Bozrah appears to have been the chief city in Edom, its capital city (see its parallelism with Edom in Isa 34:6; 63:1 ; Jer 49:22 ). The reference to “its towns” (translated here “all the towns around it”) could then be a reference to all the towns in Edom. It was located about twenty-five miles southeast of the southern end of the Dead Sea apparently in the district of Teman (see the parallelism in Amos 1:12 ).


This verse is very similar to Jer 19:8 where the same judgment is pronounced on Jerusalem. For the meaning of some of the terms here (“hiss out their scorn” and “all the disasters that have happened to it”) see the notes on that verse.


Teman here appears to be a poetic equivalent for Edom, a common figure of speech in Hebrew poetry where the part is put for the whole. “The people of Teman” is thus equivalent to all the people of Edom.


Compare Jer 48:40-41 for a similar prophecy about Moab. The parallelism here suggests that Bozrah, like Teman in v. 20 , is a poetic equivalent for Edom.


Damascus is a city in Syria, located below the eastern slopes of the Anti-lebanon Mountains. It was the capital of the Aramean state that was in constant hostility with Israel from the time of David until its destruction by the Assyrians in 732 b.c . At various times it was allied with the Aramean state of Hamath which was further north. Contingents from these Aramean states were involved in harassing Judah and Jerusalem in 598 b.c. when Jehoiakim rebelled ( 2 Kgs 24:2 ) but little is heard about them in the rest of the book of Jeremiah or in the history of this period.


Ben-Hadad was a common name borne by a number of the kings of Damascus, e.g., one during the time of Asa around 900 b.c. (cf. 1 Kgs 15:18-20 ), one a little later during the time of Omri and Ahab around 850 (), and one during the time of Jehoash about 800 ( 2 Kgs 13:24-25 ).


Kedar appears to refer to an Arabic tribe of nomads descended from Ishmael ( Gen 25:13 ). They are associated here with the people who live in the eastern desert ( Heb “the children of the east”; בְּנֵי־קֶדֶם , bÿne-qedem ). In Isa 21:16 they are associated with the Temanites and the Dedanites, Arabic tribes in the north Arabian desert. They were sheep breeders ( Isa 60:7 ) who lived in tents ( Ps 120:5 ) and unwalled villages ( Isa 42:11 ). According to Assyrian records they clashed with Assyria from the time of Shalmaneser in 850 until the time of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal in the late seventh century. According to the Babylonian Chronicles, Nebuchadnezzar defeated them in 599 b.c .


Hazor . Nothing is know about this Hazor other than what is said here in vv. 28, 30, 33 . They appear to also be nomadic tent dwellers who had a loose association with the Kedarites.


Heb “the children of the east.” Nothing much is known about them other than their association with the Midianites and Amalekites in their attack on Israel in the time of Gideon ( Judg 6:3, 33 ) and the fact that God would let tribes from the eastern desert capture Moab and Ammon in the future ( Ezek 25:4, 10 ). Midian and Amalek were consider to be located in the region in north Arabia east of Ezion Geber. That would put them in the same general locality as the region of Kedar. The parallelism here suggests that they are the same as the people of Kedar. The words here are apparently addressed to the armies of Nebuchadnezzar.


This expression is a favorite theme in the book of Jeremiah. It describes the terrors of war awaiting the people of Judah and Jerusalem ( 6:25 ), the Egyptians at Carchemish ( 46:5 ), and here the Kedarites.


Compare Jer 9:11 .


Compare Jer 49:18 and 50:40 where the same thing is said about Edom and Babylon.


Bel was originally the name or title applied to the Sumerian storm god. During the height of Babylon’s power it became a title that was applied to Marduk who was Babylon’s chief deity. As a title it means “Lord.” Here it is a poetical parallel reference to Marduk mentioned in the next line.


A nation from the north refers to Medo-Persia which at the time of the conquest of Babylon in 539 b.c. had conquered all the nations to the north, the northwest, and the northeast of Babylon forming a vast empire to the north and east of Babylon. Contingents of these many nations were included in her army and reference is made to them in 50:9 and 51:27-28 . There is also some irony involved here because the “enemy from the north” referred to so often in Jeremiah (cf. 1:14; 4:6; 6:1 ) has been identified with Babylon (cf. 25:9 ). Here in a kind of talionic justice Judah’s nemesis from the north will be attacked and devastated by an enemy from the north.


See Jer 32:40 and the study note there for the nature of this lasting agreement.


The shepherds are the priests, prophets, and leaders who have led Israel into idolatry ( 2:8 ).


The allusion here, if it is not merely a part of the metaphor of the wandering sheep, is to the worship of the false gods on the high hills ( 2:20, 3:2 ).


These two verses appear to be a poetical summary of the argument of where the nation is accused of abandoning its loyalty to God and worshiping idols. Whereas those who tried to devour Israel were liable for punishment when Israel was loyal to God ( 2:3 ), the enemies of Israel who destroyed them (i.e., the Babylonians [but also the Assyrians], 50:17) argue that they are not liable for punishment because the Israelites have sinned against the Lord and thus deserve their fate.


Some of these are named in Jer 51:27-28 .


Compare Jer 49:17 and the study note there and see also the study notes on 18:16 and 19:8 .


The king of Assyria devoured them . This refers to the devastation wrought on northern Israel by the kings of Assyria beginning in 738 b.c. when Tiglath Pileser took Galilee and the Transjordanian territories and ending with the destruction and exile of the people of Samaria by Sargon in 722 b.c .


The metaphor of Israel as a flock of sheep (v. 17 ) is continued here. The places named were all in Northern Israel and in the Transjordan, lands that were lost to the Assyrians in the period 738-722 b.c . All of these places were known for their fertility, for their woods and their pastures. The hills (hill country) of Ephraim formed the center of Northern Israel. Mount Carmel lies on the seacoast of the Mediterranean north and west of the hill country of Ephraim. Gilead formed the central part of Transjordan and was used to refer at times to the territory between the Yarmuk and Jabbok Rivers, at times to the territory between the Yarmuk and the Arnon Rivers, and at times for all of Israel in the Transjordan. Bashan refers to the territory north of Gilead.


Compare Jer 31:34 and 33:8 .


The commands in this verse and in vv. 26-27 are directed to the armies from the north who are referred to in v. 3 as “a nation from the north” and in v. 9 as a “host of mighty nations from the land of the north.” The addressee in this section shifts from one referent to another.


Merathaim…Pekod . It is generally agreed that the names of these two regions were chosen for their potential for wordplay. Merathaim probably refers to a region in southern Babylon near where the Tigris and Euphrates come together before they empty into the Persian Gulf. It was known for its briny waters. In Hebrew the word would mean “double rebellion” and would stand as an epithet for the land of Babylon as a whole. Pekod refers to an Aramean people who lived on the eastern bank of the lower Tigris River. They are mentioned often in Assyrian texts and are mentioned in Ezek 23:23 as allies of Babylon. In Hebrew the word would mean “punishment.” As an epithet for the land of Babylon it would refer to the fact that Babylon was to be punished for her double rebellion against the Lord .


Compare Jer 50:21 and see the study note on 25:9 .


The Holy One of Israel is a common title for the Lord in the book of Isaiah. It is applied to the Lord only here and in 51:5 in the book of Jeremiah. It is a figure where an attribute of a person is put as a title of a person (compare “your majesty” for a king). It pictures the Lord as the sovereign king who rules over his covenant people and exercises moral authority over them.


Compare v. 27 .


Heb “their redeemer.” The Hebrew term “redeemer” referred in Israelite family law to the nearest male relative who was responsible for securing the freedom of a relative who had been sold into slavery. For further discussion of this term as well as its metaphorical use to refer to God as the one who frees Israel from bondage in Egypt and from exile in Assyria and Babylonia see the study note on 31:11 .


A mighty nation and many kings is an allusion to the Medo-Persian empire and the vassal kings who provided forces for the Medo-Persian armies.


Compare Jer 6:22-24 where almost the same exact words as 50:41-43 are applied to the people of Judah. The repetition of prophecies here and in the following verses emphasizes the talionic nature of God’s punishment of Babylon; as they have done to others, so it will be done to them (cf. 25:14; 50:15 ).


The destructive wind is a figurative reference to the “foreign people” who will “winnow” Babylon and drive out all the people (v. 2 ). This figure has already been used in 4:11-12 and in 49:36 . See the study note on 4:11-12 and the translator’s notes on 22:22 and 49:36 .


Heb “the people who live in Leb-qamai.” “Leb-qamai” is a code name for “Chaldeans” formed on the principle of substituting the last letter of the alphabet for the first, the next to the last for the second, and so on. This same principle is used in referring to Babylon in 25:26 and 51:41 as “Sheshach.” See the study note on 25:26 where further details are given. There is no consensus on why the code name is used because the terms Babylon and Chaldeans (= Babylonians) have appeared regularly in this prophecy or collection of prophecies.


For the concept underlying this word see the study note on “utterly destroy” in Jer 25:9 and compare the usage in 50:21, 26 .


See the note on the phrase “the Holy One of Israel” in 50:29 .


The imperatives here and in v. 12 are directed to the soldiers in the armies of the kings from the north (here identified as the kings of Media [see also 50:3, 9; 51:27-28 ]). They have often been addressed in this prophecy as though they were a present force (see 50:14-16; 50:21 [and the study note there]; 50:26, 29; 51:3 ) though the passage as a whole is prophetic of the future. This gives some idea of the ideal stance that the prophets adopted when they spoke of the future as though already past (the use of the Hebrew prophetic perfect which has been referred to often in the translator’s notes).


Media was a country in what is now northwestern Iran. At the time this prophecy was probably written they were the dominating force in the northern region, the most likely enemy to Babylon. By the time Babylon fell in 538 b.c. the Medes had been conquered and incorporated in the Persian empire by Cyrus. However, several times in the Bible this entity is known under the combined entity of Media and Persia ( Esth 1:3, 4, 18, 19; 10:2 ; Dan 5:28; 6:8, 12, 15; 8:20 ). Dan 5:31 credits the capture of Babylon to Darius the Mede, which may have been another name for Cyrus or the name by which Daniel refers to a Median general named Gobryas.


