⁶ sn The gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out. Compare the account in Acts 2, especially 2:33. Note also Joel 2:17-21 and Acts 11:15-18.

² tn BDAG 299 s.v. ἐκβάλλω 1 has “throw out.” Once again, many Jews reacted to the message (Acts 5:17, 33; 6:11; 13:45).

² tn L&N 33.201 indicates that ἐκδιηγέομαι (ekdihgeomai) means to provide detailed information in a systematic manner, “to inform, to relate, to tell fully.” “Relating at length” conveys this effectively in the present context.

² sn Amphipolis. The capital city of the southeastern district of Macedonia (BDAG 55 s.v. ᾿Αμφίπολις). It was a military post. From Philippi this was about 33 mi (53 km).

² tn L&N 33.408 has “some scoffed (at him) Ac 17:32” for ἐχλεύαζον (ecleuazon) here; the imperfect verb has been translated as an ingressive imperfect (“began to scoff”).

² tn L&N 33.442 translates the phrase τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις διακατηλέγχετο δημοσίᾳ (toi" Ioudaioi" diakathlenceto dhmosia) as “he defeated the Jews in public debate.” On this use of the term δημόσιος (dhmosio") see BDAG 223 s.v. 2.

³ tn BDAG 865 s.v. προβάλλω 1 has “to cause to come forward, put forward…τινά someone…push someone forward to speak in the theater…Ac 19:33.”

³ tn The words “to him” are not in the Greek text but are implied. L&N 33.311 has for the verb μετακαλέομαι (metakaleomai) “to summon someone, with considerable insistence and authority – ‘to summon, to tell to come.’”

¹ tn BDAG 422 s.v. ἔχω 11.b.β has “temporal, to be next, immediately following…τῇ ἐχομένῃ…on the next day Lk 13:33…Ac 20:15; w. ἡμέρᾳ added…21:26.”

¹ tn L&N 33.77 has “ἄλλοι δὲ ἄλλο τι ἐπεφώνουν ἐν τῷ ὄχλῳ ‘some in the crowd shouted one thing; others, something else’ Ac 21:34.”

¹ tn Grk “on stones”; but since this is clearly an allusion to the tablets of the Decalogue (see 2 Cor 3:3) the word “tablets” was supplied in the translation to make the connection clear.

¹ tn Or “is not mocked,” “will not be ridiculed” (L&N 33.409). BDAG 660 s.v. μυκτηρίζω has “of God οὐ μ. he is not to be mocked, treated w. contempt, perh. outwitted Gal 6:7.”

² sn Jesus’ good confession was his affirmative answer to Pilate’s question “Are you the king of the Jews?” (see Matt 27:11, Mark 15:2, Luke 23:3, John 18:33-37).

² tn Although it is possible the term νομικός (nomikos) indicates an expert in Jewish religious law here, according to L&N 33.338 and 56.37 it is more probable that Zenas was a specialist in civil law.

¹ tc Some important mss (א* C* P 0285^vid 33 1175 1739 pc lat) lack καί (kai), but because the omission conforms to the wording of Ps 118:6 (117:6 LXX), it is suspect.

¹ sn Beginning with 31:55, the verse numbers in the English Bible through 32:32 differ by one from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (BHS), with 31:55 ET = 32:1 HT, 32:1 ET = 32:2 HT, etc., through 32:32 ET = 32:33 HT. From 33:1 the verse numbers in the ET and HT are again the same.

¹ sn Tell me your name. In primitive thought to know the name of a deity or supernatural being would enable one to use it for magical manipulation or power (A. S. Herbert, Genesis 12-50 [TBC], 108). For a thorough structural analysis of the passage discussing the plays on the names and the request of Jacob, see R. Barthes, “The Struggle with the Angel: Textual Analysis of Genesis 32:23-33,” Structural Analysis and Biblical Exegesis (PTMS), 21-33.

¹ tn Heb “33:10 Thus says the Lord, ‘There will again be heard in this place of which you are saying [masc. pl.], “It is a ruin without people and without animals,” [that is] in the towns of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem which are desolate without people and without inhabitants and without animals 33:11 the sound of….” The long run-on sentence in Hebrew has been broken down to better conform with contemporary English style.

¹ sn Elealeh was about two miles (3.3 km) north of Heshbon. Jahaz was about twenty miles (33 km) south of it. These three cities were in the north and Zoar, Horonaim, and Eglath Shelishiyah were apparently in the south. The verse is speaking about the news of destruction in the north spreading to the south. Comparison should be made with the parallel passage in Isa 15:4-6.

¹ sn There are now four speeches from another friend of Job, Elihu. But Job does not reply to any of these, nor does the Lord. The speeches show a knowledge of the debate that has gone on, but they take a different approach entirely. Elihu’s approach is that suffering is a discipline from God, to teach his people. In other words, Job was suffering to vindicate God’s confidence in him. His speeches are an interesting part of the book, but they too are irrelevant to Job’s actual case. In the first speech, there is a short introduction (32:1-5), and then the speech proper with these sections: Elihu will speak because his youth is wiser (32:6-14), and his friends arguments failed (32:15-22); he calls for Job’s attention (33:1-7), claims Job’s case is wrong (33:8-13), and Job’s argument that God does not answer is false (33:14-28), and then makes an appeal to Job (33:29-33). It becomes evident that Elihu correctly identified Job’s determination to maintain his integrity at God’s expense as the primary problem in at least the latter stages of the dialogues (32:1-3; 34:37; 35:16; cf. 38:2; 40:8; 42:3). Elihu was respectful of his elders (32:4), but remained uninfected by their error (32:14). He sought to maintain impartiality (32:21-22) and to offer true wisdom (33:33), believed like Job that a mediator existed (33:23-24), and desired Job’s vindication (33:32). In addition, Elihu focused on vindicating God’s actions (34:12; 35:10-11; 36:2-3, 22-26) and announced the coming theophany (37:1-5, 22). It appears that he was not included in the divine condemnation of Job’s friends (42:7-9) and was excluded from Job’s prayer of intercession (42:8-10) – both perhaps implying divine approval of his behavior and words.