² tn Heb “of the blood.” The relative pronoun (“it”) has been used in the translation here for stylistic reasons.

¹ tn The relative pronoun “which” is joined with the resumptive pronoun “in it” to form a smoother reading “where.”

¹ tn Heb “and the pillar of cloud.” This phrase was not repeated in the translation; a relative clause was used instead.

¹ tn The construction with the relative clause includes a resumptive pronoun referring to God: “who in his hand” = “in whose hand.”

¹ tn The demonstrative pronoun is used here as a nominative, to introduce an independent relative clause (see GKC 447 §138.h).

³ tn It is necessary, with Rashi, to understand the relative pronoun before the verb “they are stored up/reserved.”

¹ tn The word “men” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied to clarify the relative pronoun “who.”

³ tn Grk “whoever” (the indefinite relative pronoun). This has been translated as “everyone who” to conform to contemporary English style.

¹ tn This figurative use operates on a relative scale. God is to be loved more than family or self.

² tn Grk “God is faithful who.” The relative pronoun was changed to a personal pronoun in the translation for clarity.

¹ tn Grk “in whom” (the relative clause of v. 7 is subordinate to v. 6). The “him” refers to Christ.

⁴ tn The causal clause includes within it a typical relative clause, which is made up of the relative pronoun, then the independent personal pronoun with the participle, and then the preposition with the resumptive pronoun. It would literally be “which you are standing on it,” but the relative pronoun and the resumptive pronoun are combined and rendered, “on which you are standing.”

² tn Heb “and I will do that which in my statutes you will walk.” The awkward syntax (verb “to do, act” + accusative sign + relative clause + prepositional phrase + second person verb) is unique, though Eccl 3:14 contains a similar construction. In the last line of that verse we read that “God acts so that (relative pronoun) they fear before him.” However, unlike Ezek 36:27, the statement has no accusative sign before the relative pronoun.

¹ tn Since the participle κατακείμενον (katakeimenon), an adjectival participle modifying Αἰνέαν (Ainean), has been translated into English as a relative clause (“who had been confined to a mattress”), it would be awkward to follow with a second relative clause (Grk “who was paralyzed”). Furthermore, the relative pronoun here has virtually a causal force, giving the reason for confinement to the mattress, so it is best translated “because.”

⁵ tn Clauses beginning with עַד (’ad) express a limit that is not absolute, but only relative, beyond which the action continues (GKC 446-47 §138.g).

¹ tn The text uses a relative clause with a resumptive pronoun for this: “who was found with him,” meaning “with whom was found.”

¹ tn The text simply uses a prepositional phrase, “with/in wisdom.” It seems to be qualifying “the women” as the relative clause is.

⁴ tn The relative clause includes this infinitive clause that expresses either the purpose or the result of God’s giving wisdom and understanding to these folk.

¹ tn This section begins with the relative pronoun אֲשֶׁר (’asher) which usually means “who” or “which,” but here means “whenever.”

² tn Heb “which we passed over in it”; the pronoun on the preposition serves as a resumptive pronoun for the relative, and need not be translated literally.