Kejadian 26:1-35

Isaac and Abimelech

26:1 There was a famine in the land, subsequent to the earlier famine that occurred ¹  in the days of Abraham. ²  Isaac went to Abimelech king of the Philistines at Gerar. 26:2 The Lord appeared to Isaac and said, “Do not go down to Egypt; ³  settle down in the land that I will point out to you. ⁴  26:3 Stay ⁵  in this land. Then I will be with you and will bless you, ⁶  for I will give all these lands to you and to your descendants, ⁷  and I will fulfill ⁸  the solemn promise I made ⁹  to your father Abraham. 26:4 I will multiply your descendants so they will be as numerous as the stars in the sky, and I will give them ¹⁰  all these lands. All the nations of the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using the name of your descendants. ¹¹  26:5 All this will come to pass ¹²  because Abraham obeyed me ¹³  and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” ¹⁴  26:6 So Isaac settled in Gerar.

26:7 When the men of that place asked him about his wife, he replied, “She is my sister.” ¹⁵  He was afraid to say, “She is my wife,” for he thought to himself, ¹⁶  “The men of this place will kill me to get ¹⁷  Rebekah because she is very beautiful.”

26:8 After Isaac ¹⁸  had been there a long time, ¹⁹  Abimelech king of the Philistines happened to look out a window and observed ²⁰  Isaac caressing ²¹  his wife Rebekah. 26:9 So Abimelech summoned Isaac and said, “She is really ²²  your wife! Why did you say, ‘She is my sister’?” Isaac replied, “Because I thought someone might kill me to get her.” ²³ 

26:10 Then Abimelech exclaimed, “What in the world have you done to us? ²⁴  One of the men ²⁵  might easily have had sexual relations with ²⁶  your wife, and you would have brought guilt on us!” 26:11 So Abimelech commanded all the people, “Whoever touches ²⁷  this man or his wife will surely be put to death.” ²⁸ 

26:12 When Isaac planted in that land, he reaped in the same year a hundred times what he had sown, ²⁹  because the Lord blessed him. ³⁰  26:13 The man became wealthy. ³¹  His influence continued to grow ³²  until he became very prominent. 26:14 He had ³³  so many sheep ³⁴  and cattle ³⁵  and such a great household of servants that the Philistines became jealous ³⁶  of him. 26:15 So the Philistines took dirt and filled up ³⁷  all the wells that his father’s servants had dug back in the days of his father Abraham.

26:16 Then Abimelech said to Isaac, “Leave us and go elsewhere, ³⁸  for you have become much more powerful ³⁹  than we are.” 26:17 So Isaac left there and settled in the Gerar Valley. ⁴⁰  26:18 Isaac reopened ⁴¹  the wells that had been dug ⁴²  back in the days of his father Abraham, for the Philistines had stopped them up ⁴³  after Abraham died. Isaac ⁴⁴  gave these wells ⁴⁵  the same names his father had given them. ⁴⁶ 

26:19 When Isaac’s servants dug in the valley and discovered a well with fresh flowing ⁴⁷  water there, 26:20 the herdsmen of Gerar quarreled ⁴⁸  with Isaac’s herdsmen, saying, “The water belongs to us!” So Isaac ⁴⁹  named the well ⁵⁰  Esek ⁵¹  because they argued with him about it. ⁵²  26:21 His servants ⁵³  dug another well, but they quarreled over it too, so Isaac named it ⁵⁴  Sitnah. ⁵⁵  26:22 Then he moved away from there and dug another well. They did not quarrel over it, so Isaac ⁵⁶  named it ⁵⁷  Rehoboth, ⁵⁸  saying, “For now the Lord has made room for us, and we will prosper in the land.”

26:23 From there Isaac ⁵⁹  went up to Beer Sheba. 26:24 The Lord appeared to him that night and said, “I am the God of your father Abraham. Do not be afraid, for I am with you. I will bless you and multiply your descendants for the sake of my servant Abraham.” 26:25 Then Isaac built an altar there and worshiped ⁶⁰  the Lord. He pitched his tent there, and his servants dug a well. ⁶¹ 

26:26 Now Abimelech had come ⁶²  to him from Gerar along with ⁶³  Ahuzzah his friend ⁶⁴  and Phicol the commander of his army. 26:27 Isaac asked them, “Why have you come to me? You hate me ⁶⁵  and sent me away from you.” 26:28 They replied, “We could plainly see ⁶⁶  that the Lord is with you. So we decided there should be ⁶⁷  a pact between us ⁶⁸  – between us ⁶⁹  and you. Allow us to make ⁷⁰  a treaty with you 26:29 so that ⁷¹  you will not do us any harm, just as we have not harmed ⁷²  you, but have always treated you well ⁷³  before sending you away ⁷⁴  in peace. Now you are blessed by the Lord.” ⁷⁵ 

26:30 So Isaac ⁷⁶  held a feast for them and they celebrated. ⁷⁷  26:31 Early in the morning the men made a treaty with each other. ⁷⁸  Isaac sent them off; they separated on good terms. ⁷⁹ 

26:32 That day Isaac’s servants came and told him about the well they had dug. “We’ve found water,” they reported. ⁸⁰  26:33 So he named it Shibah; ⁸¹  that is why the name of the city has been Beer Sheba ⁸²  to this day.

26:34 When ⁸³  Esau was forty years old, ⁸⁴  he married ⁸⁵  Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, as well as Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite. 26:35 They caused Isaac and Rebekah great anxiety. ⁸⁶ 

Kejadian 3:20-21

3:20 The man ⁸⁷  named his wife Eve, ⁸⁸  because ⁸⁹  she was the mother of all the living. ⁹⁰  3:21 The Lord God made garments from skin ⁹¹  for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.

Kejadian 33:12-13

33:12 Then Esau ⁹²  said, “Let’s be on our way! ⁹³  I will go in front of you.” 33:13 But Jacob ⁹⁴  said to him, “My lord knows that the children are young, ⁹⁵  and that I have to look after the sheep and cattle that are nursing their young. ⁹⁶  If they are driven too hard for even a single day, all the animals will die.

Kejadian 33:18

33:18 After he left Paddan Aram, Jacob came safely to the city of Shechem in the land of Canaan, and he camped near ⁹⁷  the city.

Kejadian 33:1

Jacob Meets Esau

33:1 Jacob looked up ⁹⁸  and saw that Esau was coming ⁹⁹  along with four hundred men. So he divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and the two female servants.

1 Samuel 15:11

15:11 “I regret that I have made Saul king, for he has turned away from me and has not done what I told him to do.” Samuel became angry and he cried out to the Lord all that night.

1 Samuel 15:2

15:2 Here is what the Lord of hosts says: ‘I carefully observed how the Amalekites opposed ¹⁰⁰  Israel along the way when Israel ¹⁰¹  came up from Egypt.

