¹ tn Heb “Will he keep angry forever? Will he maintain [it] to the end?” The questions are rhetorical and expect a negative answer. The change to direct address in the English translation is intended to ease the problem of the rapid transition, common in Hebrew style (but not in English), from second person direct address in the preceding lines to third person indirect address in these two lines. See GKC 462 §144.p.

¹ tn The words “I will say” are not in the text. They are supplied in the translation to mark the transition from the address about Israel in a response to Rachel’s weeping (vv. 15-20) to a direct address to Israel which is essentially the answer to Israel’s prayer of penitence (cf. G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, T. G. Smothers, Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 121.)

² tn Heb “Now the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah while he…saying.” The form of this clause is disjunctive showing that it does not follow the preceding events in either chronological or logical sequence. For a discussion of the form and function of such disjunctive clauses see IBHS 650-52 §39.2.3. This example most closely fits the description and function of example 12, Ruth 4:18, 21-22 on p. 652.

³ tn Heb “Their soldiers.” These words are actually at the midpoint of the stanza as the subject of the third of the five verbs. However, as G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 291) note, this is the subject of all five verbs “are terrified,” “are retreating,” “have been defeated,” “have run away,” and “have not looked back.” The subject is put at the front to avoid an unidentified “they.”

² sn Religious banquets. This refers to the מַרְזֵחַ (marzeakh), a type of pagan religious banquet popular among the upper class of Israel at this time and apparently associated with mourning. See P. King, Amos, Hosea, Micah, 137-61; J. L. McLaughlin, The “Marzeah” in the Prophetic Literature (VTSup). Scholars debate whether at this banquet the dead were simply remembered or actually venerated in a formal, cultic sense.

⁵ sn It is possible that herdsmen agreed to care for sycamore fig trees in exchange for grazing rights. See P. King, Amos, Hosea, Micah, 116-17. Since these trees do not grow around Tekoa but rather in the lowlands, another option is that Amos owned other property outside his hometown. In this case, this verse demonstrates his relative wealth and is his response to Amaziah; he did not depend on prophecy as a profession (v. 13).

¹ tc The textual tradition here is quite complicated. A number of mss (B C [Δ] Θ al sy^s,p,h) read “Gadarenes,” which is the better reading here. Many other mss (א² L W Ë^1,13 Ï [sy^hmg] bo) have “Gergesenes.” Others (892^c latt sy^hmg sa mae) have “Gerasenes,” which is the reading followed in Luke 8:26. The difference between Matthew and Luke may be due to uses of variant regional terms.

³ tn Or “temple.” Such sacrifices, which included the burning of incense, would have occurred in the holy place according to the Mishnah (m. Tamid 1.2; 3.1; 5-7). A priest would have given this sacrifice, which was offered for the nation, once in one’s career. It would be offered either at 9 a.m. or 3 p.m., since it was made twice a day.

² tc Most mss (א A C D L W Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï lat sy^c,p,h bo) have “bread, does not give him a stone instead, or” before “a fish”; the longer reading, however, looks like a harmonization to Matt 7:9. The shorter reading is thus preferred, attested by Ì^45,75 B 1241 pc sy^s sa.

² tc ‡ Although the witnesses for the shorter reading (Ì⁴⁶ D F G Ψ 075 0243 1739 1881 Ï) are not as strong as for the addition of ἀδελφοί (adelfoi, “brothers”) at this juncture (א A B K P 33 81 104 365 1175 2464 lat sy co), it is difficult to find a reason why scribes would either intentionally or unintentionally drop the address here. Thus, the shorter reading is slightly preferred.

² tc Although several important witnesses (א¹ A C P 6 81 326 1739^c 1881) have πᾶσα ἡ οἰκοδομή (pasa Jh oikodomh), instead of πᾶσα οἰκοδομή (the reading of א* B D F G Ψ 33 1739* Ï), the article is almost surely a scribal addition intended to clarify the meaning of the text, for with the article the meaning is unambiguously “the whole building.”

³ tc Most Western and Byzantine witnesses, along with a few others (א² D F G Ψ 0278 1881 Ï lat sy), have “of our Lord Jesus Christ” after “Father,” but such an edifying phrase cannot explain the rise of the reading that lacks it, especially when the shorter reading is attested by early and important witnesses such as Ì⁴⁶ א* A B C P 6 33 81 365 1175 1739 co Or Hier.

¹ tc Most mss (א* D² H 33^vid Ï) have ἐν Χριστῷ (en Cristw) after λέγω (legw) to read “I am telling the truth in Christ,” but this is probably an assimilation to Rom 9:1. Further, the witnesses that lack this phrase are early, important, and well distributed (א² A D* F G P Ψ 6 81 1175 1739 1881 al sy co). It is difficult to explain the shorter reading if it is not original.

² tc Most witnesses (D² Ψ Ï) here read τῇ ἀγαπητῇ (th agaphth, “beloved, dear”), a reading that appears to have been motivated by the masculine form of the same adjective in v. 1. Further, the earliest and best witnesses, along with a few others (א A D* F G I P 048 0278 33 81 104 1739 1881 pc), have ἀδελφῇ (adelfh, “sister”). Thus on internal and external grounds, ἀδελφῇ is the strongly preferred reading.

¹ tc Some mss (C P Ψ 6 629* 630 1505 pm latt sy^h) read ὑμῖν (Jumin, “in you”) here, but ἡμῖν (Jhmin) has stronger external support (Ì⁴⁶ א A D^vid K 0243 0285 33 81 104 326 365 629^c 1175 1739 1881 pm sy^p co). It is also more likely that ἡμῖν would have been changed to ὑμῖν in light of the “you” which occurs at the beginning of the verse than vice versa.

¹ tc Most later mss (Ï), along with several versional witnesses, have θεόν (qeon, “God”) here instead of κύριον (kurion, “Lord”). Such is a predictable variant since nowhere else in the NT is God described as “Lord and Father,” but he is called “God and Father” on several occasions. Further, the reading κύριον is well supported by early and diversified witnesses (̲⁰ א A B C P Ψ 33 81 945 1241 1739), rendering it as the overwhelmingly preferred reading.

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.