² tn Grk “they fell down on their faces.” BDAG 815 s.v. face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">πίπτω 1.b.face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">α.face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">ב. has “fall down, throw oneself to the ground as a sign of devotion or humility, before high-ranking persons or divine beings.”

¹ tn The exact sense of the Hebrew word face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">אַפָּיִם (’face="Scholar">appayim, “two faces”) is not certain here. It is most likely used with the preceding expression (“one portion of two faces”) to mean a portion double than normally received. Although evidence for this use of the word derives primarily from Aramaic rather than from Hebrew usage, it provides an understanding that fits the context here better than other suggestions for the word do. The meaning “double” is therefore adopted in the present translation. Other possibilities for the meaning of the word include the following: “heavily” (cf. Vulg., face="Scholar">tristis) and “worthy” or “choice” (cf. KJV and Targum). Some scholars have followed the LXX here, emending the word to face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">אֶפֶס (’face="Scholar">efes) and translating it as “but” or “however.” This seems unnecessary. The translators of the LXX may simply have been struggling to make sense of the word rather than following a Hebrew text that was different from the MT here.

¹ tn Or “They went backward and not forward”; Heb “They were to the backward and not to the forward.” The two phrases used here appear nowhere else in the Bible and the latter preposition plus adverb elsewhere is used temporally meaning “formerly” or “previously.” The translation follows the proposal of J. Bright, Jeremiah (AB), 57. Another option is “they turned their backs to me, not their faces,” understanding the line as a variant of a line in 2:27.

¹ tn The evidence suggests that the cherubim were composite angelic creatures that always indicated the nearness of God. So here images of them were to be crafted and put on each end of the ark of the covenant to signify that they were there. Ezekiel 1 describes four cherubim as each having human faces, four wings, and parts of different animals for their bodies. Traditions of them appear in the other cultures as well. They serve to guard the holy places and to bear the throne of God. Here they were to be beaten out as part of the lid.

¹ tn Heb “on the faces of the atonement plate toward the east.” Some have taken this to mean that the ark was stationed just behind the veil-canopy on the eastern side of the most holy place. Thus, the high priest would need to enter and walk toward the west end of the most holy place and then turn eastward in order to face the ark and sprinkle the blood in an eastward direction. The rendering here, however, requires that the ark was stationed on the western end, or perhaps in the middle of the area, so that as the priest entered he was already facing the ark and would sprinkle the blood on the eastern face of the atonement plate, in a westward direction (see, e.g., J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 239 versus J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:1032).

² tn Heb “to the faces of the atonement plate.” The exact meaning of the Hebrew term face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">כַּפֹּרֶת (face="Scholar">kapporet) here rendered “atonement plate” is much debated. The traditional “mercy seat” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) does not suit the cognate relationship between this term and the Piel verb face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">כִּפֶּר (face="Scholar">kipper, “to make atonement, to make expiation”). The translation of the word should also reflect the fact that the most important atonement procedures on the Day of Atonement were performed in relation to it. Since the Lord would “appear in the cloud over the atonement plate,” and since it was so closely associated with the ark of the covenant (the ark being his “footstool”; cf. 1 Chr 28:2 and Ps 132:7-8), one could take it to be the place of his throne at which he accepts atonement. See J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:1014; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 234-35; and R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:691, 699. Cf. NIV “the atonement cover”; NCV “the lid on the Ark”; NLT “the Ark’s cover – the place of atonement.”

⁴ tn Heb “I will give my faces against [literally “in”] the soul/person/life [face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נֶפֶשׁ, face="Scholar">nefesh, feminine] who eats the blood and I will cut it [i.e., that face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נֶפֶשׁ, face="Scholar">nefesh] off from the midst of its people.” The uses of face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נֶפֶשׁ in this and the following verse are most significant for the use of animal blood in Israel’s sacrificial system. Unfortunately, it is a most difficult word to translate accurately and consistently, and this presents a major problem for the rendering of these verses (see, e.g., G. J. Wenham, Leviticus [NICOT], 244-45). No matter which translation of face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נֶפֶשׁ one uses here, it is important to see that both man and animal have face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נֶפֶשׁ and that this face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נֶפֶשׁ is identified with the blood. See the further remarks on v. 11 below. On the “cutting off” penalty see the note on v. 4 above. In this instance, God takes it on himself to “cut off” the person (i.e., extirpation).

² tc The MT reads the plural verb face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">לֹא נָשָׂאוּ (face="Scholar">lo’ face="Scholar">nasa’face="Scholar">u, “they did not lift up”), Qal perfect 3rd person common plural from face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נָשָׂא (face="Scholar">nasa’, “to lift up” the face); however, the ancient versions (LXX, Aramaic Targum, Latin Vulgate, Syriac Peshitta) have singular verbs, reflecting a Vorlage of face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">לֹא נָשָׂא (face="Scholar">lo’ face="Scholar">nasa’, “he did not lift up”), Qal perfect 3rd person masculine singular from face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">נָשָׂא (face="Scholar">nasa’). D. R. Hillers suggests that the MT plural is an intentional scribe change, to avoid the appearance that God brought about evil on the priests and elders. Equally possible is that consonantal face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">לא חננו (face="Scholar">l’ face="Scholar">khnnv) should be revocalized as Qal passive perfect 3rd person common plural, and that face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">כֹהֲנִים (face="Scholar">kohanim, “the priests”) functions as the subject of a passive verb rather than the accusative direct object of an active verb: “(the faces of ) the priests were not lifted up.”