Babylon was situated on the Euphrates River and was surrounded by canals (also called “rivers”).


With the major exception discussed in the translator’s note on the preceding line vv. 15-19 are a verbatim repetition of 10:12-16 with a few minor variations in spelling. There the passage was at the end of a section in which the Lord was addressing the Judeans and trying to convince them that the worship of idols was vain – the idols were impotent but he is all powerful. Here the passage follows a solemn oath by the Lord who rules over all and is apparently directed to the Babylonians, emphasizing the power of the Lord to carry out his oath.


Ararat , Minni , and Ashkenaz are three kingdoms who were located in the Lake Van, Lake Urmia region which are now parts of eastern Turkey and northwestern Iran. They were kingdoms which had been conquered and made vassal states by the Medes in the early sixth century. The Medes were the dominant country in this region from around 590 b.c. until they were conquered and incorporated into the Persian empire by Cyrus in 550 b.c .


This is probably a poetic or shorthand way of referring to the cavalry and chariotry where horse is put for “rider” and “driver.”


The figure here is common in the poetic tradition of the Lord going forth to do battle against his foes and the earth’s reaction to it is compared to a person trembling with fear and writhing in agony, agony like that of a woman in labor (cf. Judg 5:4 ; Nah 1:2-5 ; Hab 3:1-15 [especially v. 6 ]).


Heb “Daughter Babylon.” See the study note at 50:42 for explanation.


The central figure here is the figure of the cup of the Lord ’s wrath (cf. 25:15-29 , especially v. 26 ). Here the Babylonians have been made to drink so deeply of it that they fall into a drunken sleep from which they will never wake up (i.e., they die, death being compared to sleep [cf. Ps 13:3 ( 13:4 HT); 76:5 ( 76:6 HT); 90:5 ]). Compare the usage in Jer 51:57 for this same figure.


Heb “Sheshach.” For an explanation of the usage of this name for Babylon see the study note on Jer 25:26 and that on 51:1 for a similar phenomenon. Babylon is here called “the pride of the whole earth” because it was renowned for its size, its fortifications, and its beautiful buildings.


God’s exiled people are told to leave doomed Babylon (see v. 45 ).


The exiles lament the way they have been humiliated.


For discussion of the terms “governors” and “leaders” see the note at Jer 51:23 .


See the note at Jer 51:39 .


See the note at Jer 2:19 .


This would be 582 b.c .


This final chapter does not mention Jeremiah, but its description of the downfall of Jerusalem and exile of the people validates the prophet’s ministry.


This would have been January 15, 588 b.c . The reckoning is based on the calendar that begins the year in the spring (Nisan = March/April).


According to modern reckoning that would have been July 18, 586 b.c . The siege thus lasted almost a full eighteen months.


The king’s garden is mentioned again in Neh 3:15 in conjunction with the pool of Siloam and the stairs that go down from the city of David. This would have been in the southern part of the city near the Tyropean Valley which agrees with the reference to the “two walls” which were probably the walls on the eastern and western hills.


Heb “toward the Arabah.” The Arabah was the rift valley north and south of the Dead Sea. Here the intention was undoubtedly to escape across the Jordan to Moab or Ammon. It appears from 40:14; 41:15 that the Ammonites were known to harbor fugitives from the Babylonians.


Riblah was a strategic town on the Orontes River in Syria. It was at a crossing of the major roads between Egypt and Mesopotamia. Pharaoh Necho had earlier received Jehoahaz there and put him in chains ( 2 Kgs 23:33 ) prior to taking him captive to Egypt. Nebuchadnezzar had set up his base camp for conducting his campaigns against the Palestinian states there and was now sitting in judgment on prisoners brought to him.


The tenth day of the month would have been August 17, 586 b.c. in modern reckoning.


For discussion of the items listed here, see the study notes at Jer 27:19 .


These shovels were used to clean the altar.


These trimming shears were used to trim the wicks of the lamps.


The censers held the embers used for the incense offerings.


These vessels were used for drink offerings.


See the note at Jer 35:4 .


This would be 597 b.c .


This would be 586 b.c .


This would be 581 b.c .


The parallel account in 2 Kgs 25:28 has “twenty-seventh.”


The twenty-fifth day would be March 20, 561 b.c. in modern reckoning.


Chapters 1-4 are arranged in alphabetic-acrostic structures; the acrostic pattern does not appear in chapter . Each of the 22 verses in chapters 1, 2 and 4 begins with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet, while the acrostic appears in triplicate in the 66 verses in chapter . The acrostic pattern does not appear in chapter , but its influence is felt in that it has 22 verses, the same as the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. For further study on Hebrew acrostics, see W. M. Soll, “Babylonian and Biblical Acrostics,” Bib 69 (1988): 305-23; D. N. Freedman, “Acrostic Poems in the Hebrew Bible: Alphabetic and Otherwise,” CBQ 48 (1986): 408-31; B. Johnson, “Form and Message in Lamentations,” ZAW 97 (1985): 58-73; K. C. Hanson, “Alphabetic Acrostics: A Form Critical Study,” Ph.D. diss., Claremont Graduate School, 1984; S. Bergler, “Threni V – Nur ein alphabetisierendes Lied? Versuch einer Deutung,” VT 27 (1977): 304-22; E. M. Schramm, “Poetic Patterning in Biblical Hebrew,” Michigan Oriental Studies in Honor of George S. Cameron , 175-78; D. N. Freedman, “Acrostics and Metrics in Hebrew Poetry,” HTR 65 (1972): 367-92; N. K. Gottwald, “The Acrostic Form,” Studies in the Book of Lamentations , 23-32; P. A. Munch, “Die alphabetische Akrostichie in der judischen Psalmendicthung,” ZDMG 90 (1936): 703-10; M. Löhr, “Alphabetische und alphabetisierende Lieder im AT,” ZAW 25 (1905): 173-98.


As elsewhere in chap. , Jerusalem is personified as remembering the catastrophic days of 587 b.c. when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the city and exiled its inhabitants. Like one of its dispossessed inhabitants, Jerusalem is pictured as becoming impoverished and homeless.


The Piel participle of כָּבֵד ( kaved ) is infrequent and usually translated formulaically as those who honor someone. The feminine nuance may be best represented as “her admirers have despised her.”


The expression have seen her nakedness is a common metaphor to describe the plunder and looting of a city by a conquering army, probably drawn on the ignominious and heinous custom of raping the women of a conquered city as well.


The syntax of the sentence is interrupted by the insertion of the following sentence, “they invaded…,” then continued with “whom…” The disruption of the syntax is a structural device intended to help convey the shock of the situation.


Lam 1-2 has two speaking voices: a third person voice reporting the horrific reality of Jerusalem’s suffering and Jerusalem’s voice. See W. F. Lanahan, “The Speaking Voice in the Book of Lamentations” JBL 93 (1974): 41-49. The reporting voice has been addressing the listener, referring to the Lord in the third person. Here he switches to a second person address to God, also changing the wording of the following command to second person. The revulsion of the Reporter is so great that he is moved to address God directly.


The dagesh lene in כּי ( ki ) following the vowel ending the verb וְהַבִּיטָה ( vÿhabbitah , “consider”) indicates a dramatic pause between calling for the Lord’s attention and stating the allegation to be seen and considered.


The delay in naming the Lord as cause is dramatic. The natural assumption upon hearing the passive verb in the previous line, “it was dealt severely,” might well be the pillaging army, but instead the Lord is named as the tormentor.


The expression the virgin daughter, Judah is used as an epithet, i.e. Virgin Judah or Maiden Judah, further reinforcing the feminine anthrpomorphism.


The term “lovers” is a figurative expression (hypocatastasis), comparing Jerusalem’s false gods and political alliance with Assyria to a woman’s immoral lovers. The prophet Hosea uses similar imagery ( Hos 2:5, 7, 10, 13 ).


Chapter continues the use of feminine epithets (e.g., “Daughter Zion”), although initially portraying Jerusalem as an object destroyed by the angered enemy, God.


The rhetorical question implies a denial: “No one can heal you!” The following verses, 14-17, present four potential healers – prophets, passersby, enemies, and God.


Lifting up the palms or hands is a metaphor for prayer.


The nature of the acrostic changes here. Each of the three lines in each verse, not just the first, begins with the corresponding letter of the alphabet.


Jeremiah is referring to the painful humiliation of subjugation to the Babylonians, particularly to the exile of the populace of Jerusalem. The Babylonians and Assyrians frequently used the phrase “bear the yoke” as a metaphor: their subjects were made as subservient to them as yoked oxen were to their masters. Because the Babylonian exile would last for seventy years, only those who were in their youth when Jerusalem fell would have any hope of living until the return of the remnant. For the middle-aged and elderly, the yoke of exile would be insufferable; but those who bore this “yoke” in their youth would have hope.


According to W. F. Lanahan (“The Speaking Voice in the Book of Lamentations” JBL 93 [1974]: 48), the persona or speaking voice in chap. is a bourgeois, the common man. This voice is somewhat akin to the Reporter in chs 1-2 in that much of the description is in the third person. However, “the bourgeois has some sense of identity with his fellow-citizens” seen in the shift to the first person plural. The alphabetic acrostic structure reduces to two bicola per letter. The first letter of only the first line in each stanza spells the acrostic.


The expression “to enter the gates” of a city is an idiom referring to the military conquest of that city. Ancient Near Eastern fortified cities typically featured double and sometimes triple city gates – the bulwark of the defense of the city. Because fortified cities were enclosed with protective walls, the Achilles tendon of every city was the city gates – the weak point in the defense and the perennial point of attack by enemies (e.g., Judg 5:8, 11 ; 1 Sam 17:52 ; Isa 29:6 ; Jer 17:27; 51:54 ; Ezek 21:20, 27 ; Mic 1:9, 12 ; Neh 1:3; 2:3, 13, 17 ).