1 Samuel 24:2

24:2 So Saul took three thousand select men from all Israel and went to find ¹⁰²  David and his men in the region of ¹⁰³  the rocks of the mountain goats. ¹⁰⁴ 

1 Samuel 24:17-22

24:17 He said to David, “You are more innocent ¹⁰⁵  than I, for you have treated me well, even though I have tried to harm you! 24:18 You have explained today how you have treated me well. The Lord delivered me into your hand, but you did not kill me. 24:19 Now if a man finds his enemy, does he send him on his way in good shape? May the Lord repay you with good this day for what you have done to me. 24:20 Now look, I realize that you will in fact be king and that the kingdom of Israel will be established in your hand. 24:21 So now swear to me in the Lord’s name ¹⁰⁶  that you will not kill ¹⁰⁷  my descendants after me or destroy my name from the house of my father.”

24:22 David promised Saul this on oath. ¹⁰⁸  Then Saul went to his house, and David and his men went up to the stronghold.

Mazmur 36:3-4

36:3 The words he speaks are sinful and deceitful;

he does not care about doing what is wise and right. ¹⁰⁹ 

36:4 He plans ways to sin while he lies in bed;

he is committed to a sinful lifestyle; ¹¹⁰ 

he does not reject what is evil. ¹¹¹ 

Mazmur 125:5

125:5 As for those who are bent on traveling a sinful path, ¹¹² 

may the Lord remove them, ¹¹³  along with those who behave wickedly! ¹¹⁴ 

May Israel experience peace! ¹¹⁵ 

Zefanya 1:6

1:6 and those who turn their backs on ¹¹⁶  the Lord

and do not want the Lord’s help or guidance.” ¹¹⁷ 

Matius 13:20-21

13:20 The ¹¹⁸  seed sown on rocky ground ¹¹⁹  is the person who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy. 13:21 But he has no root in himself and does not endure; ¹²⁰  when ¹²¹  trouble or persecution comes because of the word, immediately he falls away.

Yohanes 6:66-70

Peter’s Confession

6:66 After this many of his disciples quit following him ¹²²  and did not accompany him ¹²³  any longer. 6:67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “You don’t want to go away too, do you?” ¹²⁴  6:68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words of eternal life. 6:69 We ¹²⁵  have come to believe and to know ¹²⁶  that you are the Holy One of God!” ¹²⁷  6:70 Jesus replied, ¹²⁸  “Didn’t I choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is the devil?” ¹²⁹ 

Galatia 5:7

5:7 You were running well; who prevented you from obeying ¹³⁰  the truth?

Ibrani 10:38-39

10:38 But my righteous one will live by faith, and if he shrinks back, I ¹³¹  take no pleasure in him. ¹³²  10:39 But we are not among those who shrink back and thus perish, but are among those who have faith and preserve their souls. ¹³³ 

Ibrani 10:2

10:2 For otherwise would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers would have been purified once for all and so have ¹³⁴  no further consciousness of sin?

Pengkhotbah 2:18-22

Futility of Being a Workaholic

2:18 So I loathed all the fruit of ¹³⁵  my effort, ¹³⁶ 

for which I worked so hard ¹³⁷  on earth, ¹³⁸ 

because ¹³⁹  I must leave it ¹⁴⁰  behind ¹⁴¹  in the hands of my successor. ¹⁴² 

2:19 Who knows if he will be a wise man or a fool?

Yet ¹⁴³  he will be master over all the fruit of ¹⁴⁴  my labor ¹⁴⁵ 

for which I worked so wisely ¹⁴⁶  on earth! ¹⁴⁷ 

This also is futile!

2:20 So I began to despair ¹⁴⁸  about all the fruit of ¹⁴⁹  my labor ¹⁵⁰ 

for which I worked so hard ¹⁵¹  on earth. ¹⁵² 

2:21 For a man may do his work with wisdom, knowledge, and skill;

however, he must hand over ¹⁵³  the fruit of his labor ¹⁵⁴  as an inheritance ¹⁵⁵ 

to someone else who did not work for it.

This also is futile, and an awful injustice! ¹⁵⁶ 

Painful Days and Restless Nights

2:22 What does a man acquire from all his labor

and from the anxiety that accompanies his toil on earth? ¹⁵⁷ 

Pengkhotbah 2:1

Futility of Self-Indulgent Pleasure

I thought to myself, ¹⁵⁸ 

2:1 “Come now, ¹⁵⁹  I will try ¹⁶⁰  self-indulgent pleasure ¹⁶¹  to see ¹⁶²  if it is worthwhile.” ¹⁶³ 

But I found ¹⁶⁴  that it also is futile. ¹⁶⁵ 

Yohanes 2:19

2:19 Jesus replied, ¹⁶⁶  “Destroy ¹⁶⁷  this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.”

Yohanes 5:16-18

Responding to Jewish Leaders

5:16 Now because Jesus was doing these things ¹⁶⁸  on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders ¹⁶⁹  began persecuting ¹⁷⁰  him. 5:17 So he ¹⁷¹  told ¹⁷²  them, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” ¹⁷³  5:18 For this reason the Jewish leaders ¹⁷⁴  were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God.

Yudas 1:12

1:12 These men are ¹⁷⁵  dangerous reefs ¹⁷⁶  at your love feasts, ¹⁷⁷  feasting without reverence, ¹⁷⁸  feeding only themselves. ¹⁷⁹  They are ¹⁸⁰  waterless ¹⁸¹  clouds, carried along by the winds; autumn trees without fruit ¹⁸²  – twice dead, ¹⁸³  uprooted;

[26:1]  ¹ tn Heb “in addition to the first famine which was.”

[26:1]  ² sn This account is parallel to two similar stories about Abraham (see Gen 12:10-20; 20:1-18). Many scholars do not believe there were three similar incidents, only one that got borrowed and duplicated. Many regard the account about Isaac as the original, which then was attached to the more important person, Abraham, with supernatural elements being added. For a critique of such an approach, see R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 47-62. It is more likely that the story illustrates the proverb “like father, like son” (see T. W. Mann, The Book of the Torah, 53). In typical human fashion the son follows his father’s example of lying to avoid problems. The appearance of similar events reported in a similar way underscores the fact that the blessing has now passed to Isaac, even if he fails as his father did.

[26:2]  ³ sn Do not go down to Egypt. The words echo Gen 12:10, which reports that “Abram went down to Egypt,” but state the opposite.

[26:2]  ⁴ tn Heb “say to you.”

[26:3]  ⁵ tn The Hebrew verb גּוּר (gur) means “to live temporarily without ownership of land.” Abraham’s family will not actually possess the land of Canaan until the Israelite conquest hundreds of years later.

[26:3]  ⁶ tn After the imperative “stay” the two prefixed verb forms with prefixed conjunction here indicate consequence.

[26:3]  sn I will be with you and I will bless you. The promise of divine presence is a promise to intervene to protect and to bless.

[26:3]  ⁷ tn The Hebrew term זֶרַע (zera’) occurring here and in v. 18 may mean “seed” (for planting), “offspring” (occasionally of animals, but usually of people), or “descendants” depending on the context.

