Luke 1:59-63

1:59 On ¹  the eighth day ²  they came to circumcise the child, and they wanted to name ³  him Zechariah after his father. 1:60 But ⁴  his mother replied, ⁵  “No! He must be named ⁶  John.” ⁷  1:61 They ⁸  said to her, “But ⁹  none of your relatives bears this name.” ¹⁰  1:62 So ¹¹  they made signs to the baby’s ¹²  father, ¹³  inquiring what he wanted to name his son. ¹⁴  1:63 He ¹⁵  asked for a writing tablet ¹⁶  and wrote, ¹⁷  “His name is John.” And they were all amazed. ¹⁸ 

Jeremiah 1:2

1:2 The Lord ¹⁹  began to speak to him ²⁰  in the thirteenth year that Josiah son of Amon ruled over Judah.

Jeremiah 2:1

The Lord Recalls Israel’s Earlier Faithfulness

2:1 The Lord spoke to me. He said:

Ezekiel 1:3

1:3 the word of the Lord came to the priest Ezekiel ²¹  the son of Buzi, ²²  at the Kebar River in the land of the Babylonians. ²³  The hand ²⁴  of the Lord came on him there).

Hosea 1:1-2

Superscription

1:1 ²⁵ This is the word of the Lord which was revealed to Hosea ²⁶  son of Beeri during the time when ²⁷  Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah ruled Judah, ²⁸  and during the time when Jeroboam son of Joash ²⁹  ruled Israel. ³⁰ 

Symbols of Sin and Judgment: The Prostitute and Her Children

1:2 When the Lord first spoke ³¹  through ³²  Hosea, he ³³  said to him, ³⁴  “Go marry ³⁵  a prostitute ³⁶  who will bear illegitimate children conceived through prostitution, ³⁷  because the nation ³⁸  continually commits spiritual prostitution ³⁹  by turning away from ⁴⁰  the Lord.”

Jonah 1:1

Jonah Tries to Run from the Lord

1:1 The Lord said ⁴¹  to Jonah son of Amittai, ⁴² 

Micah 1:1

Introduction

1:1 This is the prophetic message that the Lord gave to ⁴³  Micah of Moresheth. He delivered this message ⁴⁴  during the reigns of ⁴⁵  Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. The prophecies pertain to ⁴⁶  Samaria ⁴⁷  and Jerusalem. ⁴⁸ 

Zephaniah 1:1

Introduction

1:1 This is the prophetic message that the Lord gave to ⁴⁹  Zephaniah son of Cushi, son of Gedaliah, son of Amariah, son of Hezekiah. Zephaniah delivered this message during the reign of ⁵⁰  King Josiah son of Amon of Judah:

[1:59]  ¹ tn Grk “And it happened that.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[1:59]  ² sn They were following OT law (Lev 12:3) which prescribed that a male child was to be circumcised on the eighth day.

[1:59]  ³ tn This could be understood as a conative imperfect, expressing an unrealized desire (“they were trying to name him”). It has been given more of a voluntative nuance in the translation.

[1:60]  ⁴ tn Grk “And,” but with clearly contrastive emphasis in context.

[1:60]  ⁵ tn Grk “his mother answering, said.” The combination of participle and finite verb is redundant in English and has been simplified to “replied” in the translation.

[1:60]  ⁶ tn This future passive indicative verb has imperatival force and thus has been translated “he must be named.”

[1:60]  ⁷ sn “No! He must be named John.” By insisting on the name specified by the angel, Elizabeth (v. 60) and Zechariah (v. 63) have learned to obey God (see Luke 1:13).

[1:61]  ⁸ tn Grk “And they.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[1:61]  ⁹ tn The word “but” is not in the Greek text but has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

[1:61]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “There is no one from your relatives who is called by this name.”

[1:62]  ¹¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the consequential nature of the action described.

[1:62]  ¹² tn Grk “his”; the referent (the baby) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:62]  ¹³ sn The crowd was sure there had been a mistake, so they appealed to the child’s father. But custom was not to be followed here, since God had spoken. The fact they needed to signal him (made signs) shows that he was deaf as well as unable to speak.

[1:62]  ¹⁴ tn Grk “what he might wish to call him.”

[1:63]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “And he.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[1:63]  ¹⁶ sn The writing tablet requested by Zechariah would have been a wax tablet.

[1:63]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “and wrote, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant is English and has not been translated.

[1:63]  ¹⁸ sn The response, they were all amazed, expresses a mixture of surprise and reflection in this setting where they were so certain of what the child’s name would be.

[1:2]  ¹⁹ sn The translation reflects the ancient Jewish tradition of substituting the word for “Lord” for the proper name for Israel’s God which is now generally agreed to have been Yahweh. Jewish scribes wrote the consonants YHWH but substituted the vowels for the word “Lord.” The practice of calling him “Lord” rather than using his proper name is also reflected in the Greek translation which is the oldest translation of the Hebrew Bible. The meaning of the name Yahweh occurs in Exod 3:13-14 where God identifies himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and tells Moses that his name is “I am” (אֶהְיֶה, ’ehyeh). However, he instructs the Israelites to refer to him as YHWH (“Yahweh” = “He is”); see further Exod 34:5-6.