The speaking voice is now that of a choir singing the community’s lament in the first person plural. The poem is not an alphabetic acrostic like the preceding chapters but has 22 verses, the same as the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet.


For the theological allusion that goes beyond physical rest, see, e.g., Deut 12:10; 25:19 ; Josh 1:13; 11:23 ; 2 Sam 7:1, 11 ; 1 Chron 22:18 ; 2 Chron 14:6-7


The meaning of the thirtieth year is problematic. Some take it to mean the age of Ezekiel when he prophesied (e.g., Origen). The Aramaic Targum explains the thirtieth year as the thirtieth year dated from the recovery of the book of the Torah in the temple in Jerusalem ( 2 Kgs 22:3-9 ). The number seems somehow to be equated with the fifth year of Jehoiachin’s exile in 1:2 , i.e., 593 b.c .


The Assyrians started the tactic of deportation, the large-scale forced displacement of conquered populations, in order to stifle rebellions. The task of uniting groups of deportees, gaining freedom from one’s overlords and returning to retake one’s own country would be considerably more complicated than living in one’s homeland and waiting for an opportune moment to drive out the enemy’s soldiers. The Babylonians adopted this practice also, after defeating the Assyrians. The Babylonians deported Judeans on three occasions. The practice of deportation was reversed by the Persian conquerors of Babylon, who gained favor from their subjects for allowing them to return to their homeland and, as polytheists, sought the favor of the gods of the various countries which had come under their control.


The Kebar River is mentioned in Babylonian texts from the city of Nippur in the fifth century b.c . It provided artificial irrigation from the Euphrates.


For the concept of the heavens opened in later literature, see 3 Macc 6:18; 2 Bar. 22:1; T. Levi 5:1; Matt 3:16 ; Acts 7:56 ; Rev 19:11 .


The prophet’s name, Ezekiel , means in Hebrew “May God strengthen.”


Storms are often associated with appearances of God (see Nah 1:3 ; Ps 18:12 ). In some passages, the “storm” ( סְעָרָה , sÿ ’ arah ) may be a whirlwind ( Job 38:1 , 2 Kgs 2:1 ).


They had human form may mean they stood erect.


The Hebrew verb translated gleamed occurs only here in the OT.


Burning coals of fire are also a part of David’s poetic description of God’s appearance (see 2 Sam 22:9, 13 ; Ps 18:8 ).


Another vision which includes wheels on thrones occurs in Dan 7:9 . contains a vision similar to this one.


Reference to the glowing substance and the brilliant light and storm phenomena in vv. 27-28 a echoes in reverse order the occurrence of these phenomena in v. 4 .


The phrase son of man occurs ninety-three times in the book of Ezekiel. It simply means “human one,” and distinguishes the prophet from the nonhuman beings that are present in the world of his vision.


The book of Ezekiel frequently refers to the Israelites as a rebellious house ( Ezek 2:5, 6, 8; 3:9, 26-27; 12:2-3, 9, 25; 17:12; 24:3 ).


Written on the front and back . While it was common for papyrus scrolls to have writing on both sides the same was not true for leather scrolls.


Moses ( Exod 3:19 ) and Isaiah ( Isa 6:9-10 ) were also told that their messages would not be received.


A similar description of Israel’s disobedience is given in 1 Sam 8:7 .


See note on “wind” in 2:2 .


The name “Tel Abib” is a transliteration of an Akkadian term meaning “mound of the flood,” i.e., an ancient mound. It is not to be confused with the modern city of Tel Aviv in Israel.


A similar response to a divine encounter is found in Acts 9:8-9 .


Even though the infinitive absolute is used to emphasize the warning, the warning is still implicitly conditional, as the following context makes clear.


Ezekiel had another vision at this location, recounted in .


Ancient Near Eastern bricks were 10 to 24 inches long and 6 to 13 1/2 inches wide.


The number 40 may refer in general to the period of Judah’s exile using the number of years Israel was punished in the wilderness. In this case, however, one would need to translate, “you will bear the punishment of the house of Judah.”


The action surely refers to a series of daily acts rather than to a continuous period.


Wheat, barley, beans, lentils, millet, and spelt . All these foods were common in Mesopotamia where Ezekiel was exiled.


Eight ounces ( Heb “twenty shekels”). The standards for weighing money varied considerably in the ancient Near East, but the generally accepted weight for the shekel is 11.5 grams (0.4 ounce). This makes the weight of grain about 230 grams here (8 ounces).


A pint and a half [ Heb “one-sixth of a hin”]. One-sixth of a hin was a quantity of liquid equal to about 1.3 pints or 0.6 liters.


Human waste was to remain outside the camp of the Israelites according to Deut 23:15 .


Unclean food among the nations . Lands outside of Israel were considered unclean ( Josh 22:19 ; Amos 7:17 ).


Objects could be carried in the end of a garment ( Hag 2:12 ).


The nations are subject to a natural law according to ; see also Amos 1:3-2:3 ; Jonah 1:2 .


One might conclude that the subject of the plural verbs is the nations/countries, but the context (vv. 5-6 a) indicates that the people of Jerusalem are in view. The text shifts from using the feminine singular (referring to personified Jerusalem) to the plural (referring to Jerusalem’s residents). See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 1:73.


You are more arrogant than the nations around you . Israel is accused of being worse than the nations in Ezek 16:27 ; 2 Kgs 21:11 ; Jer 2:11 .


The judgment of plague and famine comes from the covenant curse ( Lev 26:25-26 ). As in v. 10 , the city of Jerusalem is figuratively addressed here.


Judgment by plague , famine , and sword occurs in Jer 21:9; 27:13 ; Ezek 6:11, 12; 7:15 .


The phrase you will know that I am the Lord concludes over sixty oracles in the book of Ezekiel and indicates the ultimate goal of God’s action. The phrase is often used in the book of Exodus as well ( Exod 7:5; 14:4, 18 ). By Ezekiel’s day the people had forgotten that the Lord (Yahweh) was their covenant God and had turned to other gods. They had to be reminded that Yahweh alone deserved to be worshiped because only he possessed the power to meet their needs. Through judgment and eventually deliverance, Israel would be reminded that Yahweh alone held their destiny in his hands.


By the sword and by famine and by pestilence . A similar trilogy of punishments is mentioned in Lev 26:25-26 . See also Jer 14:12; 21:9; 27:8, 13; 29:18 ).


By referring to every high hill…all the mountaintops…under every green tree and every leafy oak Ezekiel may be expanding on the phraseology of Deut 12:2 (see 1 Kgs 14:23 ; 2 Kgs 16:4; 17:10 ; Jer 2:20; 3:6, 13 ; 2 Chr 28:4 ).


I will stretch out my hand against them is a common expression in the book of Ezekiel ( 14:9, 13; 16:27; 25:7; 35:3 ).


The day refers to the day of the Lord, a concept which, beginning in Amos 5:18-20 , became a common theme in the OT prophetic books. It refers to a time when the Lord intervenes in human affairs as warrior and judge.


Compare Zeph 1:18 .


My treasured place probably refers to the temple (however, cf. NLT “my treasured land”).


Since the pronouns “it” are both feminine, they do not refer to the masculine “my treasured place”; instead they probably refer to Jerusalem or the land, both of which are feminine in Hebrew.


Or “their holy places” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NCV, NRSV).


These engravings were prohibited in the Mosaic law ( Deut 4:16-18 ).


Note the contrast between these seventy men who represented Israel and the seventy elders who ate the covenant meal before God, inaugurating the covenant relationship ( Exod 24:1, 9 ).


The worship of Tammuz included the observation of the annual death and descent into the netherworld of the god Dumuzi. The practice was observed by women in the ancient Near East over a period of centuries.


The priests prayed to God between the porch and the altar on fast days ( Joel 2:17 ). This is the location where Zechariah was murdered ( Matt 23:35 ).


The temple faced east.


The six men plus the scribe would equal seven, which was believed by the Babylonians to be the number of planetary deities.


The upper gate was built by Jotham ( 2 Kgs 15:35 ).


The saying is virtually identical to that of the elders in Ezek 8:12 .


That is, the cherubim.


The living creature described here is thus slightly different from the one described in Ezek 1:10 , where a bull’s face appeared instead of a cherub’s. Note that some English versions harmonize the two descriptions and read the same here as in 1:10 (cf. NAB, NLT “an ox”; TEV, CEV “a bull”). This may be justified based on v. 22 , which states the creatures’ appearance was the same.


The phrase officials of the people occurs in Neh 11:1 ; 1 Chr 21:2 ; 2 Chr 24:23 .


The expression build houses may mean “establish families” ( Deut 25:9 ; Ruth 4:11 ; Prov 24:27 ).


Jerusalem is also compared to a pot in Ezek 24:3-8 . The siege of the city is pictured as heating up the pot.


The expression They will be my people, and I will be their God occurs as a promise to Abraham ( Gen 17:8 ), Moses ( Exod 6:7 ), and the nation ( Exod 29:45 ).


The book of Ezekiel frequently refers to the Israelites as a rebellious house ( Ezek 2:5, 6, 8; 3:9, 26-27; 12:2-3, 9, 25; 17:12; 24:3 ).


This verse is very similar to Isa 6:9-10 .


See also Ezek 12:11, 24:24, 27 .


The prince is a reference to Zedekiah.


He will not see it . This prediction was fulfilled in 2 Kgs 25:7 and Jer 52:11 , which recount how Zedekiah was blinded before being deported to Babylon.


There he will die . This was fulfilled when King Zedekiah died in exile ( Jer 52:11 ).


The same description of a false prophet is found in Micah 2:11 .


The Lord has not sent them . A similar concept is found in Jer 14:14; 23:21 .


A violent wind will break out . God’s judgments are frequently described in storm imagery ( Pss 18:7-15; 77:17-18; 83:15 ; Isa 28:17; 30:30 ; Jer 23:19; 30:23 ).


The wristbands mentioned here probably represented magic bands or charms. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 1:413.


I will be their God . See Exod 6:7 ; Lev 26:12 ; Jer 7:23; 11:4 .