[26:3]  sn To you and to your descendants. The Abrahamic blessing will pass to Isaac. Everything included in that blessing will now belong to the son, and in turn will be passed on to his sons. But there is a contingency involved: If they are to enjoy the full blessings, they will have to obey the word of the Lord. And so obedience is enjoined here with the example of how well Abraham obeyed.

[26:3]  ⁸ tn The Hiphil stem of the verb קוּם (qum) here means “to fulfill, to bring to realization.” For other examples of this use of this verb form, see Lev 26:9; Num 23:19; Deut 8:18; 9:5; 1 Sam 1:23; 1 Kgs 6:12; Jer 11:5.

[26:3]  ⁹ tn Heb “the oath which I swore.”

[26:3]  sn The solemn promise I made. See Gen 15:18-20; 22:16-18.

[26:4]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “your descendants.”

[26:4]  ¹¹ tn Traditionally the verb is taken as passive (“will be blessed”) here, as if Abraham’s descendants were going to be a channel or source of blessing to the nations. But the Hitpael is better understood here as reflexive/reciprocal, “will bless [i.e., pronounce blessings on] themselves/one another” (see also Gen 22:18). Elsewhere the Hitpael of the verb “to bless” is used with a reflexive/reciprocal sense in Deut 29:18; Ps 72:17; Isa 65:16; Jer 4:2. Gen 12:2 predicts that Abram will be held up as a paradigm of divine blessing and that people will use his name in their blessing formulae. For examples of blessing formulae utilizing an individual as an example of blessing see Gen 48:20 and Ruth 4:11. Earlier formulations of this promise (see Gen 12:2; 18:18) use the Niphal stem. (See also Gen 28:14.)

[26:5]  ¹² tn The words “All this will come to pass” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied for stylistic reasons.

[26:5]  ¹³ tn Heb “listened to my voice.”

[26:5]  ¹⁴ sn My charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. The language of this verse is clearly interpretive, for Abraham did not have all these laws. The terms are legal designations for sections of the Mosaic law and presuppose the existence of the law. Some Rabbinic views actually conclude that Abraham had fulfilled the whole law before it was given (see m. Qiddushin 4:14). Some scholars argue that this story could only have been written after the law was given (C. Westermann, Genesis, 2:424-25). But the simplest explanation is that the narrator (traditionally taken to be Moses the Lawgiver) elaborated on the simple report of Abraham’s obedience by using terms with which the Israelites were familiar. In this way he depicts Abraham as the model of obedience to God’s commands, whose example Israel should follow.

[26:7]  ¹⁵ sn Rebekah, unlike Sarah, was not actually her husband’s sister.

[26:7]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “lest.” The words “for he thought to himself” are supplied because the next clause is written with a first person pronoun, showing that Isaac was saying or thinking this.

[26:7]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “kill me on account of.”

[26:8]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:8]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “and it happened when the days were long to him there.”

[26:8]  ²⁰ tn Heb “look, Isaac.” By the use of the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “look”), the narrator invites the audience to view the scene through Abimelech’s eyes.

[26:8]  ²¹ tn Or “fondling.”

[26:8]  sn The Hebrew word מְצַחֵק (mÿtsakheq), from the root צָחַק (tsakhaq, “laugh”), forms a sound play with the name “Isaac” right before it. Here it depicts an action, probably caressing or fondling, that indicated immediately that Rebekah was Isaac’s wife, not his sister. Isaac’s deception made a mockery of God’s covenantal promise. Ignoring God’s promise to protect and bless him, Isaac lied to protect himself and acted in bad faith to the men of Gerar.

[26:9]  ²² tn Heb “Surely, look!” See N. H. Snaith, “The meaning of Hebrew ‘ak,” VT 14 (1964): 221-25.

[26:9]  ²³ tn Heb “Because I said, ‘Lest I die on account of her.’” Since the verb “said” probably means “said to myself” (i.e., “thought”) here, the direct discourse in the Hebrew statement has been converted to indirect discourse in the translation. In addition the simple prepositional phrase “on account of her” has been clarified in the translation as “to get her” (cf. v. 7).

[26:10]  ²⁴ tn Heb “What is this you have done to us?” The Hebrew demonstrative pronoun “this” adds emphasis: “What in the world have you done to us?” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 24, §118).

[26:10]  ²⁵ tn Heb “people.”

[26:10]  ²⁶ tn The Hebrew verb means “to lie down.” Here the expression “lie with” or “sleep with” is euphemistic for “have sexual relations with.”

[26:11]  ²⁷ tn Heb “strikes.” Here the verb has the nuance “to harm in any way.” It would include assaulting the woman or killing the man.

[26:11]  ²⁸ tn The use of the infinitive absolute before the imperfect makes the construction emphatic.

[26:12]  ²⁹ tn Heb “a hundredfold.”

[26:12]  ³⁰ tn This final clause explains why Isaac had such a bountiful harvest.

[26:13]  ³¹ tn Heb “great.” In this context the statement refers primarily to Isaac’s material wealth, although reputation and influence are included.

[26:13]  ³² tn Heb “and he went, going and becoming great.” The construction stresses that his growth in possessions and power continued steadily.

[26:14]  ³³ tn Heb “and there was to him.”

[26:14]  ³⁴ tn Heb “possessions of sheep.”

[26:14]  ³⁵ tn Heb “possessions of cattle.”

[26:14]  ³⁶ tn The Hebrew verb translated “became jealous” refers here to intense jealousy or envy that leads to hostile action (see v. 15).

[26:15]  ³⁷ tn Heb “and the Philistines stopped them up and filled them with dirt.”

[26:16]  ³⁸ tn Heb “Go away from us.”

[26:16]  ³⁹ sn You have become much more powerful. This explanation for the expulsion of Isaac from Philistine territory foreshadows the words used later by the Egyptians to justify their oppression of Israel (see Exod 1:9).

[26:17]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “and he camped in the valley of Gerar and he lived there.”

[26:17]  sn This valley was actually a wadi (a dry river bed where the water would flow in the rainy season, but this would have been rare in the Negev). The water table under it would have been higher than in the desert because of water soaking in during the torrents, making it easier to find water when digging wells. However, this does not minimize the blessing of the Lord, for the men of the region knew this too, but did not have the same results.

[26:18]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “he returned and dug,” meaning “he dug again” or “he reopened.”

[26:18]  ⁴² tn Heb “that they dug.” Since the subject is indefinite, the verb is translated as passive.

[26:18]  ⁴³ tn Heb “and the Philistines had stopped them up.” This clause explains why Isaac had to reopen them.

[26:18]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:18]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “them”; the referent (the wells) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:18]  ⁴⁶ tn Heb “called names to them according to the names that his father called them.”

[26:19]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “living.” This expression refers to a well supplied by subterranean streams (see Song 4:15).

[26:20]  ⁴⁸ tn The Hebrew verb translated “quarreled” describes a conflict that often has legal ramifications.

[26:20]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:20]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “and he called the name of the well.”

