44:21 Remember these things, O Jacob,
O Israel, for you are my servant.
I formed you to be my servant;
O Israel, I will not forget you! 1
31:20 Indeed, the people of Israel are my dear children.
They are the children I take delight in. 2
For even though I must often rebuke them,
I still remember them with fondness.
So I am deeply moved with pity for them 3
and will surely have compassion on them.
I, the Lord, affirm it! 4
11:1 When Israel was a young man, I loved him like a son, 5
and I summoned my son 6 out of Egypt.
11:28 In regard to the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but in regard to election they are dearly loved for the sake of the fathers. 11:29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.
1 tc The verb in the Hebrew text is a Niphal imperfect with a pronominal suffix. Although the Niphal ordinarily has the passive sense, it can have a reflexive nuance as well (see above translation). Some have suggested an emendation to a Qal form: “Do not forget me” (all the ancient versions, NEB, REB; see GKC 369 §117.x). “Do not forget me” would make a good parallel with “remember these things” in the first line. Since the MT is the harder reading and fits with Israel’s complaint that God had forgotten her (Isa 40:27), the MT reading should be retained (NASB, NKJV, NRSV, ESV). The passive has been rendered as an active in the translation in keeping with contemporary English style (so also NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).
2 tn Heb “Is Ephraim a dear son to me or a child of delight?” For the substitution of Israel for Ephraim and the plural pronouns for the singular see the note on v. 18. According to BDB 210 s.v. הֲ 1.c the question is rhetorical having the force of an impassioned affirmation. See 1 Sam 2:27; Job 41:9 (41:1 HT) for parallel usage.
3 tn Heb “my stomach churns for him.” The parallelism shows that this refers to pity or compassion.
4 tn Heb “Oracle of the
5 tn The words “like a son” are not in the Hebrew text, but are necessary to clarify what sort of love is intended (cf. also NLT).
6 tc The MT reads בְנִי (vÿni, “My son”); however, the LXX reflects בָנָיו (vanav, “his sons”). The MT should be retained as original here because of internal evidence; it is much more appropriate to the context.