Traditionally this has been understood as a reference to the biblical Daniel, though he was still quite young when Ezekiel prophesied. One wonders if he had developed a reputation as an intercessor by this point. For this reason some prefer to see a reference to a ruler named Danel, known in Canaanite legend for his justice and wisdom. In this case all three of the individuals named would be non-Israelites, however the Ugaritic Danel is not known to have qualities of faith in the Lord that would place him in the company of the other men. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 1:447-50.


This escape refers to the exile of Ezekiel and others in 597 b.c. ( Ezek 1:2 ; 2 Kgs 24:10-16 ).


Arab midwives still cut the umbilical cords of infants and then proceed to apply salt and oil to their bodies.


These verbs, “pity” and “spare,” echo the judgment oracles in 5:11; 7:4, 9; 8:18; 9:5, 10 .


A similar concept is found in Deut 32:10 .


The description of the nation Israel in vv. 10-14 recalls the splendor of the nation’s golden age under King Solomon.


The sacrifice of children was prohibited in Lev 18:21; 20:2 ; Deut 12:31; 18:10 .


Harlots suffered degradation when their nakedness was exposed ( Jer 13:22, 26 ; Hos 2:12 ; Nah 3:5 ).


Sodom was the epitome of evil ( Deut 29:23; 32:32 ; Isa 1:9-10; 3:9 ; Jer 23:14 ; Lam 4:6 ; Matt 10:15; 11:23-24 ; Jude 7 ).


The verb occurs elsewhere in the OT only in Judg 14:12-19 , where Samson supplies a riddle.


The great eagle symbolizes Nebuchadnezzar ( 17:12 ).


In the parable Lebanon apparently refers to Jerusalem ( 17:12 ).


The phrase another great eagle refers to Pharaoh Hophra.


The narrative description of this interpretation of the riddle is given in 2 Kgs 24:11-15 .


Heb “hand.” “Giving one’s hand” is a gesture of promise ( 2 Kgs 10:15 ).


The language is analogous to messianic imagery in Isa 11:1 ; Zech 3:8; 6:4 although the technical terminology is not the same.


This law was given in Lev 25:36 .


See note on “mountains” in v. 6 .


The poor and needy are often mentioned together in the OT ( Deut 24:14 ; Jer 22:16 ; Ezek 14:69; Ps 12:6; 35:10; 37:14 ).


In Ezek 11:19, 36:26 the new heart and new spirit are promised as future blessings.


Lions probably refer to Judahite royalty and/or nobility. The lioness appears to symbolize the Davidic dynasty, though some see the referent as Hamutal, the wife of Josiah and mother of Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Gen 49:9 seems to be the background for Judah being compared to lions.


The description applies to king Jehoahaz ( 2 Kgs 23:31-34 ; Jer 22:10-12 ).


The identity of this second lion is unclear; the referent is probably Jehoiakim or Zedekiah. If the lioness is Hamutal, then Zedekiah is the lion described here.


The east wind symbolizes the Babylonians.


This metaphor depicts the Babylonian exile of the Davidic dynasty.


The date would be August 14th, 591 b.c . The seventh year is the seventh year of Jehoiachin’s exile.


The phrase “a land flowing with milk and honey,” a figure of speech describing the land’s abundant fertility, occurs in v. 15 as well as Exod 3:8, 17; 13:5; 33:3 ; Lev 20:24 ; Num 13:27 ; Deut 6:3; 11:9; 26:9; 27:3 ; Josh 5:6 ; Jer 11:5; 32:23 (see also Deut 1:25; 8:7-9 ).


The laws were given at Mount Sinai.


Ezekiel’s contemporary, Jeremiah, also stressed the importance of obedience to the Sabbath law ().


Though the Pentateuch does not seem to know of this episode, Ps 106:26-27 may speak of God’s oath to exile the people before they had entered Canaan.


This act is prohibited in Deut 12:29-31 and Jer 7:31; 19:5; 32:35 . See also 2 Kgs 21:6; 23:10 . This custom indicates that the laws the Israelites were following were the disastrous laws of pagan nations (see Ezek 16:20-21 ).


God sometimes punishes sin by inciting the sinner to sin even more, as the biblical examples of divine hardening and deceit make clear. See Robert B. Chisholm, Jr., “Divine Hardening in the Old Testament,” BSac 153 (1996): 410-34; idem, “Does God Deceive?” BSac 155 (1998): 11-28. For other instances where the Lord causes individuals to act unwisely or even sinfully as punishment for sin, see 1 Sam 2:25 ; 2 Sam 17:14 ; 1 Kgs 12:15 ; 2 Chr 25:20 .


This phrase occurs frequently in Deuteronomy ( Deut 4:34; 5:15; 7:19; 11:2; 26:8 ).


The metaphor may be based in Lev 27:32 (see also Jer 33:13 ; Matt 25:32-33 ). A shepherd would count his sheep as they passed beneath his staff.


Compare the irony here to Amos 4:4 and Jer 44:25 .


A similar concept may be found in Lev 18:21; 20:3 .


Beginning with 20:45 , the verse numbers through 21:32 in the English Bible differ by five from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text ( BHS ), with 20:45 ET = 21:1 HT, 20:46 ET = 21:2 HT, 21:1 ET = 21:6 HT etc., through 21:32 ET = 21:37 HT. Beginning with 22:1 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Hebrew Bible are again the same.


Ezek 21:1 in the English Bible is 21:6 in the Hebrew text ( BHS ). See the note at 20:45 .


This is the sword of judgment, see Isa 31:8; 34:6; 66:16 .


Ezekiel elsewhere pictures the Lord’s judgment as discriminating between the righteous and the wicked ( 9:4-6; 18:1-20 ; see as well Pss 1 and 11 ) and speaks of the preservation of a remnant ( 3:21; 6:8; 12:16 ). Perhaps here he exaggerates for rhetorical effect in an effort to subdue any false optimism. See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:25-26; D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 1:669-70; and W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel (Hermeneia), 1:424-25.


This expression depicts in a very vivid way how they will be overcome with fear. See the note on the same phrase in 7:17 .


This physical action was part of an expression of grief. Cp. Jer. 31:19 .


Mesopotamian kings believed that the gods revealed the future through omens. They employed various divination techniques, some of which are included in the list that follows. A particularly popular technique was the examination and interpretation of the livers of animals. See R. R. Wilson, Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel , 90-110.


When the people of Judah realized the Babylonians’ intentions, they would object on grounds that they had made a treaty with the Babylonian king (see 17:13 ).


The second half of the verse appears to state that the sword of judgment would fall upon the wicked, despite their efforts to prevent it.


Once the Babylonian king’s sword (vv. 19-20 ) has carried out its assigned task, the Lord commands it to halt and announces that Babylon itself will also experience his judgment. See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:28.


This statement introduces vv. 10-11 and refers in general terms to the sexual sins described there. For the legal background of vv. 10-11 , see Lev 18:7-20; 20:10-21 ; Deut 22:22-23, 30; 27:22 .


Sexual relations with one’s half-sister may be primarily in view here. See Lev 18:9; 20:17 .


Forgetting the Lord is also addressed in Deut 6:12; 8:11, 14 ; Jer 3:21; 13:25 ; Ezek 23:35 ; Hos 2:15; 8:14; 13:6 .


This gesture apparently expresses mourning and/or anger (see 6:11; 21:14, 17 ).


The ultimate purpose of divine judgment is to purify the covenant community of its sins.


In this allegory the Lord is depicted as being the husband of two wives. The OT law prohibited a man from marrying sisters ( Lev 18:18 ), but the practice is attested in the OT (cf. Jacob). The metaphor is utilized here for illustrative purposes and does not mean that the Lord condoned such a practice or bigamy in general.


The Chaldeans were prominent tribal groups of Babylonia. The imagery is reminiscent of events in the reigns of Hezekiah ( 2 Kgs 20:12-15 ) and Jehoiakim ( 2 Kgs 23:34-24:1 ).


Pekod was the name of an Aramean tribe (known as Puqudu in Mesopotamian texts) that lived in the region of the Tigris River.


Shoa was the name of a nomadic people (the Sutu) that lived in Mesopotamia.


Koa was the name of another Mesopotamian people group (the Qutu).


The image of a deep and wide cup suggests the degree of punishment; it will be extensive and leave the victim helpless.


The severe action is more extreme than beating the breasts in anguish ( Isa 32:12 ; Nah 2:7 ). It is also ironic for these are the very breasts she so blatantly offered to her lovers (vv. 3, 21 ).


The Lord speaks here in the role of the husband of the sisters.


The book of Ezekiel frequently refers to the Israelites as a rebellious house ( Ezek 2:5, 6, 8; 3:9, 26-27; 12:2-3, 9, 25; 17:12; 24:3 ).


See Ezek 11:3-12 .


The turban would normally be removed for mourning ( Josh 7:6 ; 1 Sam 4:12 ).


Mourning rites included covering the lower part of the face. See Lev 13:45 .


Heb “the delight of your eyes.” Just as Ezekiel was deprived of his beloved wife (v. 16 , the “desire” of his “eyes”) so the Lord would be forced to remove the object of his devotion, the temple, which symbolized his close relationship to his covenant people.


Moab was located immediately south of Ammon.


Edom was located south of Moab.


Edom apparently in some way assisted in the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/6 b.c. ( Ps 137:7 ; Lam 5:21, 23 ; Joel 3:19 ; Obadiah).


The Philistines inhabited the coastal plain by the Mediterranean Sea, west of Judah.


This is a name for the Philistines, many of whom migrated to Palestine from Crete.


Tyre was located on the Mediterranean coast north of Israel.


That is, Jerusalem.


That is, the towns located inland that were under Tyre’s rule.


This prophecy was fulfilled by Alexander the Great in 332 b.c .


Rome, another economic power, is described in a similar way in Rev 17:1 .


This is probably a reference to Cyprus.


Sidon and Arvad , like Tyre, were Phoenician coastal cities.


Another Phoenician coastal city located between Sidon and Arvad.