[26:20]  ⁵¹ sn The name Esek means “argument” in Hebrew. The following causal clause explains that Isaac gave the well this name as a reminder of the conflict its discovery had created. In the Hebrew text there is a wordplay, for the name is derived from the verb translated “argued.”

[26:20]  ⁵² tn The words “about it” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[26:21]  ⁵³ tn Heb “they”; the referent (Isaac’s servants) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:21]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “and he called its name.” The referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:21]  ⁵⁵ sn The name Sitnah (שִׂטְנָה, sitnah) is derived from a Hebrew verbal root meaning “to oppose; to be an adversary” (cf. Job 1:6). The name was a reminder that the digging of this well caused “opposition” from the Philistines.

[26:22]  ⁵⁶ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:22]  ⁵⁷ tn Heb “and he called its name.”

[26:22]  ⁵⁸ sn The name Rehoboth (רְהֹבוֹת, rehovot) is derived from a verbal root meaning “to make room.” The name was a reminder that God had made room for them. The story shows Isaac’s patience with the opposition; it also shows how God’s blessing outdistanced the men of Gerar. They could not stop it or seize it any longer.

[26:23]  ⁵⁹ tn Heb “and he went up from there”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:25]  ⁶⁰ tn Heb “called in the name of.” The expression refers to worshiping the Lord through prayer and sacrifice (see Gen 4:26; 12:8; 13:4; 21:33). See G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:116.

[26:25]  ⁶¹ tn Heb “and they dug there, the servants of Isaac, a well.”

[26:26]  ⁶² tn The disjunctive clause supplies pertinent supplemental information. The past perfect is used because the following narrative records the treaty at Beer Sheba. Prior to this we are told that Isaac settled in Beer Sheba; presumably this treaty would have allowed him to do that. However, it may be that he settled there and then made the treaty by which he renamed the place Beer Sheba. In this case one may translate “Now Abimelech came to him.”

[26:26]  ⁶³ tn Heb “and.”

[26:26]  ⁶⁴ tn Many modern translations render the Hebrew term מֵרֵעַ (merea’) as “councillor” or “adviser,” but the term may not designate an official position but simply a close personal friend.

[26:27]  ⁶⁵ tn The disjunctive clause is circumstantial, expressing the reason for his question.

[26:28]  ⁶⁶ tn The infinitive absolute before the verb emphasizes the clarity of their perception.

[26:28]  ⁶⁷ tn Heb “And we said, ‘Let there be.’” The direct discourse in the Hebrew text has been rendered as indirect discourse in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[26:28]  ⁶⁸ tn The pronoun “us” here is inclusive – it refers to the Philistine contingent on the one hand and Isaac on the other.

[26:28]  ⁶⁹ tn The pronoun “us” here is exclusive – it refers to just the Philistine contingent (the following “you” refers to Isaac).

[26:28]  ⁷⁰ tn The translation assumes that the cohortative expresses their request. Another option is to understand the cohortative as indicating resolve: “We want to make.’”

[26:29]  ⁷¹ tn The oath formula is used: “if you do us harm” means “so that you will not do.”

[26:29]  ⁷² tn Heb “touched.”

[26:29]  ⁷³ tn Heb “and just as we have done only good with you.”

[26:29]  ⁷⁴ tn Heb “and we sent you away.”

[26:29]  ⁷⁵ tn The Philistine leaders are making an observation, not pronouncing a blessing, so the translation reads “you are blessed” rather than “may you be blessed” (cf. NAB).

[26:30]  ⁷⁶ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:30]  ⁷⁷ tn Heb “and they ate and drank.”

[26:31]  ⁷⁸ tn Heb “and they got up early and they swore an oath, a man to his brother.”

[26:31]  ⁷⁹ tn Heb “and they went from him in peace.”

[26:32]  ⁸⁰ tn Heb “and they said to him, ‘We have found water.’” The order of the introductory clause and the direct discourse has been rearranged in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[26:33]  ⁸¹ sn The name Shibah (שִׁבְעָה, shiv’ah) means (or at least sounds like) the word meaning “oath.” The name was a reminder of the oath sworn by Isaac and the Philistines to solidify their treaty.

[26:33]  ⁸² sn The name Beer Sheba (בְּאֵר שָׁבַע, bÿ’er shava’) means “well of an oath” or “well of seven.” According to Gen 21:31 Abraham gave Beer Sheba its name when he made a treaty with the Philistines. Because of the parallels between this earlier story and the account in 26:26-33, some scholars see chaps. 21 and 26 as two versions (or doublets) of one original story. However, if one takes the text as it stands, it appears that Isaac made a later treaty agreement with the people of the land that was similar to his father’s. Abraham dug a well at the site and named the place Beer Sheba; Isaac dug another well there and named the well Shibah. Later generations then associated the name Beer Sheba with Isaac, even though Abraham gave the place its name at an earlier time.

[26:34]  ⁸³ tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator (“and it happened”), making this clause subordinate to the next.

[26:34]  ⁸⁴ tn Heb “the son of forty years.”

[26:34]  ⁸⁵ tn Heb “took as a wife.”

[26:35]  ⁸⁶ tn Heb “And they were [a source of ] bitterness in spirit to Isaac and to Rebekah.”

[3:20]  ⁸⁷ tn Or “Adam”; however, the Hebrew term has the definite article here.

[3:20]  ⁸⁸ sn The name Eve means “Living one” or “Life-giver” in Hebrew.

[3:20]  ⁸⁹ tn The explanatory clause gives the reason for the name. Where the one doing the naming gives the explanation, the text normally uses “saying”; where the narrator explains it, the explanatory clause is typically used.

[3:20]  ⁹⁰ tn The explanation of the name forms a sound play (paronomasia) with the name. “Eve” is חַוָּה (khavvah) and “living” is חַי (khay). The name preserves the archaic form of the verb חָיָה (khayah, “to live”) with the middle vav (ו) instead of yod (י). The form חַי (khay) is derived from the normal form חַיָּה (khayyah). Compare the name Yahweh (יְהוָה) explained from הָיָה (hayah, “to be”) rather than from הַוָה (havah). The biblical account stands in contrast to the pagan material that presents a serpent goddess hawwat who is the mother of life. See J. Heller, “Der Name Eva,” ArOr 26 (1958): 636-56; and A. F. Key, “The Giving of Proper Names in the OT,” JBL 83 (1964): 55-59.

[3:21]  ⁹¹ sn The Lord God made garments from skin. The text gives no indication of how this was done, or how they came by the skins. Earlier in the narrative (v. 7) the attempt of the man and the woman to cover their nakedness with leaves expressed their sense of alienation from each other and from God. By giving them more substantial coverings, God indicates this alienation is greater than they realize. This divine action is also ominous; God is preparing them for the more hostile environment in which they will soon be living (v. 23). At the same time, there is a positive side to the story in that God makes provision for the man’s and woman’s condition.