[1:2]  ²⁰ tn Heb “to whom the word of the Lord came.” The present translation is more in keeping with contemporary English idiom. The idea of “began to speak” comes from the context where the conclusion of his speaking is signaled by the phrases “until the end of the eleventh year of Zedekiah” and “until the people of Jerusalem were taken into exile” in v. 3.

[1:3]  ²¹ sn The prophet’s name, Ezekiel, means in Hebrew “May God strengthen.”

[1:3]  ²² tn Or “to Ezekiel son of Buzi the priest.”

[1:3]  ²³ tn Heb “Chaldeans.” The name of the tribal group ruling Babylon, “Chaldeans” is used as metonymy for the whole empire of Babylon. The Babylonians worked with the Medes to destroy the Assyrian Empire near the end of the 7th century b.c. Then, over the next century, the Babylonians dominated the West Semitic states (such as Phoenicia, Aram, Moab, Edom, and Judah in the modern countries of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel) and made incursions into Egypt.

[1:3]  ²⁴ tn Or “power.”

[1:1]  ²⁵ 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.

[1:1]  ²⁶ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which was to Hosea.” The words “This is” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:1]  ²⁷ 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.”

[1:1]  ²⁸ tn Heb “Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, kings of Judah.”

[1:1]  ²⁹ sn Joash is a variation of the name Jehoash. Some English versions use “Jehoash” here (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).

[1:1]  ³⁰ tn Heb “Jeroboam son of Joash, king of Israel.”

[1:2]  ³¹ tn The construct noun תְּחִלַּת (tékhillat, “beginning of”) displays a wider use of the construct state here, preceding a perfect verb דִּבֶּר (dibber, “he spoke”; Piel perfect 3rd person masculine singular) rather than a genitive noun. This is an unusual temporal construction (GKC 422 §130.d). It may be rendered, “When he (= the Lord) began to speak” (cf. ASV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, TEV, and most other modern English versions, all of which are similar). This time-determinative was not correctly understood by the LXX or by the KJV: “The beginning of the word of the Lord.”

[1:2]  ³² tn The preposition בְּ (bet) on בְּהוֹשֵׁעַ (bÿhoshea’) is an instrumental use of the preposition (BDB 89 s.v. בְּ III.2.b): “by, with, through Hosea” rather than a directional “to Hosea.” This focuses on the entire prophetic revelation through Hosea to Israel.

[1:2]  ³³ tn Heb “the Lord.” This is redundant in English, so the pronoun has been used in the translation (cf. TEV, NLT).

[1:2]  ³⁴ tn Heb “to Hosea.” The proper name is replaced by the pronoun here to avoid redundancy in English (cf. NIV, NCV, NLT).

[1:2]  ³⁵ tn Heb “Go, take for yourself” (so NRSV; NASB, NIV “to yourself”). In conjunction with the following phrase this means “marry.”

[1:2]  ³⁶ tn Heb “a wife of harlotries.” The noun זְנוּנִים (zÿnunim) means “prostitute; harlot” (HALOT 275-76 s.v. זְנוּנִים). The term does not refer to mere adultery (cf. NIV; also NCV, TEV, CEV “unfaithful”) which is expressed by the root נַאַף (na’af, “adultery”; HALOT 658 s.v. נאף). The plural noun זְנוּנִים (zénunim, literally, “harlotries”) is an example of the plural of character or plural of repeated behavior. The phrase “wife of harlotries” (אֵשֶׁת זְנוּנִים, ’eshet zénunim) probably refers to a prostitute, possibly a temple prostitute serving at a Baal temple.

[1:2]  ³⁷ tn Heb “and children of harlotries.” However, TEV takes the phrase to mean the children will behave like their mother (“your children will be just like her”).

[1:2]  ³⁸ tn Heb “the land.” The term “the land” is frequently used as a synecdoche of container (the land of Israel) for the contained (the people of Israel).

[1:2]  ³⁹ tn Heb “prostitution.” The adjective “spiritual” is supplied in the translation to clarify that apostasy is meant here. The construction זָנֹה תִזְנֶה (zanoh tizneh, infinitive absolute + imperfect of the same root) repeats the root זָנַה (zanah, “harlotry”) for rhetorical emphasis. Israel was guilty of gross spiritual prostitution by apostatizing from Yahweh. The verb זָנַה is used in a concrete sense to refer to a spouse being unfaithful in a marriage relationship (HALOT 275 s.v. זנה 1), and figuratively meaning “to be unfaithful” in a relationship with God by prostituting oneself with other gods and worshiping idols (Exod 34:15; Lev 17:7; 20:5, 6; Deut 31:16; Judg 8:27, 33; 21:17; 1 Chr 5:25; Ezek 6:9; 20:30; 23:30; Hos 4:15; Ps 106:39; see HALOT 275 s.v. 2).

[1:2]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “from after.”

[1:1]  ⁴¹ 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).

[1:1]  ⁴² 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.

[1:1]  ⁴³ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which came to.”

[1:1]  ⁴⁴ tn The words “he delivered this message” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[1:1]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “in the days of” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV).

[1:1]  ⁴⁶ tn Heb “which he saw concerning.”

[1:1]  ⁴⁷ map For location see Map2 B1; Map4 D3; Map5 E2; Map6 A4; Map7 C1.

[1:1]  ⁴⁸ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[1:1]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which came to.”

[1:1]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “in the days of.” The words “Zephaniah delivered this message” are supplied in the translation for clarification.