² tn For the Greek verb σφάζω (sfazw) L&N 20.72 states, “to slaughter, either animals or persons; in contexts referring to persons, the implication is of violence and mercilessness – ‘to slaughter, to kill.’” As a reflection of this nuance, the translation “brutally murdered” has been used.

² tn Grk “from the rising of the sun.” BDAG 74 s.v. ἀνατολή 2.a takes this as a geographical direction: “ἀπὸ ἀ. ἡλίου…from the east Rv 7:2; 16:12…simply ἀπὸ ἀ. …21:13.”

⁵ tn Grk “from the rising of the sun.” BDAG 74 s.v. ἀνατολή 2.a takes this as a geographical direction: “ἀπὸ ἀ. ἡλίου…from the east Rv 7:2; 16:12; simply ἀπὸ ἀ. …21:13.”

¹ sn The Lord called Abram while he was in Ur (see Gen 15:7; Acts 7:2); but the sequence here makes it look like it was after the family left to migrate to Canaan (11:31-32). Genesis records the call of Abram at this place in the narrative because it is the formal beginning of the account of Abram. The record of Terah was brought to its end before this beginning.

¹ sn The staff appears here to be the shepherd’s staff that he was holding. It now will become the instrument with which Moses will do the mighty works, for it is the medium of the display of the divine power (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 27; also, L. Shalit, “How Moses Turned a Staff into a Snake and Back Again,” BAR 9 [1983]: 72-73).

² tn Heb “the breast to wave it, a wave offering before the Lord.” Other possible translations are “to elevate the breast [as] an elevation offering before the Lord” (cf. NRSV) or “to present the breast [as] a presentation offering before the Lord.” See J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 91, J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:430-31, 461-72, and R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 3:63-67.

² tn The verb is plural because the subject, אִישׁ (’ish), is viewed as a collective: “mankind.” The verb means “to wake up; to awake”; another root, קוּץ (quts, “to split open”) cognate to Arabic qada and Akkadian kasu, was put forward by H. M. Orlinsky (“The Hebrew and Greek Texts of Job 14:12,” JQR 28 [1937-38]: 57-68) and G. R. Driver (“Problems in the Hebrew Text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 72-93).

¹ sn Psalm 43. Many medieval Hebrew mss combine Psalm 43 and Psalm 42 into one psalm. Psalm 43 is the only psalm in Book 2 of the Psalter (Psalms 42-72) that does not have a heading, suggesting that it was originally the third and concluding section of Psalm 42. Ps 43:5 is identical to the refrain in Ps 42:11 and almost identical to the refrain in Ps 42:5.

¹ tn Heb “precious in the eyes of the Lord [is] the death of his godly ones.” The point is not that God delights in or finds satisfaction in the death of his followers! The psalmist, who has been delivered from death, affirms that the life-threatening experiences of God’s followers get God’s attention, just as a precious or rare object would attract someone’s eye. See Ps 72:14 for a similar expression of this belief.

⁶ tn This title pictures the king as one who establishes a safe socio-economic environment for his people. It hardly depicts him as a meek individual, for he establishes peace through military strength (as the preceding context and the first two royal titles indicate). His people experience safety and prosperity because their invincible king destroys their enemies. See Pss 72 and 144 for parallels to these themes.

⁵ sn This has been the constant emphasis in this section. See 22:3 for the demand, 22:15 for its fulfillment, and 22:13 for its abuse. The ideal king would follow in the footsteps of his illustrious ancestor David (2 Sam 8:15) who set this forth as an ideal for his dynasty (2 Sam 23:3) and prayed for it to be true of his son Solomon (Ps 72:1-2).

¹ tn The name (“El Shaddai”) has often been translated “God Almighty,” primarily because Jerome translated it omnipotens (“all powerful”) in the Latin Vulgate. There has been much debate over the meaning of the name. For discussion see W. F. Albright, “The Names Shaddai and Abram,” JBL 54 (1935): 173-210; R. Gordis, “The Biblical Root sdy-sd,” JTS 41 (1940): 34-43; and especially T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God, 69-72.