[33:12]  ⁹² tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Esau) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[33:12]  ⁹³ tn Heb “let us travel and let us go.” The two cohortatives are used in combination with the sense, “let’s travel along, get going, be on our way.”

[33:13]  ⁹⁴ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Jacob) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[33:13]  ⁹⁵ tn Heb “weak.”

[33:13]  ⁹⁶ tn Heb “and the sheep and the cattle nursing [are] upon me.”

[33:18]  ⁹⁷ tn Heb “in front of.”

[33:1]  ⁹⁸ tn Heb “and Jacob lifted up his eyes.”

[33:1]  ⁹⁹ tn Or “and look, Esau was coming.” By the use of the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “look”), the narrator invites the reader to view the scene through Jacob’s eyes.

[15:2]  ¹⁰⁰ tn Heb “what Amalek did to Israel, how he placed against him.”

[15:2]  ¹⁰¹ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Israel) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[24:2]  ¹⁰² tn Heb “to search [for].”

[24:2]  ¹⁰³ tn Heb “upon the face of.”

[24:2]  ¹⁰⁴ tn Or “the region of the Rocks of the Mountain Goats,” if this expression is understood as a place name (cf. NASB, NIV, NRSV, TEV, CEV).

[24:17]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Or “righteous” (so KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV); NAB “you are in the right”; NLT “are a better man than I am.”

[24:21]  ¹⁰⁶ tn Heb “by the Lord.”

[24:21]  ¹⁰⁷ tn Heb “cut off.”

[24:22]  ¹⁰⁸ tn Heb “and David swore an oath to Saul.”

[36:3]  ¹⁰⁹ tn Heb “he ceases to exhibit wisdom to do good.” The Hiphil forms are exhibitive, indicating the outward expression of an inner attitude.

[36:4]  ¹¹⁰ tn Heb “he takes a stand in a way [that is] not good.” The word “way” here refers metaphorically to behavior or life style.

[36:4]  ¹¹¹ tn The three imperfect verbal forms in v. 4 highlight the characteristic behavior of the typical evildoer.

[125:5]  ¹¹² tn Heb “and the ones making their paths twisted.” A sinful lifestyle is compared to a twisting, winding road.

[125:5]  ¹¹³ tn Heb “lead them away.” The prefixed verbal form is understood as a jussive of prayer here (note the prayers directly before and after this). Another option is to translate, “the Lord will remove them” (cf. NIV, NRSV).

[125:5]  ¹¹⁴ tn Heb “the workers of wickedness.”

[125:5]  ¹¹⁵ tn Heb “peace [be] upon Israel.” The statement is understood as a prayer (see Ps 122:8 for a similar prayer for peace).

[1:6]  ¹¹⁶ tn Heb “turn back from [following] after.”

[1:6]  ¹¹⁷ tn Heb “who do not seek the Lord and do not inquire of him.” The present translation assumes the first verb refers to praying for divine help and the second to seeking his revealed will through an oracle. Note the usage of the two verbs in 2 Chr 20:3-4.

[13:20]  ¹¹⁸ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[13:20]  ¹¹⁹ tn Grk “The one sown on rocky ground, this is the one.” The next two statements like this one have this same syntactical structure.

[13:21]  ¹²⁰ tn Grk “is temporary.”

[13:21]  ¹²¹ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[6:66]  ¹²² tn Grk “many of his disciples went back to what lay behind.”

[6:66]  ¹²³ tn Grk “were not walking with him.”

[6:67]  ¹²⁴ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here it is “do you?”).

[6:69]  ¹²⁵ tn Grk “And we.”

[6:69]  ¹²⁶ sn See 1 John 4:16.

[6:69]  ¹²⁷ tc The witnesses display a bewildering array of variants here. Instead of “the Holy One of God” (ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ, Jo {agio" tou qeou), Tertullian has ὁ Χριστός (Jo Cristo", “the Christ”); C³ Θ* ˹ 33 565 lat read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (Jo Cristo" Jo Juio" tou qeou, “the Christ, the Son of God”); two versional witnesses (b sy^c) have ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Son of God”); the Byzantine text as well as many others (Ψ 0250 ˹³ 33 Ï) read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος (Jo Cristo" Jo Juio" tou qeou tou zwnto", “the Christ, the Son of the living God”); and Ì⁶⁶ as well as a few versions have ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Christ, the Holy One of God”). The reading ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ is, however, well supported by Ì⁷⁵ א B C* D L W as well as versional witnesses. It appears that Peter’s confession in the Synoptic Gospels (especially Matt 16:16) supplied the motivation for the variations. Although the witnesses in Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; and Luke 9:20 vary considerably, the readings are all intra-synoptic, that is, they do not pull in “the Holy One of God” but reflect various permutations of “Christ”/“Christ of God”/“Christ, the Son of God”/“Christ, the Son of the living God.” The wording “the Holy One of God” (without “Christ”) in important witnesses here is thus unique among Peter’s confessions, and best explains the rise of the other readings.

[6:69]  sn You have the words of eternal life…you are the Holy One of God! In contrast to the response of some of his disciples, here is the response of the twelve, whom Jesus then questioned concerning their loyalty to him. This was the big test, and the twelve, with Peter as spokesman, passed with flying colors. The confession here differs considerably from the synoptic accounts (Matt 16:16, Mark 8:29, and Luke 9:20) and concerns directly the disciples’ personal loyalty to Jesus, in contrast to those other disciples who had deserted him (John 6:66).

[6:70]  ¹²⁸ tn Grk “Jesus answered them.”

[6:70]  ¹²⁹ tn Although most translations render this last phrase as “one of you is a devil,” such a translation presupposes that there is more than one devil. This finds roots in the KJV in which the Greek word for demon was often translated “devil.” In fact, the KJV never uses the word “demon.” (Sixty-two of the 63 NT instances of δαιμόνιον [daimonion] are translated “devil” [in Acts 17:18 the plural has been translated “gods”]. This can get confusing in places where the singular “devil” is used: Is Satan or one of the demons in view [cf. Matt 9:33 (demon); 13:39 (devil); 17:18 (demon); Mark 7:26 (demon); Luke 4:2 (devil); etc.]?) Now regarding John 6:70, both the construction in Greek and the technical use of διάβολος (diabolos) indicate that the one devil is in view. To object to the translation “the devil” because it thus equates Judas with Satan does not take into consideration that Jesus often spoke figuratively (e.g., “destroy this temple” [John 2:19]; “he [John the Baptist] is Elijah” [Matt 11:14]), even equating Peter with the devil on one occasion (Mark 8:33). According to ExSyn 249, “A curious phenomenon has occurred in the English Bible with reference to one particular monadic noun, διάβολος. The KJV translates both διάβολος and δαιμόνιον as ‘devil.’ Thus in the AV translators’ minds, ‘devil’ was not a monadic noun. Modern translations have correctly rendered δαιμόνιον as ‘demon’ and have, for the most part, recognized that διάβολος is monadic (cf., e.g., 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 20:2). But in John 6:70 modern translations have fallen into the error of the King James translators. The KJV has ‘one of you is a devil.’ So does the RSV, NRSV, ASV, NIV, NKJV, and the JB [Jerusalem Bible]. Yet there is only one devil…The legacy of the KJV still lives on, then, even in places where it ought not.”