The reference to “all the ships of the sea…within you” suggests that the metaphor is changing; previously Tyre had been described as a magnificent ship, but now the description shifts back to an actual city. The “ships of the sea” were within Tyre’s harbor. Verse 11 refers to “walls” and “towers” of the city.


See Gen 10:22 .


The identity of the Gammadites is uncertain.


Tarshish refers to a distant seaport sometimes believed to be located in southern Spain (others identified it as Carthage in North Africa). In any event it represents here a distant, rich, and exotic port which was a trading partner of Tyre.


The location is mentioned in Judg 11:33 .


According to L. C. Allen ( Ezekiel [WBC], 2:82), Izal was located between Haran and the Tigris and was famous for its wine.


Or perhaps “Danel” (so TEV), referring to a ruler known from Canaanite legend. See the note on “Daniel” in 14:14 . A reference to Danel (preserved in legend at Ugarit, near the northern end of the Phoenician coast) makes more sense here when addressing Tyre than in 14:14 .


The tone here is sarcastic, reflecting the ruler’s view of himself.


This is probably a reference to the Babylonians.


The Phoenicians practiced circumcision, so the language here must be figurative, indicating that they would be treated in a disgraceful manner. Uncircumcised peoples were viewed as inferior, unclean, and perhaps even sub-human. See 31:18 and 32:17-32 , as well as the discussion in D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:99.


The imagery of the lament appears to draw upon an extrabiblical Eden tradition about the expulsion of the first man (see v. 14 and the note there) from the garden due to his pride. The biblical Eden tradition speaks of cherubs placed as guardians at the garden entrance following the sin of Adam and Eve ( Gen 3:24 ), but no guardian cherub like the one described in verse 14 is depicted or mentioned in the biblical account. Ezekiel’s imagery also appears to reflect Mesopotamian and Canaanite mythology at certain points. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:119-20.


Sidon was located 25 miles north of Tyre. map For location see Map1-A1 ; JP3-F3 ; JP4-F3 .


Similar language is used in reference to Israel’s adversaries in Num 33:55 ; Josh 23:13 .


This promise was given in Lev 25:18-19 .


In Egyptian theology Pharaoh owned and controlled the Nile. See J. D. Currid, Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament , 240-44.


Compare Isa 36:6 .


This may refer to a site in the Egyptian Delta which served as a refuge for Jews ( Jer 44:1; 46:14 ).


Syene is known today as Aswan.


In Ezek 4:4-8 it was said that the house of Judah would suffer forty years.


April 26, 571 b.c .


Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre from 585 to 571 b.c . map For location see Map1-A2 ; Map2-G2 ; Map4-A1 ; JP3-F3 ; JP4-F3 .


Syene is known as Aswan today.


On and Pi-beseth are generally identified with the Egyptian cities of Heliopolis and Bubastis.


In Zeph 1:15 darkness is associated with the day of the Lord .


The expression “breaking the arm” indicates the removal of power ( Ps 10:15; 37:17 ; Job 38:15 ; Jer 48:25 ).


This may refer to the event recorded in Jer 37:5 .


June 21, 587 b.c .


Either Egypt, or the Lord compares Egypt to Assyria, which is described in vv. 3-17 through the metaphor of a majestic tree. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:185. Like Egypt, Assyria had been a great world power, but in time God brought the Assyrians down. Egypt should learn from history the lesson that no nation, no matter how powerful, can withstand the judgment of God. Rather than following the text here, some prefer to emend the proper name Assyria to a similar sounding common noun meaning “boxwood” (see Ezek 27:6 ), which would make a fitting parallel to “cedar of Lebanon” in the following line. In this case vv. 3-18 in their entirety refer to Egypt, not Assyria. See L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:121-27.


Lebanon was know for its cedar trees ( Judg 9:15 ; 1 Kgs 4:33; 5:6 ; 2 Kgs 14:9 ; Ezra 3:7 ; Pss 29:5; 92:12; 104:16 ).


For the expression “going down to the pit,” see Ezek 26:20; 32:18, 24, 29 .


This would be March 3, 585 b.c .


The king of Babylon referred to here was Nebuchadnezzar ( Ezek 21:19 ).


Through this prophetic lament given by God himself, the prophet activates the judgment described therein. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:217, and L. C. Allen, Ezekiel (WBC), 2:136-37.


Jeremiah ( Jer 6:17 ) and Habakkuk ( Hab 2:1 ) also served in the role of a watchman.


Ezekiel’s God-imposed muteness was lifted (see 3:26 ).


Outside of its seven occurrences in Ezekiel the term translated “possession” appears only in Exod 6:8 and Deut 33:4 .


This practice was a violation of Levitical law (see Lev 19:26 ).


The judgments of vv. 27-29 echo the judgments of Lev 26:22, 25 .


Similar responses are found in Isa 29:13 ; Matt 21:28-32 ; James 1:22-25 .


The imagery may reflect the overthrow of the Israelites by the Babylonians in 587/6 b.c .


The messianic king is here called “David” (see Jer 30:9 and Hos 3:5 , as well as Isa 11:1 and Mic 5:2 ) because he will fulfill the Davidic royal ideal depicted in the prophets and royal psalms (see Ps 2, 89 ).


The messianic king (“David”) is called both “king” and “prince” in 37:24-25 . The use of the term “prince” for this king facilitates the contrast between this ideal ruler and the Davidic “princes” denounced in earlier prophecies (see 7:27; 12:10, 12; 19:1; 21:25; 22:6, 25 ).


The woods were typically considered to be places of danger ( Ps 104:20-21 ; Jer 5:6 ).


A promise given to Abraham ( Gen 15:7 ) and his descendants ( Gen 15:8 ; Exod 6:7 ).


The blessings described in vv. 25-30 are those promised for obedience in Lev 26:4-13 .


Mount Seir is to be identified with Edom ( Ezek 35:15 ), home of Esau’s descendants ( Gen 25:21-30 ).


The reference is to Israel and Judah.


These verbs occur together in Gen 1:22, 28; 9:1 .


See Ezek 7:8; 9:8; 14:19; 20:8, 13, 21; 22:22; 30:15 .


For the concept of defiling the land in legal literature, see Lev 18:28 ; Deut 21:23 .


In Ezek 20:22 God refrained from punishment for the sake of his holy name. Here God’s reputation is the basis for Israel’s restoration.


The Lord here uses a metaphor from the realm of ritual purification. For the use of water in ritual cleansing, see Exod 30:19-20 ; Lev 14:51 ; Num 19:18 ; Heb 10:22 .


That is, a heart which symbolizes a will that is stubborn and unresponsive (see 1 Sam 25:37 ). In Rabbinic literature a “stone” was associated with an evil inclination ( b. Sukkah 52a).


That is, a heart which symbolizes a will that is responsive and obedient to God.


This promise reflects the ancient covenantal ideal (see Exod 6:7 ).


Heb “I will multiply them like sheep, human(s).”


The reunification of Israel and Judah is envisioned as well in Ezek 33:23, 29 ; Jer 3:18; 23:5-6 ; Hos 1:11 ; Amos 9:11 .


Jeremiah also attested to the reuniting of the northern and southern kingdoms ( Jer 3:12, 14; 31:2-6 ).


See Isa 24:5; 55:3; 61:8 ; Jer 32:40; 50:5 ; Ezek 16:60 , for other references to perpetual covenants.


The sanctuary of Israel becomes the main focus of Ezek 40-48 .


This may refer to a Lydian king in western Asia Minor in the seventh century b.c . Apart from Ezek 38-39 , the only other biblical reference to this king/nation is in Rev 20:8 . For a study of the names appearing in this verse, see E. Yamauchi, Foes From the Northern Frontier , 19-27.


One of the sons of Japheth according to Gen 10:2 ; 1 Chr 1:5 .


The Hebrew text mentions two different types of shields here.


That is, Lydia.


The seven-nation coalition represents the north (Meshech, Tubal, Gomer, Beth-Togarmah), the south/west (Ethiopia, Put) and the east (Persia). The use of the sevenfold list suggests completeness. See D. I. Block, Ezekiel (NICOT), 2:441.


The phrase “in the fire of my fury” occurs in Ezek 21:31; 22:21, 31 .


The basic sense of the word “holy” is “set apart from that which is commonplace, special, unique.” The Lord ’s holiness is first and foremost his transcendent sovereignty as the ruler of the world. He is “set apart” from the world over which he rules. At the same time his holiness encompasses his moral authority, which derives from his royal position. As king he has the right to dictate to his subjects how they are to live; indeed his very own character sets the standard for proper behavior. This expression is a common title for the Lord in the book of Isaiah.


See Rev 19:17-18 .


Eating the fat and drinking blood were God’s exclusive rights in Israelite sacrifices ( Lev 3:17 ).


See Ezek 11:19; 37:14 .


That is, Jerusalem.


That is, to the land of Israel (see v. 2 ).


The three alcoves are parallel to the city gates found at Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer.


Decorative palm trees were also a part of Solomon’s temple ( 1 Kgs 6:29, 32, 35 ).


The priests are from the Zadokite family ( Ezek 40:6; 44:15 ).


This same title appears in 8:4; 9:3; 10:19; and 11:22 .


Earlier Ezekiel had observed God leaving the temple to the east ( 11:23 ).


See Ezek 1:24 ; Rev 1:15; 14:2; 19:6 .


In 1 Kgs 8:10-11 we find a similar event with regard to Solomon’s temple. See also Exod 40:34-35 . and Isa 6:4 .


God’s throne is mentioned in Isa 6:1 ; Jer 3:17 .


See 1 Chr 28:2 ; Ps 99:5; 132:7 ; Isa 60:13 ; Lam 2:1 .


For the “sprinkling of blood,” see Lev 1:5, 11; 8:19; 9:12 .


Note the similar language in Lev 16:18 .


It is likely that salt was used with sacrificial meals ( Num 18:19 ; 2 Chr 13:5 ).


The people also could partake of the food of the peace offering ().


Tobiah, an Ammonite ( Neh 13:8 ), was dismissed from the temple.


