Jeremiah 1:4

Jeremiah’s Call and Commission

1:4 The Lord said to me,

Jeremiah 1:11

Visions Confirming Jeremiah’s Call and Commission

1:11 Later the Lord asked me, “What do you see, Jeremiah?” I answered, “I see a branch of an almond tree.”

Jeremiah 1:1

The Superscription

1:1 The following is a record of what Jeremiah son of Hilkiah prophesied. ¹  He was one of the priests who lived at Anathoth in the territory of the tribe of Benjamin.

Jeremiah 13:20

13:20 Then I said, ² 

“Look up, Jerusalem, ³  and see

the enemy ⁴  that is coming from the north.

Where now is the flock of people that were entrusted to your care? ⁵ 

Where now are the ‘sheep’ that you take such pride in? ⁶ 

Hosea 1:1

Superscription

1:1 ⁷ This is the word of the Lord which was revealed to Hosea ⁸  son of Beeri during the time when ⁹  Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah ruled Judah, ¹⁰  and during the time when Jeroboam son of Joash ¹¹  ruled Israel. ¹² 

Jonah 1:1

Jonah Tries to Run from the Lord

1:1 The Lord said ¹³  to Jonah son of Amittai, ¹⁴ 

Micah 1:1

Introduction

1:1 This is the prophetic message that the Lord gave to ¹⁵  Micah of Moresheth. He delivered this message ¹⁶  during the reigns of ¹⁷  Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. The prophecies pertain to ¹⁸  Samaria ¹⁹  and Jerusalem. ²⁰ 

¹ tn Or “This is a record of what Jeremiah prophesied and did”; Heb “The words [or affairs] of Jeremiah.” The phrase could refer to either the messages of Jeremiah recorded in the book or to both his messages and the biographical (and autobiographical) narratives recorded about him in the book. Since the phrase is intended to serve as the title or superscription for the whole book and recurs again in 51:64 at the end of the book before the final appendix, it might refer to the latter. The expression “The words of [someone]” is a standard introductory formula (Deut 29:1[28:69]; 2 Sam 23:1; Amos 1:1; Eccl 1:1; Neh 1:1).

² tn The words “Then I said” are not in the text. They are supplied in the translation to show the shift in speaker from vv. 18-19 where the Lord is speaking to Jeremiah.

³ tn The word “Jerusalem” is not in the Hebrew text. It is added in the Greek text and is generally considered to be the object of address because of the second feminine singular verbs here and throughout the following verses. The translation follows the consonantal text (Kethib) and the Greek text in reading the second feminine singular here. The verbs and pronouns in vv. 20-22 are all second feminine singular with the exception of the suffix on the word “eyes” which is not reflected in the translation here (“Look up” = “Lift up your eyes”) and the verb and pronoun in v. 23. The text may reflect the same kind of alternation between singular and plural that takes place in Isa 7 where the pronouns refer to Ahaz as an individual and his entourage, the contemporary ruling class (cf., e.g., Isa 7:4-5 [singular], 9 [plural], 11 [singular], 13-14 [plural]). Here the connection with the preceding may suggest that it is initially the ruling house (the king and the queen mother), then Jerusalem personified as a woman in her role as a shepherdess (i.e., leader). However, from elsewhere in the book the leadership has included the kings, the priests, the prophets, and the citizens as well (cf., e.g., 13:13). In v. 27 Jerusalem is explicitly addressed. It may be asking too much of some readers who are not familiar with biblical metaphors to understand an extended metaphor like this. If it is helpful to them, they may substitute plural referents for “I” and “me.”

⁴ tn The word “enemy” is not in the text but is implicit. It supplied in the translation for clarity.

⁵ tn Heb “the flock that was given to you.”

⁶ tn Heb “the sheep of your pride.” The word “of your people” and the quotes around “sheep” are intended to carry over the metaphor in such a way that readers unfamiliar with the metaphor will understand it.

⁷ tc The textual problems in Hosea are virtually unparalleled in the OT. The Masoretic Text (MT), represented by the Leningrad Codex (c. a.d. 1008), which served as the basis for both BHK and BHS, and the Aleppo Codex (c. a.d. 952), are textually corrupt by all accounts and have a multitude of scribal errors. Many medieval Masoretic mss preserve textual variants that differ from the Leningrad and Aleppo Codices. The Qumran materials (4QXII^c,d,g) contain numerous textual variants that differ from the MT; unfortunately, these texts are quite fragmentary (frequently in the very place that an important textual problem appears). The textual tradition and translation quality of the LXX and the early Greek recensions (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion) is mixed; in some places they are inferior to the MT but in other places they preserve a better reading. The textual apparatus of BHK and BHS contains many proposed emendations based on the ancient versions (Greek, Syriac, Latin, Aramaic) that often appear to be superior readings than what is preserved in the MT. In numerous cases, the MT readings are so difficult morphologically, syntactically, and contextually that conservative conjectural emendations are necessary to make sense of the text. Most major English versions (e.g., KJV, ASV, RSV, NEB, NAB, NASB, NIV, TEV, NKJV, NJPS, NJB, NRSV, REB, NCV, CEV, NLT) adopt (either occasionally or frequently) textual variants reflected in the versions and occasionally adopt conservative conjectural emendations proposed in BHK and/or BHS. However, many of the textual problems in Hosea are so difficult that the English versions frequently are split among themselves. With this in mind, the present translation of Hosea must necessarily be viewed as only preliminary. Further work on the text and translation of Hosea is needed, not only in terms of the NET Bible but in Hosea studies in general. The text of Hosea should be better clarified when the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project completes work on the book of Hosea. For further study of textual problems in Hosea, see D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 5:228-71.

⁸ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which was to Hosea.” The words “This is” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

⁹ tn Heb “in the days of” (again later in this verse). Cf. NASB “during the days of”; NIV “during the reigns of”; NLT “during the years when.”

¹⁰ tn Heb “Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, kings of Judah.”

¹¹ sn Joash is a variation of the name Jehoash. Some English versions use “Jehoash” here (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).

¹² tn Heb “Jeroboam son of Joash, king of Israel.”

¹³ tn Heb “The word of the Lord.” The genitive noun in the construction דְּבַר־יְהוָה (dÿvar-yÿhvah, “word of the Lord”) could function as a possessive genitive (“the Lord’s word”; see IBHS 145 §9.5.1g), but more likely it functions as a subjective genitive (“the Lord said”; see IBHS 143 §9.5.1a). The Aramaic translation of Jonah 1:1 (Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible are known as Targums) interprets the Hebrew as “There was a word of prophecy from the Lord” (cf. Tg. Hos 1:1).

¹⁴ tn Heb “The word of the Lord was to Jonah…saying….” The infinitive לֵאמֹר (le’mor, “saying”) introduces direct discourse and is untranslated in English.

¹⁵ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which came to.”

¹⁶ tn The words “he delivered this message” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarification.

¹⁷ tn Heb “in the days of” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV).

¹⁸ tn Heb “which he saw concerning.”

¹⁹ map For location see Map2-B1; Map4-D3; Map5-E2; Map6-A4; Map7-C1.

²⁰ map For location see Map5-B1; Map6-F3; Map7-E2; Map8-F2; Map10-B3; JP1-F4; JP2-F4; JP3-F4; JP4-F4.