[5:7]  ¹³⁰ tn Or “following.” BDAG 792 s.v. πείθω 3.b states, “obey, follow w. dat. of the pers. or thing…Gal 3:1 v.l.; 5:7.”

[10:38]  ¹³¹ tn Grk “my soul.”

[10:38]  ¹³² sn A quotation from Hab 2:4.

[10:39]  ¹³³ tn Grk “not…of shrinking back to perdition but of faith to the preservation of the soul.”

[10:2]  ¹³⁴ tn Grk “the worshipers, having been purified once for all, would have.”

[2:18]  ¹³⁵ tn The phrase “the fruit of” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity (see the following note on the phrase “hard labor”).

[2:18]  ¹³⁶ tn Heb “I hated all my toil for which I had toiled.” The term עֲמָלִי (’amali, “my toil”) is repeated throughout 2:18-21. In each case, it functions as a metonymy of cause (i.e., toil) for effect (i.e., fruit of labor). See, e.g., Ps 105:44; BDB 765 s.v עָמַל 3. The metonymy is indicated by several factors: (1) The 3rd person masculine singular suffix (“it”) on אַנִּיחֶנּוּ (’annikhennu, “I must leave it”) in 2:18, and on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yittÿnennu, “I must give it”) in 2:21 refer to his wealth, that is, the fruit of his labor. (2) In 2:21 the 3rd person masculine singular suffix on שֶׁלֹּא עָמַל־בּוֹ (shello’ ’amal-bo, “who did not work for it”) refers to the inheritance that Qoheleth must turn over to his successor, namely, the fruit of his labor. (3) While he himself enjoyed the fruit of his labor, he despaired that he had to turn the fruit of his labor over to his successor: “So I loathed all the [fruit of] my labor” (2:18a) and “I began to despair about the [fruit of] my labor” (2:20a). Although most translations render עֲמָלִי as “my toil” in 2:18, the metonymy is recognized by several English translations: “So I hated all the fruit of my labor for which I had labored” (NASB); “So I detested all the fruits of my labor” (NAB); “I hated all the things I had toiled for” (NIV); and “So I loathed all the wealth that I was gaining” (NJPS).

[2:18]  ¹³⁷ tn Qoheleth uses an internal cognate accusative construction (accusative noun and verb from the same root) for emphasis: עֲמָלִי שֶׁאֲנִי עָמֵל (’amali she’ani ’amel, “my toil for which I had toiled”). See IBHS 167 §10.2.1g.

[2:18]  ¹³⁸ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:18]  ¹³⁹ tn The relative pronoun שֶׁ (she) on שֶׁאַנִּיחֶנּוּ (she’annikhennu, relative pronoun שֶׁ + Hiphil imperfect 1st person common singular from נוּחַ, nuakh, “to leave” + 3rd person masculine singular suffix) is causal: “Because I must leave it behind.”

[2:18]  ¹⁴⁰ tn The 3rd person masculine singular suffix on אַנִּיחֶנּוּ (’annikhennu, “I must leave it”) refers to Qoheleth’s wealth, that is, the fruit of his labor (see the note on the phrase “hard labor” in 2:18). The suffix is rendered literally by nearly all translations; however, a few make its referent explicit: “I have to leave its fruits” (NEB), “I must leave them [= all the fruits of my labor]” (NAB).

[2:18]  ¹⁴¹ tn The verb נוּחַ (nuakh, “to rest”) denotes “to leave [something] behind” in the hands of someone (e.g., Ps 119:121; Eccl 2:18); see HALOT 680 s.v. נוח B.2.c. The imperfect functions in a modal sense of obligation or necessity. At death, Qoheleth will be forced to pass on his entire estate and the fruit of his labors to his successor.

[2:18]  ¹⁴² tn Heb “to a man who will come after me.”

[2:19]  ¹⁴³ tn The vav on וְיִשְׁלַט (vÿyishlat, conjunction + Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from שָׁלַט, shalat, “to be master”) is adversative (“yet”).

[2:19]  ¹⁴⁴ tn The phrase “the fruit of” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity (see the following note on the word “labor”).

[2:19]  ¹⁴⁵ tn Heb “my labor.” As in 2:18, the term עֲמָלִי (’amali, “my labor”) is a metonymy of cause (i.e., my labor) for effect (i.e., fruit of my labor). The metonymy is recognized by several translations: “he will control all the wealth that I gained” (NJPS); “he will have control over all the fruits of my labor” (NAB); “he will have mastery over all the fruits of my labor” (NEB); “he will have control over all the fruit of my labor” (NASB); “he will be master over all my possessions” (MLB).

[2:19]  ¹⁴⁶ tn An internal cognate accusative construction (accusative and verb from same root) is used for emphasis: שֶׁעָמַלְתִּי עֲמָלִי (’amali she’amalti, “my toil for which I had toiled”); see IBHS 167 §10.2.1g. The two verbs שֶׁעָמַלְתִּי וְשֶׁחָכַמְתִּי (she’amalti vÿshekhakhamti, “for which I had labored and for which I had acted wisely”) form a verbal hendiadys (two separate verbs used in association to communicate one idea): “for I had labored so wisely.” The second verb is used adverbially to modify the first verb, which functions in its full verbal sense.

[2:19]  ¹⁴⁷ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:20]  ¹⁴⁸ tn Heb “I turned aside to allow my heart despair.” The term לִבִּי (libbi, “my heart”) is a synecdoche of part (i.e., heart) for the whole (i.e., whole person); see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 648.

[2:20]  ¹⁴⁹ tn The phrase “the fruit of” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity (see the following note on the word “labor”).

[2:20]  ¹⁵⁰ tn Heb “all my toil.” As in 2:18-19, the term עֲמָלִי (’amali, “my labor”) is a metonymy of cause (i.e., my labor) for effect (i.e., the fruit of my labor). The metonymy is recognized by several translations: “all the fruits of my labor” (NAB); “all the fruit of my labor” (NASB); “all the gains I had made” (NJPS).

[2:20]  ¹⁵¹ tn Here the author uses an internal cognate accusative construction (accusative noun and verb from the same root) for emphasis: שֶׁעָמַלְתִּי הֶעָמָל (he’amal she’amalti, “the toil for which I had toiled”); see IBHS 167 §10.2.1g.

[2:20]  ¹⁵² tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:21]  ¹⁵³ tn Heb “he must give.” The 3rd person masculine singular suffix on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yittÿnennu, Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from נָתַן, natan, “to give” + 3rd person masculine singular suffix) refers back to עֲמָלוֹ (’amalo, “his labor”) which is treated in this line as a metonymy of cause for effect, that is, “he must give it” = “he must give his labor” = “he must give the fruit of his labor.”