Zadok was a descendant of Aaron through Eleazar ( 1 Chr 6:50-53 ), who served as a priest during David’s reign ( 2 Sam 8:17 ).


For a similar concept of the transmitting of holiness, see Exod 19:12-14 ; Lev 10:1-2 ; 2 Sam 6:7 . Similar laws concerning the priest are found in Lev 10 and 21 .


The shaving of the head was associated with mourning ( Ezek 7:18 ).


Letting the hair grow was associated with the taking of a vow ( Num 6:5 ; Acts 21:23-26 ).


This task was a fundamental role of the priest ( Lev 10:10 ).


For a historical illustration of the priest carrying out this function, see 2 Chr 19:9-11 .


This law was part of the legal code for priests ( Lev 21:1-3 ).


See Num 18:20 ; Deut 10:9; 18:2 ; Josh 13:33; 18:7 .


Evictions of the less fortunate by the powerful are described in 1 Kgs 21:1-16 ; Jer 22:1-5, 13-17 ; Ezek 22:25 .


Previous legislation regarding this practice may be found in Lev 19:35-36 ; Deut 25:13-16 ; Mic 6:10-12 .


The homer was about 5 bushels as a dry measure and 55 gallons as a liquid measure.


That is, the Feast of Temporary Shelters, traditionally known as the Feast of Tabernacles ( Exod 23:16; 34:22 ; Deut 16:16 ).


The east gate of the outer court was permanently closed ( Ezek 44:2 ).


That is, the year of Jubilee ( Lev 25:8-15 ).


The Great Sea refers to the Mediterranean Sea (also in vv. 15, 19, 20 ).


See Rev 22:1-2 .


Gen 15:9-21 .


The measurements resemble those in Num 34:1-2 .


A similar attitude toward non-Israelites is found in Isa 56:3-8 .


The tribes descended from Jacob’s maidservants are placed farthest from the sanctuary. See .


The tribe from which the Davidic prince would come is given the most prestigious allotment (see Gen 49:8-12 ).


See Rev 21:12-14 .


See Rev 21:12-21 .


The third year of the reign of Jehoiakim would be ca. 605 B.C . At this time Daniel would have been a teenager. The reference to Jehoiakim’s third year poses a serious crux interpretum , since elsewhere these events are linked to his fourth year ( Jer 25:1 ; cf. 2 Kgs 24:1 ; 2 Chr 36:5-8 ). Apparently Daniel is following an accession year chronology, whereby the first partial year of a king’s reign was reckoned as the accession year rather than as the first year of his reign. Jeremiah, on the other hand, is following a nonaccession year chronology, whereby the accession year is reckoned as the first year of the king’s reign. In that case, the conflict is only superficial. Most modern scholars, however, have concluded that Daniel is historically inaccurate here.


King Nebuchadnezzar ruled Babylon from ca. 605-562 B.C .


This attack culminated in the first of three major deportations of Jews to Babylon. The second one occurred in 597 B.C. and included among many other Jewish captives the prophet Ezekiel. The third deportation occurred in 586 B.C. , at which time the temple and the city of Jerusalem were thoroughly destroyed.


The land of Babylonia ( Heb “the land of Shinar”) is another name for Sumer and Akkad, where Babylon was located (cf. Gen 10:10; 11:2; 14:1, 9 ; Josh 7:21 ; Isa 11:11 ; Zech 5:11 ).


It is possible that the word Ashpenaz is not a proper name at all, but a general term for “innkeeper.” See J. J. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia), 127, n. 9. However, the ancient versions understand the term to be a name, and the present translation (along with most English versions) understands the word in this way.


The word court official (Hebrew saris ) need not mean “eunuch” in a technical sense (see Gen 37:36 , where the term refers to Potiphar, who had a wife), although in the case of the book of Daniel there was in Jewish literature a common tradition to that effect. On the OT usage of this word see HALOT 769-70 s.v. סָרֹיס .


The language of the Chaldeans referred to here is Akkadian, an East Semitic cuneiform language.


The names reflect a Jewish heritage. In Hebrew Daniel means “God is my judge”; Hananiah means “the Lord is gracious”; Mishael means “who is what God is?”; Azariah means “the Lord has helped.”


The meanings of the Babylonian names are more conjectural than is the case with the Hebrew names. The probable etymologies are as follows: Belteshazzar means “protect his life,” although the MT vocalization may suggest “Belti, protect the king” (cf. Dan 4:8 ); Shadrach perhaps means “command of Aku”; Meshach is of uncertain meaning; Abednego means “servant of Nego.” Assigning Babylonian names to the Hebrew youths may have been an attempt to erase from their memory their Israelite heritage.


Having failed to convince the overseer, Daniel sought the favor of the warden whom the overseer had appointed to care for the young men.


The number ten is sometimes used in the OT as an ideal number of completeness. Cf. v. 20 ; Zech 8:23 ; Rev 2:10 .


The Persian king Cyrus’ first year in control of Babylon was 539 B.C . Daniel actually lived beyond the first year of Cyrus, as is clear from 10:1 . The purpose of the statement in 1:21 is merely to say that Daniel’s life spanned the entire period of the neo-Babylonian empire. His life span also included the early years of the Persian control of Babylon. However, by that time his age was quite advanced; he probably died sometime in the 530’s B.C .


Contrary to common belief, the point here is not that the wise men (Chaldeans) replied to the king in the Aramaic language, or that this language was uniquely the language of the Chaldeans. It was this view that led in the past to Aramaic being referred to as “Chaldee.” Aramaic was used as a lingua franca during this period; its origins and usage were not restricted to the Babylonians. Rather, this phrase is better understood as an editorial note (cf. NAB) marking the fact that from 2:4 b through 7:28 the language of the book shifts from Hebrew to Aramaic. In 8:1 , and for the remainder of the book, the language returns to Hebrew. Various views have been advanced to account for this change of language, most of which are unconvincing. Most likely the change in language is a reflection of stages in the transmission history of the book of Daniel.


As is often the case in the Bible, here the name represents the person.


Arioch’s claim is self-serving and exaggerated. It is Daniel who came to him, and not the other way around. By claiming to have found one capable of solving the king’s dilemma, Arioch probably hoped to ingratiate himself to the king.


Clay refers to baked clay, which – though hard – was also fragile. Cf. the reference in v. 41 to “wet clay.”


The identity of the first kingdom is clearly Babylon. The identification of the following three kingdoms is disputed. The common view is that they represent Media, Persia, and Greece. Most conservative scholars identify them as Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome.


The reference to people being mixed is usually understood to refer to intermarriage.


The LXX introduces this chapter with the following chronological note: “in the eighteenth year of.” Such a date would place these events at about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. (cf. 2 Kgs 25:8 ). However, there seems to be no real basis for associating the events of with this date.


There is no need to think of Nebuchadnezzar’s image as being solid gold. No doubt the sense is that it was overlaid with gold (cf. Isa 40:19 ; Jer 10:3-4 ), with the result that it presented a dazzling self-compliment to the greatness of Nebuchadnezzar’s achievements.


According to a number of patristic authors, the image represented a deification of Nebuchadnezzar himself. This is not clear from the biblical text, however.


The specific duties of the seven types of officials listed here (cf. vv. 3, 27 ) are unclear. The Aramaic words that are used are transliterations of Akkadian or Persian technical terms whose exact meanings are uncertain. The translations given here follow suggestions set forth in BDB.


The word zither (Aramaic קִיתָרוֹס [ qitaros ]), and the words for harp (Aramaic פְּסַנְתֵּרִין [ pÿsanterin ]) and pipes (Aramaic סוּמְפֹּנְיָה [ sumponÿyah ]), are of Greek derivation. Though much has been made of this in terms of suggesting a date in the Hellenistic period for the writing of the book, it is not surprising that a few Greek cultural terms, all of them the names of musical instruments, should appear in this book. As a number of scholars have pointed out, the bigger surprise (if, in fact, the book is to be dated to the Hellenistic period) may be that there are so few Greek loanwords in Daniel.


O king, live forever! is a comment of typical court courtesy that is not necessarily indicative of the real sentiments of the speaker. Ancient oriental court protocol could sometimes require a certain amount of hypocrisy.


Daniel’s absence from this scene has sparked the imagination of commentators, some of whom have suggested that perhaps he was unable to attend the dedication due to sickness or due to being away on business. Hippolytus supposed that Daniel may have been watching from a distance.


There is a great deal of uncertainty with regard to the specific nature of these items of clothing.


The deuterocanonical writings known as The Prayer of Azariah and The Song of the Three present at this point a confession and petition for God’s forgiveness and a celebration of God’s grace for the three Jewish youths in the fiery furnace. Though not found in the Hebrew/Aramaic text of Daniel, these compositions do appear in the ancient Greek versions.


The phrase like that of a god is in Aramaic “like that of a son of the gods.” Many patristic writers understood this phrase in a christological sense (i.e., “the Son of God”). But it should be remembered that these are words spoken by a pagan who is seeking to explain things from his own polytheistic frame of reference; for him the phrase “like a son of the gods” is equivalent to “like a divine being.”


The king identifies the “son of the gods” (v. 25 ) as an angel. Comparable Hebrew expressions are used elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible for the members of God’s angelic assembly (see Gen 6:2, 4 ; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 ; Pss 29:1; 89:6 ). An angel later comes to rescue Daniel from the lions ( Dan 6:22 ).


Beginning with 4:1 , the verse numbers through 4:37 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Aramaic text ( BHS ), with 4:1 ET = 3:31 AT, 4:2 ET = 3:32 AT, 4:3 ET = 3:33 AT, 4:4 ET = 4:1 AT, etc., through 4:37 ET = 4:34 AT. Thus Dan 3:31-33 of the Aramaic text appears as Dan 4:1-3 in the English Bible, and the corresponding verses of ch. differ accordingly. In spite of the division of the Aramaic text, a good case can be made that 3:31-33 AT (= 4:1-3 ET) is actually the introduction to ch. .