² tn Heb “[the] ban” (חֵרֶם, kherem). God’s prophetic messenger seeks to bring about salvation and restoration, thus avoiding the imposition of the covenant curse, that is, the divine ban that the hopelessly unrepentant must expect (see Deut 7:2; 20:17; Judg 1:21; Zech 14:11). If the wicked repent, the purifying judgment threatened in 4:1-3 will be unnecessary.

² tn Grk “may be rendered ineffective, inoperative,” or possibly “may be destroyed.” The term καταργέω (katargew) has various nuances. In Rom 7:2 the wife whose husband has died is freed from the law (i.e., the law of marriage no longer has any power over her, in spite of what she may feel). A similar point seems to be made here (note v. 7).

⁵ tc A few mss (A B 1852 pc) lack καθαρᾶς (kaqaras, “pure”) and read simply καρδίας (kardias, “from the heart”), but there is excellent ms support (Ì⁷² א* C P Ψ 33 1739 Ï co) for the word. The omission may have been accidental. In the uncial script (kaqaras kardias) an accidental omission could have happened via homoioteleuton or homoioarcton. καθαρᾶς should be considered original.

⁵ tc The Byzantine text lacks εἰς σωτηρίαν (ei" swthrian, “to salvation”), while the words are found in the earliest and best witnesses (Ì⁷² א A B C K P Ψ 33 81 630 1241 1505 1739 al latt sy co). Not only is the longer reading superior externally, but since the notion of growing up [in]to salvation would have seemed theologically objectionable, it is easy to see why some scribes would omit it.

¹ tc Many mss, some of them important and early ([א] A P 33 81 323 945 1241 1739 pm bo), add καὶ δυνάμεως (kai dunamew"; “and of power”) here. The shorter reading is supported by Ì⁷² B K L Ψ 049 pm). Although the evidence is evenly divided, the longer reading looks to be an explanatory or liturgical expansion on the text and for this reason should be considered secondary.

² tc A few important mss (א* B sa) lack ἐπισκοποῦντες (episkopounte", “exercising oversight”), but the participle enjoys otherwise good ms support (Ì⁷² א² A P Ψ 33 1739 Ï lat). A decision is difficult because normally the shorter reading is preferred, especially when found in excellent witnesses. However, in this instance the omission may be due to a hesitation among some scribes to associate oversight with elders, since the later church viewed overseer/bishop as a separate office from elder.

¹ sn Nineveh employed a system of dams and sluice gates to control the waters of the Tebiltu and Khoser Rivers which flowed through the city (R. C. Thompson and R. W. Hutchinson, A Century of Exploration at Nineveh, 120-132). However, the Tebiltu often flooded its banks inside the city, undermining palace foundations and weakening other structures. To reduce this flooding, Sennacherib changed the course of the Tebiltu inside the city. Outside the city, he dammed up the Khoser and created a reservoir, regulating the flow of water into the city through an elaborate system of double sluice gates (D. D. Luckenbill, Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylon, 99-100; J. Reade, “Studies in Assyrian Geography, Part I: Sennacherib and the Waters of Nineveh,” RA 72 [1978]: 47-72; idem, “Studies in Assyrian Geography, Part II: The Northern Canal System,” RA 72 [1978]: 157-80). According to classical tradition (Diodorus and Xenophon), just before Nineveh fell, a succession of very high rainfalls deluged the area. The Khoser River swelled and the reservoir was breached. The waters rushed through the overloaded canal system, breaking a hole twenty stades (about 2.3 miles or 3.7 km) wide in the city wall and flooding the city. When the waters receded, the Babylonians stormed into Nineveh and conquered the city (Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica, 2.26-27, especially 27.1-3; Xenophon, Anabasis, 3.4.12; P. Haupt, “Xenophon’s Account of the Fall of Nineveh,” JAOS 28 [1907]: 65-83). This scenario seems to be corroborated by the archaeological evidence (A. T. Olmstead, History of Assyria, 637).

⁵ tn Heb “in your valuation, silver of shekels, in the shekel of the sanctuary.” The translation offered here suggests that, instead of a ram, the guilt offering could be presented in the form of money (see, e.g., NRSV; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:326-27). Others still maintain the view that it refers to the value of the ram that was offered (see, e.g., NIV “of the proper value in silver, according to the sanctuary shekel”; also NAB, NLT; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 72-73, 81).