[2:21]  sn As in 2:18-19, Qoheleth laments the injustice that a person who works diligently in wisdom must one day hand over the fruit of his labor (i.e., his fortune and the care of his achievements) to his successor. There is no guarantee that one’s heir will be wise and be a good steward of this wealth, or be foolish and squander it – in which case, the former man’s entire life’s work would be in vain.

[2:21]  ¹⁵⁴ tn Heb “it”; the referent (“the fruit of his labor”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:21]  ¹⁵⁵ tn Or “he must turn over an inheritance”; or “he must turn it over, namely, an inheritance.” There are two approaches to the syntax of חֶלְקוֹ (khelqo, “his inheritance”): (1) The 3rd person masculine singular suffix is a subjective genitive: “his inheritance” = the inheritance which he must give to his heir. The referent of the 3rd person masculine singular suffix is Qoheleth in 2:21a who worked hard to amass the fortune. The noun חֵלֶק (kheleq, “inheritance”) functions as an adverbial accusative of state (GKC 372 §118.a) or a predicate accusative (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 12-13, §57): “He must give it [i.e., his fortune] as an inheritance.” (2) The 3rd person masculine singular suffix is an objective genitive: “his inheritance” = the inheritance which the heir will receive from Qoheleth. The referent of the 3rd person masculine singular suffix is the heir in 2:21b. The noun חֵלֶק (“inheritance”) functions as the accusative direct object in apposition (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 15-16, §71) to the 3rd person masculine singular suffix on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yittÿnennu, “he must give it”; Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from נָתַן, natan, + 3rd person masculine singular suffix): “He must give it, namely, his inheritance, to one who did not work for it.”

[2:21]  ¹⁵⁶ tn The noun רָעָה (ra’ah, “evil”) probably means “misfortune” (HALOT 1263 s.v. רָעָה 4) or “injustice; wrong” (HALOT 1262 s.v. רָעָה 2.b). The phrase רָעָה רַבָּה (ra’ah rabbah) connotes “grave injustice” or “great misfortune” (e.g., Eccl 2:17; 5:12, 15; 6:1; 10:5). It is expressed well as: “This too is…a great misfortune” (NAB, NIV, MLB) and “utterly wrong!” (NEB).

[2:21]  sn Verses 18-21 are arranged into two sub-units (2:18-19 and 2:20-21). Each contains a parallel structure: (1) Introductory lament: “I hated all my toil” and “I began to despair about all my toil.” (2) Reason for the lament: “I must turn over the fruit of my labor to the hands of my successor” and “he must hand over the fruit of his work as an inheritance.” (3) Description of successor: “who knows whether he will be a wise man or a fool?” and “he did not work for it.” (4) Concluding statement: “This also is fruitless!” and “This also is profitless and an awful injustice!”

[2:22]  ¹⁵⁷ tn Heb “under the sun.” The rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “Man acquires nothing” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51).

[2:1]  ¹⁵⁸ tn Heb “I said, I, in my heart” (אָמַרְתִּי אֲנִי בְּלִבִּי, ’amarti ’ani bÿlibbi). The term “heart” (לֵב, lev) is a synecdoche of part (“heart”) for the whole (the whole person), and thus means “I said to myself” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 648).

[2:1]  ¹⁵⁹ tn The Hebrew verb לְכָה (lÿkhah, “Come!”) is a weakened imperative, used merely as an introductory word, e.g., Gen 19:32; 31:44; Judg 19:11; 1 Sam 9:9-10; 11:14; 2 Kgs 3:7; Ps 66:5; Song 7:12; Isa 1:18; 2:3; Mic 4:2 (HALOT 246 s.v. הָלַךְ 2; BDB 234 s.v. הָלַךְ I.5.f.2). Whenever לְכָה introduces an exhortation, it functions as an invitation to the audience to adopt a course of action that will be beneficial to the addressee or mutually beneficial to both the speaker and the addressee. Here, Qoheleth personifies his “heart” (לִבִּי, libbi) and addresses himself. The examination of self-indulgent pleasure is designed to be beneficial to Qoheleth.

[2:1]  ¹⁶⁰ tn Or “test.” The cohortative אֲנַסְּכָה (’anassÿkhah) emphasizes the resolve of the speaker. The term נָסַה (nasah, “to test”) means “to conduct a test,” that is, to conduct an experiment (Judg 6:39; Eccl 2:1; 7:23; Dan 1:12, 14; see HALOT 702 s.v. נסה 3; BDB 650 s.v. נָסָה 1). The verb נָסַה is often used as a synonym with בָּחַן (bakhan, “to examine”; BDB 103 s.v. בָּחַן and 650 s.v. נָסָה 1) and לָדַעַת (lada’at, “to ascertain”; Deut 8:2).

[2:1]  ¹⁶¹ tn Heb “I will test you with pleasure.” The term שִׂמְחַה (simkhah, “pleasure”) has a two-fold range of meanings: (1) it can refer to the legitimate enjoyment of life that Qoheleth affirms is good (5:17; 8:15; 9:7; 11:8, 9) and that God gives to those who please him (2:26; 5:19); or (2) it can refer to foolish pleasure, self-indulgent, frivolous merrymaking (2:1, 2; 7:4). The parallelism in 2:2 between שִׂמְחַה and שְׂחוֹק (sÿkhoq, “laughter, frivolous merrymaking”), which always appears in the context of banqueting, drinking, and merrymaking, suggests that the pejorative sense is in view in this context.

[2:1]  sn The statement I will try self-indulgent pleasure is a figurative expression known as metonymy of association. As 2:1-3 makes clear, it is not so much Qoheleth who is put to the test with pleasure, but rather that pleasure is put to the test by Qoheleth.

[2:1]  ¹⁶² tn Heb “See what is good!” The volitive sequence of the cohortative (אֲנַסְּכָה, ’anassÿkhah, “I will test you”) followed by vav + imperative (וּרְאֵה, urÿ’eh, “and see!”) denotes purpose/result: “I will test you…in order to see….” The verb רָאָה (ra’ah, “to see”) has a broad range of meanings (e.g., in the Qal stem 16 categories are listed in HALOT 1157–1160 s.v.). In this context it means “to discover; to perceive; to discern; to understand” (HALOT 1159 s.v. ראה 13; BDB 907 s.v. רָאָה 5).

[2:1]  ¹⁶³ sn The phrase “to see what is good” (רָאָה, ra’ah, “to see” + טוֹב, tov, “good”) is repeated twice in 2:1-3. This is the key phrase in this section of Ecclesiastes. Qoheleth sought to discover (רָאָה) whether merry-making offered any value (טוֹב) to mankind.

[2:1]  ¹⁶⁴ tn The particle וְהִנֵּה (vÿhinneh, literally “Behold!”) occurs after verbs of perception to introduce what was seen, understood or discovered (HALOT 252 s.v. הִנֵּה 8). It is used to make the narrative graphic and vivid, enabling the reader to enter into the surprise of the speaker (BDB 244 s.v. הִנֵּה c). This is an example of the heterosis of the deictic particle (“Behold!”) for a verb of perception (“I found”). See E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 510-34.

