’asof) is to be interpreted as a form of the Hiphil infinitive absolute (הָסֵף [hasef] would be expected) chosen for assonance with the following form. This suggestion would gain more credence if the MT is to be retained in Zeph 1:2 where parallel forms are found. However, that text too has been questioned on lexical and grammatical grounds. The translation adopted fits the following context better than the alternate one and is based on less questionable lexical and grammatical parallels. The Greek translation which reads “they shall gather their fruits” supports the translation chosen.
5 tn The meaning of this line is very uncertain. A possible alternate translation is: “They have broken the laws that I gave them.” The line reads rather literally “And I gave them they passed over them.” The translation adopted treats the first expression as a noun clause (cf. GKC 488-89 §155.n) which is the subject of the following verb, i.e., “the things I gave them [contextually, the grapes, etc.] passed over from them.” The alternate translation treats the expression as a dangling object (a Hebrew casus pendens) resumed by the pronoun “them” and understands “the things that I gave them” to be the law or some related entity which is often the object of this verb (see BDB 717 s.v. עָבַר Qal.1.i). Neither of these translations is without its weakness. The weakness of the translation which has been adopted is the unusual use it assigns to the object suffix of the verb translated “pass over.” The weakness of the alternate translation is the rather abrupt and opaque introduction of a new topic of reference (i.e., the laws) into the context. On the whole the latter weakness would appear to outweigh the former. This line is missing from the Greek version and J. Bright (Jeremiah [AB]) and J. A. Thompson (Jeremiah [NICOT]) despair of giving a translation. For other possible suggestions see, W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah (Hermeneia), 1:285-86.
6 tn Heb “it.” Throughout vv. 6-7 the Hebrew uses singular forms to describe the locust swarm, but the translation uses plural forms because several details of the text make more sense in English as if they are describing the appearance and effects of individual locusts.
7 tn Heb “my.”
8 tn Both “vines” and “fig trees” are singular in the Hebrew text, but are regarded as collective singulars.
9 tn Heb “my.”
10 tn Heb “it has completely stripped her.”
11 tn Heb “her.”
12 tn Heb “grow white.”
13 tn This Hebrew word וְתַפּוּחַ (vÿtappuakh) probably refers to the apple tree (so most English versions), but other suggestions that scholars have offered include the apricot, citron, or quince.
14 tn These words are not in the Hebrew text but are supplied in the translation for clarity.
15 tn Heb “the sons of man.”
16 tn Heb “beasts of the field.”
17 tn Heb “their strength.” The trees and vines will produce a maximum harvest, in contrast to the failed agricultural conditions previously described.
18 tn Or “though.”
19 tn Heb “the produce of the olive disappoints.”
20 tn Heb “food.”
21 tn Or “are cut off.”
22 tn Or “the heavens” (so KJV, NAB, NIV). The Hebrew term שָׁמַיִם (shamayim) may be translated “heavens” or “skies” depending on the context.