Isaiah 40:20

40:20 To make a contribution one selects wood that will not rot; ¹ 

he then seeks a skilled craftsman

to make ²  an idol that will not fall over.

Jeremiah 10:3-8

10:3 For the religion ³  of these people is worthless.

They cut down a tree in the forest,

and a craftsman makes it into an idol with his tools. ⁴ 

10:4 He decorates it with overlays of silver and gold.

He uses hammer and nails to fasten it ⁵  together

so that it will not fall over.

10:5 Such idols are like scarecrows in a cucumber field.

They cannot talk.

They must be carried

because they cannot walk.

Do not be afraid of them

because they cannot hurt you.

And they do not have any power to help you.” ⁶ 

10:6 I said, ⁷ 

“There is no one like you, Lord. ⁸ 

You are great.

And you are renowned for your power. ⁹ 

10:7 Everyone should revere you, O King of all nations, ¹⁰ 

because you deserve to be revered. ¹¹ 

For there is no one like you

among any of the wise people of the nations nor among any of their kings. ¹² 

10:8 The people of those nations ¹³  are both stupid and foolish.

Instruction from a wooden idol is worthless! ¹⁴ 

Hosea 4:12

4:12 They consult their wooden idols,

and their diviner’s staff answers with an oracle.

The wind of prostitution blows them astray;

they commit spiritual adultery ¹⁵  against their God.

Habakkuk 2:19

2:19 The one who says to wood, ‘Wake up!’ is as good as dead ¹⁶  –

he who says ¹⁷  to speechless stone, ‘Awake!’

Can it give reliable guidance? ¹⁸ 

It is overlaid with gold and silver;

it has no life’s breath inside it.

[40:20]  ¹ tn The first two words of the verse (הַמְסֻכָּן תְּרוּמָה, hamsukan tÿrumah) are problematic. Some take מְסֻכָּן as an otherwise unattested Pual participle from סָכַן (sakhan, “be poor”) and translate “the one who is impoverished.” תְּרוּמָה (tÿrumah, “contribution”) can then be taken as an adverbial accusative, “with respect to a contribution,” and the entire line translated, “the one who is too impoverished for such a contribution [i.e., the metal idol of v. 19?] selects wood that will not rot.” However, מְסֻכָּן is probably the name of a tree used in idol manufacturing (cognate with Akkadian musukkanu, cf. H. R. Cohen, Biblical Hapax Legomena [SBLDS], 133). מְסֻכָּן may be a scribal interpretive addition attempting to specify עֵץ (’ets) or עֵץ may be a scribal attempt to categorize מְסֻכָּן. How an idol constitutes a תְּרוּמָה (“contribution”) is not entirely clear.

[40:20]  ² tn Or “set up” (ASV, NAB, NIV, NRSV); KJV, NASB “to prepare.”

[10:3]  ³ tn Heb “statutes.” According to BDB 350 s.v. חֻקָּה 2.b it refers to the firmly established customs or practices of the pagan nations. Compare the usage in Lev 20:23; 2 Kgs 17:8. Here it is essentially equivalent to דֶּרֶךְ (derekh) in v. 1, which has already been translated “religious practices.”

[10:3]  ⁴ sn This passage is dripping with sarcasm. It begins by talking about the “statutes” of the pagan peoples as a “vapor” using a singular copula and singular predicate. Then it suppresses the subject, the idol, as though it were too horrible to mention, using only the predications about it. The last two lines read literally: “[it is] a tree which one cuts down from the forest; the work of the hands of a craftsman with his chisel.”

[10:4]  ⁵ tn The pronoun is plural in Hebrew, referring to the parts.

[10:5]  ⁶ tn Heb “And it is not in them to do good either.”

[10:6]  ⁷ tn The words “I said” are not in the Hebrew text, but there appears to be a shift in speaker. Someone is now addressing the Lord. The likely speaker is Jeremiah, so the words “I said” are supplied in the translation for clarity.

[10:6]  ⁸ tn The form that introduces this line has raised debate. The form מֵאֵין (me’en) normally means “without” and introduces a qualification of a term expressing desolation or “so that not” and introduces a negative result (cf. BDB 35 s.v. II אַיִן 6.b). Neither of these nuances fit either this verse or the occurrence in v. 7. BDB 35 s.v. II אַיִן 6.b.γ notes that some have explained this as a strengthened form of אַיִן (’ayin) which occurs in a similar phrase five other times (cf., e.g., 1 Kgs 8:23). Though many including BDB question the validity of this solution it is probably better than the suggestion that BDB gives of repointing to מֵאַיִן (me’ayin, “whence”), which scarcely fits the context of v. 7, or the solution of HALOT 41 s.v. I אַיִן, which suggests that the מ (mem) is a double writing (dittograph) of the final consonant from the preceding word. That would assume that the scribe made the same error twice or was influenced the second time by the first erroneous writing.

[10:6]  ⁹ tn Heb “Great is your name in power.”

[10:7]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “Who should not revere you…?” The question is rhetorical and expects a negative answer.

[10:7]  ¹¹ tn Heb “For it is fitting to you.”

[10:7]  ¹² tn Heb “their royalty/dominion.” This is a case of substitution of the abstract for the concrete “royalty, royal power” for “kings” who exercise it.

[10:8]  ¹³ tn Or “Those wise people and kings are…” It is unclear whether the subject is the “they” of the nations in the preceding verse, or the wise people and kings referred to. The text merely has “they.”

[10:8]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “The instruction of vanities [worthless idols] is wood.” The meaning of this line is a little uncertain. Various proposals have been made to make sense, most of which involve radical emendation of the text. For some examples see J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah (NICOT), 323-24, fn 6. However, this is probably a case of the bold predication that discussed in GKC 452 §141.d, some examples of which may be seen in Ps 109:4 “I am prayer,” and Ps 120:7 “I am peace.”

[4:12]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “adultery.” The adjective “spiritual” is supplied in the translation to clarify that apostasy is meant here.

[2:19]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “Woe [to] the one who says.” On the term הוֹי (hoy) see the note on the word “dead” in v. 6.

[2:19]  ¹⁷ tn The words “he who says” in the translation are supplied from the previous parallel line.

[2:19]  ¹⁸ tn Though the Hebrew text has no formal interrogative marker here, the context indicates that the statement should be taken as a rhetorical question anticipating the answer, “Of course not!” (so also NIV, NRSV).