[2:1]  ¹⁶⁵ tn This use of הֶבֶל (hevel) denotes “futile, worthless, fruitless, pointless” (HALOT 237 s.v. I הֶבֶל 2; BDB 210–11 s.v. I הֶבֶל 2). It is a synonym to מְהוֹלָל (mÿholal, “folly”) in 2:2a and an antonym to טוֹב (tov, “worthwhile, beneficial”) in 2:1b and 2:3c.

[2:19]  ¹⁶⁶ tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

[2:19]  ¹⁶⁷ tn The imperative here is really more than a simple conditional imperative (= “if you destroy”); its semantic force here is more like the ironical imperative found in the prophets (Amos 4:4, Isa 8:9) = “Go ahead and do this and see what happens.”

[5:16]  ¹⁶⁸ sn Note the plural phrase these things which seems to indicate that Jesus healed on the Sabbath more than once (cf. John 20:30). The synoptic gospels show this to be true; the incident in 5:1-15 has thus been chosen by the author as representative.

[5:16]  ¹⁶⁹ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 10.

[5:16]  ¹⁷⁰ tn Or “harassing.”

[5:17]  ¹⁷¹ tc ‡ Most witnesses (Ì⁶⁶ A D L Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï latt co) have ᾿Ιησοῦς (Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while generally better witnesses (Ì⁷⁵ א B W {0141} 892 1241 pbo) lack the name. Although it is possible that Alexandrian scribes deleted the name due to proclivities to prune, this is not as likely as other witnesses adding it for clarification, especially since multiple strands of the Alexandrian text are represented in the shorter reading. NA²⁷ places the word in brackets, indicating some doubts as to authenticity.

[5:17]  ¹⁷² tn Grk “answered.”

[5:17]  ¹⁷³ sn “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” What is the significance of Jesus’ claim? A preliminary understanding can be obtained from John 5:18, noting the Jewish authorities’ response and the author’s comment. They sought to kill Jesus, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God. This must be seen in the context of the relation of God to the Sabbath rest. In the commandment (Exod 20:11) it is explained that “In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth…and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” Philo, based on the LXX translation of Exod 20:11, denied outright that God had ever ceased his creative activity. And when Rabban Gamaliel II, R. Joshua, R. Eleazar ben Azariah, and R. Akiba were in Rome, ca. a.d. 95, they gave as a rebuttal to sectarian arguments evidence that God might do as he willed in the world without breaking the Sabbath because the entire world was his private residence. So even the rabbis realized that God did not really cease to work on the Sabbath: Divine providence remained active on the Sabbath, otherwise, all nature and life would cease to exist. As regards men, divine activity was visible in two ways: Men were born and men died on the Sabbath. Since only God could give life and only God could deal with the fate of the dead in judgment, this meant God was active on the Sabbath. This seems to be the background for Jesus’ words in 5:17. He justified his work of healing on the Sabbath by reminding the Jewish authorities that they admitted God worked on the Sabbath. This explains the violence of the reaction. The Sabbath privilege was peculiar to God, and no one was equal to God. In claiming the right to work even as his Father worked, Jesus was claiming a divine prerogative. He was literally making himself equal to God, as 5:18 goes on to state explicitly for the benefit of the reader who might not have made the connection.

[5:18]  ¹⁷⁴ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 10.

[1:12]  ¹⁷⁵ tn Grk “these are the men who are.”

[1:12]  ¹⁷⁶ tn Though σπιλάδες (spilades) is frequently translated “blemishes” or “stains,” such is actually a translation of the Greek word σπίλοι (spiloi). The two words are quite similar, especially in their root or lexical forms (σπιλάς [spila"] and σπίλος [spilos] respectively). Some scholars have suggested that σπιλάδες in this context means the same thing as σπίλοι. But such could be the case only by a stretch of the imagination (see BDAG 938 s.v. σπιλάς for discussion). Others suggest that Jude’s spelling was in error (which also is doubtful). One reason for the tension is that in the parallel passage, 2 Pet 2:13, the term used is indeed σπίλος. And if either Jude used 2 Peter or 2 Peter used Jude, one would expect to see the same word. Jude, however, may have changed the wording for the sake of a subtle wordplay. The word σπιλάς was often used of a mere rock, though it normally was associated with a rock along the shore or one jutting out in the water. Thus, the false teachers would appear as “rocks” – as pillars in the community (cf. Matt 16:18; Gal 2:9), when in reality if a believer got too close to them his faith would get shipwrecked. Some suggest that σπιλάδες here means “hidden rocks.” Though this meaning is attested for the word, it is inappropriate in this context, since these false teachers are anything but hidden. They are dangerous because undiscerning folks get close to them, thinking they are rocks and pillars, when they are really dangerous reefs.

[1:12]  ¹⁷⁷ tc Several witnesses (A C^vid 1243 1846 al), influenced by the parallel in 2 Pet 2:13, read ἀπάταις (apatai", “deceptions”) for ἀγάπαις (agapai", “love-feasts”) in v. 12. However, ἀγάπαις has much stronger and earlier support and should therefore be considered original.

[1:12]  sn The danger of the false teachers at the love feasts would be especially pernicious, for the love feasts of the early church involved the Lord’s Supper, worship, and instruction.

[1:12]  ¹⁷⁸ tn Or “fearlessly.” The term in this context, however, is decidedly negative. The implication is that these false teachers ate the Lord’s Supper without regarding the sanctity of the meal. Cf. 1 Cor 11:17-22.

[1:12]  ¹⁷⁹ tn Grk “shepherding themselves.” The verb ποιμαίνω (poimainw) means “shepherd, nurture [the flock].” But these men, rather than tending to the flock of God, nurture only themselves. They thus fall under the condemnation Paul uttered when writing to the Corinthians: “For when it comes time to eat [the Lord’s Supper,] each one goes ahead with his own meal” (1 Cor 11:21). Above all, the love-feast was intended to be a shared meal in which all ate and all felt welcome.

[1:12]  ¹⁸⁰ tn “They are” is not in Greek, but resumes the thought begun at the front of v. 12. There is no period before “They are.” English usage requires breaking this into more than one sentence.

[1:12]  ¹⁸¹ tn Cf. 2 Pet 2:17. Jude’s emphasis is slightly different (instead of waterless springs, they are waterless clouds).

[1:12]  ¹⁸² sn The imagery portraying the false teachers as autumn trees without fruit has to do with their lack of productivity. Recall the statement to the same effect by Jesus in Matt 7:16-20, in which false prophets will be known by their fruits. Like waterless clouds full of false hope, these trees do not yield any harvest even though it is expected.

[1:12]  ¹⁸³ tn Grk “having died twice.”

[1:12]  sn Twice dead probably has no relevance to the tree metaphor, but has great applicability to these false teachers. As in Rev 20:6, those who die twice are those who die physically and spiritually. The aphorism is true: “born once, die twice; born twice, die once” (cf. Rev 20:5; John 3, 11).