This verse marks the beginning of chap. in the Aramaic text of Daniel (see the note on 4:1 ). The Greek OT (LXX) has the following addition: “In the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign he said.” This date would suggest a link to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C . In general, the LXX of chapters 4-6 is very different from the MT, so much so that the following notes will call attention only to selected readings. In the LXX lacks sizable portions of material in the MT (e.g., vv. 3-6, 31-32 ), includes sizable portions of material not in the MT (e.g., v. 14 a, parts of vv. 16, 28 ), has a different order of some material (e.g., v. 8 after v. 9 ), and in some instances is vastly different from the MT (e.g., vv. 30, 34 ). Whether these differences are due to an excessively paraphrastic translation technique adopted for these chapters in the LXX, or are due to differences in the underlying Vorlage of the LXX, is a disputed matter. The latter seems more likely. There is a growing trend in modern scholarship to take the LXX of chapters 4-6 much more seriously than was the case in most earlier text-critical studies that considered this issue.


This explanation of the meaning of the name Belteshazzar may be more of a paronomasia than a strict etymology.


The function of the band of iron and bronze is not entirely clear, but it may have had to do with preventing the splitting or further deterioration of the portion of the tree that was left after being chopped down. By application it would then refer to the preservation of Nebuchadnezzar’s life during the time of his insanity.


The seven periods of time probably refer to seven years.


Much of modern scholarship views this chapter as a distortion of traditions that were originally associated with Nabonidus rather than with Nebuchadnezzar. A Qumran text, the Prayer of Nabonidus, is often cited for parallels to these events.


Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity has features that are associated with the mental disorder known as boanthropy, in which the person so afflicted imagines himself to be an ox or a similar animal and behaves accordingly.


The reference to heaven here is a circumlocution for God. There was a tendency in Jewish contexts to avoid direct reference to God. Cf. the expression “kingdom of heaven” in the NT and such statements as “I have sinned against heaven and in your sight” ( Luke 15:21 ).


As is clear from the extra-biblical records, it was actually Nabonidus (ca. 556-539 B.C. ) who was king of Babylon at this time. However, Nabonidus spent long periods of time at Teima, and during those times Belshazzar his son was de facto king of Babylon. This arrangement may help to explain why later in this chapter Belshazzar promises that the successful interpreter of the handwriting on the wall will be made third ruler in the kingdom. If Belshazzar was in effect second ruler in the kingdom, this would be the highest honor he could grant.


This scene of a Babylonian banquet calls to mind a similar grandiose event recorded in Esth 1:3-8 . Persian kings were also renowned in the ancient Near Eastern world for their lavish banquets.


The king probably sat at an elevated head table.


Making use of sacred temple vessels for an occasion of reveling and drunkenness such as this would have been a religious affront of shocking proportions to the Jewish captives.


The mention of the lampstand in this context is of interest because it suggests that the writing was in clear view.


Purple was a color associated with royalty in the ancient world.


The point of describing Nebuchadnezzar as arrogant is that he had usurped divine prerogatives, and because of his immense arrogance God had dealt decisively with him.


Peres ( פְּרֵס ) is the singular form of פַרְסִין ( pharsin ) in v. 25 .


The year was 539 B.C . At this time Daniel would have been approximately eighty-one years old. The relevant extra-biblical records describing the fall of Babylon include portions of Herodotus, Xenophon, Berossus (cited in Josephus), the Cyrus Cylinder, and the Babylonian Chronicle.


Beginning with 5:31 , the verse numbers through 6:28 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Aramaic text ( BHS ), with 5:31 ET = 6:1 AT, 6:1 ET = 6:2 AT, 6:2 ET = 6:3 AT, 6:3 ET = 6:4 AT, etc., through 6:28 ET = 6:29 AT. Beginning with 7:1 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Aramaic text are again the same.


In later rabbinic thought this verse was sometimes cited as a proof text for the notion that one should pray only in a house with windows. See b. Berakhot 34b.


This is apparently the only specific mention in the OT of prayer being regularly offered three times a day. The practice was probably not unique to Daniel, however.


The den was perhaps a pit below ground level which could be safely observed from above.


The purpose of the den being sealed was to prevent unauthorized tampering with the opening of the den. Any disturbance of the seal would immediately alert the officials to improper activity of this sort.


The first year of Belshazzar’s reign would have been ca. 553 B.C . Daniel would have been approximately 67 years old at the time of this vision.


The referent of the great sea is unclear. The common view that the expression refers to the Mediterranean Sea is conjectural.


The identity of the first animal, derived from v. 17 and the parallels in chap. , is Babylon. The reference to the plucking of its wings is probably a reference to the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity (cf. chap. ). The latter part of v. 4 then describes the restoration of Nebuchadnezzar. The other animals have traditionally been understood to represent respectively Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome, although most of modern scholarship identifies them as Media, Persia, and Greece. For a biblical parallel to the mention of lion, bear, and leopard together, see Hos 13:7-8 .


The three ribs held securely in the mouth of the bear, perhaps representing Media-Persia, apparently symbolize military conquest, but the exact identity of the “ribs” is not clear. Possibly it is a reference to the Persian conquest of Lydia, Egypt, and Babylonia.


If the third animal is Greece, the most likely identification of these four heads is the four-fold division of the empire of Alexander the Great following his death. See note on Dan 8:8 .


The fourth animal differs from the others in that it is nondescript. Apparently it was so fearsome that Daniel could find nothing with which to compare it. Attempts to identify this animal as an elephant or other known creature are conjectural.


This text is probably the main OT background for Jesus’ use of the term “son of man.” In both Jewish and Christian circles the reference in the book of Daniel has traditionally been understood to refer to an individual, usually in a messianic sense. Many modern scholars, however, understand the reference to have a corporate identity. In this view, the “son of man” is to be equated with the “holy ones” (vv. 18, 21, 22, 25 ) or the “people of the holy ones” (v. 27 ) and understood as a reference to the Jewish people. Others understand Daniel’s reference to be to the angel Michael.


The expression holy ones is either a reference to angels or to human beings devoted to God.


Although the word times is vocalized in the MT as a plural, it probably should be regarded as a dual. The Masoretes may have been influenced here by the fact that in late Aramaic (and Syriac) the dual forms fall out of use. The meaning would thus be three and a half “times.”


Dan 8:1 marks the switch from Aramaic (= 2:4 b- 7:28 ) back to Hebrew as the language in which the book is written in its present form. The remainder of the book from this point on ( 8:1-12:13 ) is in Hebrew. The bilingual nature of the book has been variously explained, but it most likely has to do with the book’s transmission history.


The third year of King Belshazzar’s reign would have been ca. 551 B.C . Daniel would have been approximately 69 years old at the time of this vision.


Susa (Heb. שׁוּשַׁן , shushan ), located some 230 miles (380 km) east of Babylon, was a winter residence for Persian kings during the Achaemenid period. The language of v. 2 seems to suggest that Daniel may not have been physically present at Susa, but only saw himself there in the vision. However, the Hebrew is difficult, and some have concluded that the first four words of v. 2 in the MT are a later addition (cf. Theodotion).


The goat of Daniel’s vision represents Greece; the large horn represents Alexander the Great. The ram stands for Media-Persia. Alexander’s rapid conquest of the Persians involved three battles of major significance which he won against overwhelming odds: Granicus (334 B.C. ), Isus (333 B.C. ), and Gaugemela (331 B.C. ).


The four conspicuous horns refer to Alexander’s successors. After his death, Alexander’s empire was divided up among four of his generals: Cassander, who took Macedonia and Greece; Lysimachus, who took Thrace and parts of Asia Minor; Seleucus, who took Syria and territory to its east; and Ptolemy, who took control of Egypt.


This small horn is Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who controlled the Seleucid kingdom from ca. 175-164 B.C . Antiochus was extremely hostile toward the Jews and persecuted them mercilessly.


The expression the beautiful land (Heb. הַצֶּבִי [ hatsÿvi ] = “the beauty”) is a cryptic reference to the land of Israel. Cf. 11:16, 41 , where it is preceded by the word אֶרֶץ (’ erets , “land”).


In prescientific Israelite thinking the stars were associated with the angelic members of God’s heavenly assembly. See Judg 5:20 ; Job 38:7 ; Isa 40:26 . In west Semitic mythology the stars were members of the high god’s divine assembly (see Isa 14:13 ).


The prince of the army may refer to God (cf. “whose sanctuary” later in the verse) or to the angel Michael (cf. 12:1 ).


Here the sanctuary is a reference to the temple of God in Jerusalem.


Truth here probably refers to the Torah. According to 1 Macc 1:56, Antiochus initiated destruction of the sacred books of the Jews.


The holy one referred to here is presumably an angel. Cf. 4:13 [10], 23 [20].


The language of evenings and mornings is reminiscent of the creation account in . Since “evening and morning” is the equivalent of a day, the reference here would be to 2,300 days. However, some interpreters understand the reference to be to the evening sacrifice and the morning sacrifice, in which case the reference would be to only 1,150 days. Either way, the event that marked the commencement of this period is unclear. The event that marked the conclusion of the period is the rededication of the temple in Jerusalem following the atrocious and sacrilegious acts that Antiochus implemented. This took place on December 25, 165 B.C . The Jewish celebration of Hanukkah each year commemorates this victory.


The only angels whose names are given in the OT are Gabriel ( Dan 8:16; 9:21 ; cf. Luke 1:19, 26 ) and Michael ( Dan 10:13, 21; 12:1 ; cf. Jude 9 ; Rev 12:7 ). The name Gabriel means in Hebrew “man of God,” and Michael means “who is like God?”


The identity of this Darius is a major problem in correlating the biblical material with the extra-biblical records of this period. Most modern scholars treat the reference as a mistaken allusion to Darius Hystaspes (ca. 522-486 B.C. ). Others have maintained instead that this name is a reference to the Persian governor Gubaru. Still others understand the reference to be to the Persian king Cyrus (cf. 6:28 , where the vav ( ו ) may be understood as vav explicativum , meaning “even”). Under either of these latter two interpretations, the first year of Darius would have been ca. 538 B.C . Daniel would have been approximately eighty-two years old at this time.


