2 Raja-raja 18:1-3

Hezekiah Becomes King of Judah

18:1 In the third year of the reign of Israel’s King Hoshea son of Elah, Ahaz’s son Hezekiah became king over Judah. 18:2 He was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned twenty-nine years in Jerusalem. ¹  His mother ²  was Abi, ³  the daughter of Zechariah. 18:3 He did what the Lord approved, just as his ancestor David had done. ⁴ 

2 Raja-raja 18:1

Hezekiah Becomes King of Judah

18:1 In the third year of the reign of Israel’s King Hoshea son of Elah, Ahaz’s son Hezekiah became king over Judah.

2 Raja-raja 3:13

3:13 Elisha said to the king of Israel, “Why are you here? ⁵  Go to your father’s prophets or your mother’s prophets!” The king of Israel replied to him, “No, for the Lord is the one who summoned these three kings so that he can hand them over to Moab.”

Yesaya 1:1

Heading

1:1 Here is the message about Judah and Jerusalem ⁶  that was revealed to Isaiah son of Amoz during the time when Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah reigned over Judah. ⁷ 

Hosea 1:1

Superscription

1:1 ⁸ This is the word of the Lord which was revealed to Hosea ⁹  son of Beeri during the time when ¹⁰  Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah ruled Judah, ¹¹  and during the time when Jeroboam son of Joash ¹²  ruled Israel. ¹³ 

Mikha 1:1

Introduction

1:1 This is the prophetic message that the Lord gave to ¹⁴  Micah of Moresheth. He delivered this message ¹⁵  during the reigns of ¹⁶  Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. The prophecies pertain to ¹⁷  Samaria ¹⁸  and Jerusalem. ¹⁹ 

Matius 1:9-10

1:9 Uzziah the father of Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 1:10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of Amon, ²⁰  Amon the father of Josiah,

[18:2]  ¹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[18:2]  ² tn Heb “the name of his mother.”

[18:2]  ³ tn The parallel passage in 2 Chr 29:1 has “Abijah.”

[18:3]  ⁴ tn Heb “he did what was proper in the eyes of the Lord, according to all which David his father had done.”

[3:13]  ⁵ tn Or “What do we have in common?” The text reads literally, “What to me and to you?”

[1:1]  ⁶ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[1:1]  ⁷ tn Heb “The vision of Isaiah son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, [and] Hezekiah, kings of Judah.”

[1:1]  sn Isaiah’s prophetic career probably began in the final year of Uzziah’s reign (ca. 740 b.c., see Isa 6:1) and extended into the later years of Hezekiah’s reign, which ended in 686 b.c.

[1:1]  ⁸ tc The textual problems in Hosea are virtually unparalleled in the OT. The Masoretic Text (MT), represented by the Leningrad Codex (c. a.d. 1008), which served as the basis for both BHK and BHS, and the Aleppo Codex (c. a.d. 952), are textually corrupt by all accounts and have a multitude of scribal errors. Many medieval Masoretic mss preserve textual variants that differ from the Leningrad and Aleppo Codices. The Qumran materials (4QXII^c,d,g) contain numerous textual variants that differ from the MT; unfortunately, these texts are quite fragmentary (frequently in the very place that an important textual problem appears). The textual tradition and translation quality of the LXX and the early Greek recensions (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion) is mixed; in some places they are inferior to the MT but in other places they preserve a better reading. The textual apparatus of BHK and BHS contains many proposed emendations based on the ancient versions (Greek, Syriac, Latin, Aramaic) that often appear to be superior readings than what is preserved in the MT. In numerous cases, the MT readings are so difficult morphologically, syntactically, and contextually that conservative conjectural emendations are necessary to make sense of the text. Most major English versions (e.g., KJV, ASV, RSV, NEB, NAB, NASB, NIV, TEV, NKJV, NJPS, NJB, NRSV, REB, NCV, CEV, NLT) adopt (either occasionally or frequently) textual variants reflected in the versions and occasionally adopt conservative conjectural emendations proposed in BHK and/or BHS. However, many of the textual problems in Hosea are so difficult that the English versions frequently are split among themselves. With this in mind, the present translation of Hosea must necessarily be viewed as only preliminary. Further work on the text and translation of Hosea is needed, not only in terms of the NET Bible but in Hosea studies in general. The text of Hosea should be better clarified when the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project completes work on the book of Hosea. For further study of textual problems in Hosea, see D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 5:228-71.

[1:1]  ⁹ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which was to Hosea.” The words “This is” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[1:1]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “in the days of” (again later in this verse). Cf. NASB “during the days of”; NIV “during the reigns of”; NLT “during the years when.”

[1:1]  ¹¹ tn Heb “Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, kings of Judah.”

[1:1]  ¹² sn Joash is a variation of the name Jehoash. Some English versions use “Jehoash” here (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).

[1:1]  ¹³ tn Heb “Jeroboam son of Joash, king of Israel.”

[1:1]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “The word of the Lord which came to.”

[1:1]  ¹⁵ tn The words “he delivered this message” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[1:1]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “in the days of” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV).

[1:1]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “which he saw concerning.”

[1:1]  ¹⁸ map For location see Map2 B1; Map4 D3; Map5 E2; Map6 A4; Map7 C1.

[1:1]  ¹⁹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[1:10]  ²⁰ tc ᾿Αμώς (Amws) is the reading found in the earliest and best witnesses (א B C [D^luc] γ δ θ ˹ 33 pc it sa bo), and as such is most likely original, but this is a variant spelling of the name ᾿Αμών (Amwn). The translation uses the more well-known spelling “Amon” found in the Hebrew MT and the majority of LXX mss. See also the textual discussion of “Asa” versus “Asaph” (vv. 7-8); the situation is similar.