89:40 You have broken down all his 1 walls;
you have made his strongholds a heap of ruins.
89:41 All who pass by 2 have robbed him;
he has become an object of disdain to his neighbors.
5:5 Now I will inform you
what I am about to do to my vineyard:
I will remove its hedge and turn it into pasture, 3
I will break its wall and allow animals to graze there. 4
18:5 For before the harvest, when the bud has sprouted,
and the ripening fruit appears, 5
he will cut off the unproductive shoots 6 with pruning knives;
he will prune the tendrils. 7
18:6 They will all be left 8 for the birds of the hills
and the wild animals; 9
the birds will eat them during the summer,
and all the wild animals will eat them during the winter.
2:2 For the Lord will restore 10 the majesty 11 of Jacob,
as well as 12 the majesty of Israel,
though 13 their enemies have plundered them 14
and have destroyed their fields. 15
1 tn The king here represents the land and cities over which he rules.
2 tn Heb “all the passersby on the road.”
3 tn Heb “and it will become [a place for] grazing.” בָּעַר (ba’ar, “grazing”) is a homonym of the more often used verb “to burn.”
4 tn Heb “and it will become a trampled place” (NASB “trampled ground”).
5 tn Heb “and the unripe, ripening fruit is maturing.”
6 tn On the meaning of זַלְזַל (zalzal, “shoot [of the vine] without fruit buds”) see HALOT 272 s.v. *זַלְזַל.
7 tn Heb “the tendrils he will remove, he will cut off.”
8 tn Heb “they will be left together” (so NASB).
9 tn Heb “the beasts of the earth” (so KJV, NASB).
10 tn The Qal perfect שָׁב (shav, “restore, return”) is an example of the so-called “prophetic perfect.” In this case, the perfect tense does not denote past-time action, but a future-time action that is pictured as complete (certain) and independent (not contingent upon other factors). The so-called “prophetic perfect” or “perfect of confidence” vividly expresses a future action that is deemed “as good as done” (Num 24:17; Isa 5:13; 8:23-9:1). See R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 33, §165; IBHS 489-90 §30.5.1. Though the transitive use of the Qal of this verb is problematic, most scholars derive שָׁב from the root שׁוּב (shuv, “to turn, to return, to restore”). However, W. A. Maier (Nahum, 232) contends that שָׁב is derived from I שָׁבַב (shavav, “to cut off, to destroy, to smite”) which is related to Arabic sabba (“to cut”), Aramaic sibba’(“splinter”), and New Hebrew. Maier admits that this would be the only occurrence of a verb from I שָׁבָב in the OT; however, he argues that the appearance of the plural noun שְׁבָבִים (shÿvavim, “splinters”) in Hos 8:6 provides adequate support. There are several problems with Maier’s proposal. First, his support from Arabic, Aramaic (Targum) and New Hebrew is all late. Second, it creates a hapax legomenon (a word that occurs only once in the Hebrew Bible) for a well-known Hebrew word which frequently appears in climactic contexts in prophetic speeches, as here. Third, the root שׁוּב (shuv, “to turn, to return, to restore”) makes perfectly good sense in this context. The meaning of this usage of שָׁב (from the root שׁוּב) is debated. The LXX took it in the negative sense “has turned aside.” On the other hand, it is nuanced in a positive, salvific sense by the Vulgate, Targum, and Syriac. The salvific nuance is best for the following reasons: (1) its direct object is גְּאוֹן (ge’on) which should be understood in the positive sense of “majesty; exaltation; glory” (see following note on the word “majesty”); (2) the motive clause introduced by causative/ explanatory כִּי (ki, “for”) would make little sense, saying that the reason the
11 tc The BHS editors propose emending the MT reading גְּאוֹן (gÿ’on, “majesty; pride”) to גֶּפֶן (gefen, “vineyard”) due to the mention of “their branches” (וּזְמֹרֵיהֶם, uzÿmorehem) in the following line (so HALOT 169 s.v. גָּאוֹן [2.b]). However, the LXX supports the MT.
12 tn The preposition כְּ (kaf) on כִּגְאוֹן (kig’on, “the glory of Israel”) may be comparative (“like the glory of Israel”) or emphatic (“the glory of Jacob, indeed, the glory of Israel”). See J. O’Rourke, “Book Reviews and Short Notes: Review of Nahum in the Light of Northwest Semitic by Kevin J. Cathcart,” CBQ 36 (1974): 397.
13 tn Or “for.” The introductory particle כִּי (ki) may be causal (“because”), explanatory (“for”), or concessive (“although”). KJV adopts the causal sense (“For”), while the concessive sense (“Although”) is adopted by NASB, NIV, NJPS, NRSV.
14 tn Heb “plunderers have plundered them.” The Hebrew root בָּקַק (baqaq, “to lay waste, to empty”) is repeated for emphasis: בְקָקוּם בֹּקְקִים (vÿqaqum boqÿqim, “plunderers have plundered them”). Similar repetition of the root בָּקַק occurs in Isa 24:3: “[The earth] will be completely laid waste” (הִבּוֹק תִּבּוֹק, hibboq tibboq).
15 tn Heb “their vine-branches.” The term “vine-branches” is a figurative expression (synecdoche of part for the whole) representing the agricultural fields as a whole.
16 sn The statement that the owner will come and destroy those tenants is a promise of judgment; see Luke 13:34-35; 19:41-44.
17 sn The warning that the owner would give the vineyard to others suggests that the care of the promise and the nation’s hope would be passed to others. This eventually looks to Gentile inclusion; see Eph 2:11-22.
18 tn Grk “they”; the referent (the people addressed in v. 9) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
19 sn May this never happen! Jesus’ audience got the point and did not want to consider a story where the nation would suffer judgment.