The tetragrammaton (the four Hebrew letters which constitute the divine Name, YHWH) appears eight times in this chapter, and nowhere else in the book of Daniel.


When lamenting, ancient Israelites would fast, wear sackcloth, and put ashes on their heads to show their sorrow and contrition.


The act of sealing in the OT is a sign of authentication. Cf. 1 Kgs 21:8 ; Jer 32:10, 11, 44 .


The expression have nothing is difficult. Presumably it refers to an absence of support or assistance for the anointed one at the time of his “cutting off.” The KJV rendering “but not for himself,” apparently suggesting a vicarious death, cannot be defended.


Flood here is a metaphor for sudden destruction.


This chapter begins the final unit in the book of Daniel, consisting of chapters 10-12 . The traditional chapter divisions to some extent obscure the relationship of these chapters.


Anointing oneself with oil (usually olive oil) was a common OT practice due to the severity of the Middle Eastern sun (cf. Ps 121:6 ). It was also associated with rejoicing (e.g., Prov 27:9 ) and was therefore usually not practiced during a period of mourning.


The first month would be the month of Nisan, during which Passover was observed.


The identity of the messenger is not specifically disclosed. Presumably he is an unnamed angel. Some interpreters identify him as Gabriel, but there is no adequate reason for doing so.


The question is rhetorical, intended to encourage reflection on Daniel’s part.


The antecedent of the pronoun “I” is the angel, not Daniel. The traditional chapter division at this point, and the presence of a chronological note in the verse similar to ones used elsewhere in the book to position Daniel’s activities in relation to imperial affairs, sometimes lead to confusion on this matter.


Perhaps these three more kings are Cambyses (ca. 530-522 B.C. ), Pseudo-Smerdis (ca. 522 B.C. ), and Darius I Hystaspes (ca. 522-486 B.C. ).


This fourth king is Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 B.C. ). The following reference to one of his chiefs apparently has in view Seleucus Nicator.


The powerful king mentioned here is Alexander the Great (ca. 336-323 B.C. ).


The king of the south is Ptolemy I Soter (ca. 323-285 B.C. ). The following reference to one of his subordinates apparently has in view Seleucus I Nicator (ca. 311-280 B.C. ). Throughout the remainder of chap. the expressions “king of the south” and “king of the north” repeatedly occur. It is clear, however, that these terms are being used generically to describe the Ptolemaic king (i.e., “of the south”) or the Seleucid king (i.e., “of the north”) who happens to be in power at any particular time. The specific identity of these kings can be established more or less successfully by a comparison of this chapter with the available extra-biblical records that discuss the history of the intertestamental period. In the following notes the generally accepted identifications are briefly mentioned.


Here they refers to Ptolemy II Philadelphus (ca. 285-246 B.C. ) and Antiochus II Theos (ca. 262-246 B.C. ).


The daughter refers to Berenice, who was given in marriage to Antiochus II Theos.


Antiochus II eventually divorced Berenice and remarried his former wife Laodice, who then poisoned her husband, had Berenice put to death, and installed her own son, Seleucus II Callinicus (ca. 246-227 B.C. ), as the Seleucid king.


The reference is to the king of Egypt.


The sons of Seleucus II Callinicus were Seleucus III Ceraunus (ca. 227-223 B.C. ) and Antiochus III the Great (ca. 223-187 B.C. ).


This king of the south refers to Ptolemy IV Philopator (ca. 221-204 B.C. ).


This was Ptolemy V Epiphanes (ca. 203-181 B.C. ).


This well-fortified city is apparently Sidon. Its capture from the Ptolemies by Antiochus the Great was a strategic victory for the Seleucid kingdom.


The commander is probably the Roman commander, Lucius Cornelius Scipio.


The one who will send out an exactor of tribute was Seleucus IV Philopator (ca. 187-176 B.C. ).


Perhaps this exactor of tribute was Heliodorus (cf. 2 Maccabees 3).


This despicable person to whom the royal honor has not been rightfully conferred is Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ca. 175-164 B.C. ).


This king of the south was Ptolemy Philometer (ca. 181-145 B.C. ).


The name Kittim has various designations in extra-biblical literature. It can refer to a location on the island of Cyprus, or more generally to the island itself, or it can be an inclusive term to refer to parts of the Mediterranean world that lay west of the Middle East (e.g., Rome). For ships of Kittim the Greek OT (LXX) has “Romans,” an interpretation followed by a few English versions (e.g., TEV). A number of times in the Dead Sea Scrolls the word is used in reference to the Romans. Other English versions are more generic: “[ships] of the western coastlands” (NIV, NLT); “from the west” (NCV, CEV).


This is apparently a reference to the Roman forces, led by Gaius Popilius Laenas, which confronted Antiochus when he came to Egypt and demanded that he withdraw or face the wrath of Rome. Antiochus wisely withdrew from Egypt, albeit in a state of bitter frustration.


This is an allusion to the Maccabean revolt, which struggled to bring about Jewish independence in the second century B.C .


The identity of this king is problematic. If vv. 36-45 continue the description of Antiochus Epiphanes, the account must be viewed as erroneous, since the details do not match what is known of Antiochus’ latter days. Most modern scholars take this view, concluding that this section was written just shortly before the death of Antiochus and that the writer erred on several key points as he tried to predict what would follow the events of his own day. Conservative scholars, however, usually understand the reference to shift at this point to an eschatological figure, viz ., the Antichrist. The chronological gap that this would presuppose to be in the narrative is not necessarily a problem, since by all accounts there are many chronological gaps throughout the chapter, as the historical figures intended by such expressions as “king of the north” and “king of the south” repeatedly shift.


The beautiful land is a cryptic reference to the land of Israel.


Presumably seas refers to the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea.


This verse is the only undisputed reference to a literal resurrection found in the Hebrew Bible.


The deuterocanonical writings known as the Story of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon appear respectively as chapters 13 and 14 of the book of Daniel in the Greek version of this book. Although these writings are not part of the Hebrew/Aramaic text of Daniel, they were popular among certain early communities who valued traditions about the life of Daniel.


The negative particle לאֹ ( lo ’, “no, not”) and the root רָחַם ( rakham , “compassion”) are repeated in 1:6 , creating a wordplay between the name Lo-Ruhamah (literally “No-Pity”) and the announcement of divine judgment, “I will no longer have pity on the nation of Israel.”


These military weapons are examples of the metonymy of adjunct (the specific weapons named) for subject (warfare).


Beginning with 1:10 , the verse numbers through 2:23 in the English Bible differ by two from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text ( BHS ), with 1:10 ET = 2:1 HT, 1:11 ET = 2:2 HT, 2:1 ET = 2:3 HT, etc., through 2:23 ET = 2:25 HT. Beginning with 3:1 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Hebrew Bible are again the same.


The suffixes on the nouns אֲחֵיכֶם (’ akhekhem , “your brother”) and אֲחוֹתֵיכֶם (’ akhotekhem , “your sister”) are both plural forms. The brother/sister imagery is being applied to Israel and Judah collectively.


The suffix on the noun אִמְּכֶם (’ immékhem , “your mother”) is a plural form (2nd person masculine). The children of Gomer represent the “children” (i.e., people) of Israel; Gomer represents the nation as a whole.


This statement alludes to the practice of sexual rites in the Canaanite fertility cult which attempted to secure agricultural fertility from the Canaanite gods (note the following reference to wool, flax, olive oil, and wine).


The third person plural here is an obvious reference to the Israelites who had been unfaithful to the Lord in spite of all that he had done for them. To maintain the imagery of Israel as the prostitute, a third person feminine singular would be called for; in the interest of literary consistency this has been supplied in some English translations (e.g., NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT).


There is a wordplay on the terms בַּעְלִי ( ba ’ li , “my master”) and הַבְּעָלִים ( habbé ’ alim , “the Baals”) which are derived from the root בַּעַל ( ba ’ al , “master; lord”). This wordplay is especially effective because the term בַּעַל can refer to one’s husband and is also the name of the Canaanite storm god Baal. Referring to a spouse the term normally means “husband; master.” It was a common, ordinary, nonpejorative term that was frequently used in an interchangeable manner with אִישׁ (’ ish , “husband; man”). Due to its similarity in sound to the abhorrent Canaanite fertility god Baal, the repentant Israelites would be so spiritually sensitive that they would refrain from even uttering this neutral term for fear of recalling their former idolatry. The purpose of the exile is to end Israel’s worship of Baal and to remove syncretism.


Beth Aven means “house of wickedness” in Hebrew; it is a polemic reference to “Bethel,” which means “house of God.” Cf. CEV “at sinful Bethel.”


The noun פַּח ( pakh , “trap”) is used (1) literally of a bird-trap, used in similes and metaphors ( Amos 3:5 ; Prov 7:23 ; Eccl 9:12 ), and (2) figuratively to refer to (a) calamities and plots ( Job 18:9; 22:10 ; Pss 91:3; 119:110; 124:7; 140:6; 141:9; 142:4 ; Prov 22:5 ; Isa 24:17-18 ; Jer 18:22; 48:43-44 ; Hos 9:8 ) and (b) a source of calamity ( Josh 23:13 ; Pss 11:6; 69:23 ; Isa 8:14 ; Hos 5:1 ; BDB 809 s.v. פַּח ).


The noun רֶשֶׁת ( reshet , “net”) is used (1) literally of a net used to catch birds ( Prov 1:17 ) and (2) in figurative descriptions of the wicked plotting to ensnare their victims ( Prov 29:5 ; Pss 9:16; 10:9; 25:15; 31:5; 35:7; 57:7; 140:6 ; Job 18:8 ; BDB 440 s.v. רֶשֶׁת ).


The terms flocks and herds are used figuratively for animal sacrifices (metonymy of association). Hosea describes the futility of seeking God’s favor with mere ritual sacrifice without the prerequisite moral obedience (e.g., 1 Sam 15:24 ; Ps 50:6-8; 51:17-18 ; