³ tn The more generic “child” does not fit the activities described in this verse and so “son” is retained in the translation. In the ancient world a “son” was more likely than a daughter to behave as stated. Such behavior may reflect the son wanting to take over his father’s lands prematurely.

¹ tn The form תָגֵל (tagel) is clearly a short form and therefore a jussive (“may she…rejoice”); if this second verb is a jussive, then the parallel יִשְׂמַח (yismakh) should be a jussive also (“may your father and your mother have joy”).

¹ tn Heb “and all the glory of the house of his father they will hang on him.” The Lord returns to the peg metaphor of v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">23a. Eliakim’s secure position of honor will bring benefits and jobs to many others in the family.

³ tn Heb “and I will cause you to eat the inheritance of Jacob your father.” The Hebrew term נַחֲלָה (nakhalah) likely stands by metonymy for the crops that grow on Jacob’s “inheritance” (i.e., the land he inherited as a result of God’s promise).

³ sn The Babylonians (Heb “the Chaldeans”). The Chaldeans were a group of people in the country south of Babylon from which Nebuchadnezzar came. The Chaldean dynasty his father established became the name by which the Babylonians are regularly referred to in the book of Jeremiah. Jeremiah’s contemporary Ezekiel uses both terms.

¹ sn The Chaldeans were a group of people in the country south of Babylon from which Nebuchadnezzar came. The Chaldean dynasty his father established became the name by which the Babylonians are regularly referred to in the book of Jeremiah, while Jeremiah’s contemporary, Ezekiel, uses both terms.

⁴ tc The MT includes a redundant reference to “your father the king” at the end of v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">11. None of the attempts to explain this phrase as original are very convincing. The present translation deletes the phrase, following Theodotion and the Syriac.

⁷ sn A treaty of brotherhood. In the ancient Near Eastern world familial terms were sometimes used to describe treaty partners. In a treaty between superior and inferior parties, the lord would be called “father” and the subject “son.” The partners in a treaty between equals referred to themselves as “brothers.” For biblical examples, see 1 Kgs 9:13; 20:32-33.

¹ sn The rhetorical question Do we not all have one father? by no means teaches the “universal fatherhood of God,” that is, that all people equally are children of God. The reference to the covenant in v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">10 as well as to Israel and Judah (v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">11) makes it clear that the referent of “we” is God’s elect people.

¹ tn Grk “be sons of your Father in heaven.” Here, however, the focus is not on attaining a relationship (becoming a child of God) but rather on being the kind of person who shares the characteristics of God himself (a frequent meaning of the Semitic idiom “son of”). See L&N 58.26.

² sn God is addressed in terms of intimacy (Father). The original Semitic term here was probably Abba. The term is a little unusual in a personal prayer, especially as it lacks qualification. It is not the exact equivalent of “daddy” (as is sometimes popularly suggested), but it does suggest a close, familial relationship.

³ sn The title Lord is an important name for God, showing his sovereignty, but it is interesting that it comes next to a reference to the Father, a term indicative of God’s care. The two concepts are often related in the NT; see Eph 1:3-6.

³ 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.

⁵ sn The title Lord is an important name for God, showing his sovereignty, but it is interesting that it comes next to a reference to the Father, a term indicative of God’s care. The two concepts are often related in the NT; see Eph 1:3-6.

² sn God is addressed in terms of intimacy (Father). The original Semitic term here was probably Abba. The term is a little unusual in a personal prayer, especially as it lacks qualification. It is not the exact equivalent of “Daddy” (as is sometimes popularly suggested), but it does suggest a close, familial relationship.

⁴ sn Herod would probably have come to Jerusalem for the feast, although his father was only half Jewish (Josephus, Ant. 14.15.2 [14.403]). Josephus does mention Herod’s presence in Jerusalem during a feast (Ant. 18.5.3 [18.122]).

² tn Grk “the promise of my Father,” with τοῦ πατρός (tou patros) translated as a subjective genitive. This is a reference to the Holy Spirit and looks back to how one could see Messiah had come with the promise of old (Luke 3:15-18). The promise is rooted in Jer 31:31 and Ezek 36:26.

¹ sn Luke’s gospel story proper ends where it began, in the temple courts (Luke 1:4-22). The conclusion is open-ended, because the story continues in Acts with what happened from Jerusalem onwards, once the promise of the Father (v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">49) came.

² tn The genitive “of his body” (τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ, tou swmato" autou) is a genitive of apposition, clarifying which temple Jesus was referring to. Thus, Jesus not only was referring to his physical resurrection, but also to his participation in the resurrection process. The New Testament thus records the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as all performing the miracle of Christ's resurrection.

¹ sn To whom does another refer? To John the Baptist or to the Father? In the nearer context, v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">33, it would seem to be John the Baptist. But v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">34 seems to indicate that Jesus does not receive testimony from men. Probably it is better to view v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">32 as identical to v. father%27s&tab=notes" ver="">37, with the comments about the Baptist as a parenthetical digression.