³ tn Heb “But you have not hearkened to the voice of [idiomatic for “obeyed” see BDB 1034 s.v. face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">שָׁמַע Qal.1.m] the Lord your God, namely [cf. BDB 252 s.v. face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">וְ 1.b] with respect [cf. BDB 514 s.v. face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">לְ 5.f(c)] all which he has sent to us.” The verb is translated “don’t seem to want to obey” because they have not yet expressed their refusal or their actual disobedience. Several commentaries sensing this apparent discrepancy suggest that 42:19-22 are to be transposed after 43:1-3 (see, e.g., BHS note 18a, W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah [Hermeneia], 2:275; J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 252, 256, 258). However, there is absolutely no textual evidence for the transposition and little reason to suspect an early scribal error (in spite of Holladay’s suggestion). It is possible that Jeremiah here anticipates this answer in 43:1-3 through the response on their faces (so Bright, 256; F. B. Huey, Jeremiah, Lamentations [NAC], 361). G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 249) also call attention to the stated intention in 41:17 and the fact that the strong warning in 42:15-17 seems to imply that a negative response is expected). The use of the perfect here is perhaps to be related to the perfect expressing resolve or determination (see IBHS 489 §30.5.1d). It is also conceivable that these two verses are part of a conditional sentence which has no formal introduction. I.e., “And if you will not obey…then you should know for certain that…” For examples of this kind of conditional clause introduced by two vavs (face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">ו) see Joüon 2:628-29 §167.b, and compare Jer 18:4; Judg 6:13. However, though this interpretation is within the possibilities of Hebrew grammar, I know of no translation or commentary that follows it. So it has not been followed in the translation or given as an alternate translation.

¹ tc face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">Χριστόν (face="Greektl">Criston, “Christ”) is attested in the majority of mss, including many important witnesses of the Alexandrian (face="Greek Uncials">Ì⁴⁶ 1739 1881) and Western (D F G) texttypes, and other mss and versions (face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">Ψ latt sy co). On the other hand, some of the important Alexandrian witnesses have face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">κύριον (face="Greektl">kurion, “Lord”; face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">א B C P 33 104 1175 al). A few mss (A 81 pc) have face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">θεόν (face="Greektl">qeon, “God”). The nomina sacra for these readings are quite similar (face="Greek Uncials">cMn, face="Greek Uncials">kMn, and face="Greek Uncials">qMn respectively), so one might be able to account for the different readings by way of confusion. On closer examination, the variants appear to be intentional changes. Alexandrian scribes replaced the highly specific term “Christ” with the less specific terms “Lord” and “God” because in the context it seems to be anachronistic to speak of the exodus generation putting Christ to the test. If the original had been “Lord,” it seems unlikely that a scribe would have willingly created a difficulty by substituting the more specific “Christ.” Moreover, even if not motivated by a tendency to overcorrect, a scribe might be likely to assimilate the word “Christ” to “Lord” in conformity with Deut 6:16 or other passages. The evidence from the early church regarding the reading of this verse is rather compelling in favor of “Christ.” Marcion, a second-century, anti-Jewish heretic, would naturally have opposed any reference to Christ in historical involvement with Israel, because he thought of the Creator God of the OT as inherently evil. In spite of this strong prejudice, though, {Marcion} read a text with “Christ.” Other early church writers attest to the presence of the word “Christ,” including {Clement of Alexandria} and Origen. What is more, the synod of Antioch in a.d. 268 used the reading “Christ” as evidence of the preexistence of Christ when it condemned Paul of Samosata. (See G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles, 126-27; TCGNT 494; C. D. Osburn, “The Text of 1 Corinthians 10:9,” New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis, 201-11; contra A. Robertson and A. Plummer, First Corinthians [ICC], 205-6.) Since “Christ” is the more difficult reading on all accounts, it is almost certainly original. In addition, “Christ” is consistent with Paul’s style in this passage (cf. 10:4, a text in which {Marcion} also reads “Christ”). This text is also christologically significant, since the reading “Christ” makes an explicit claim to the preexistence of Christ. (The textual critic faces a similar dilemma in Jude 5. In a similar exodus context, some of the more important Alexandrian mss [A B 33 81 pc] and the Vulgate read “Jesus” in place of “Lord.” Two of those mss [A 81] are the same mss that have “Christ” instead of “God” in 1 Cor 10:9. See the tc notes on Jude 5 for more information.) In sum, “Christ” has all the earmarks of authenticity here and should be considered the original reading.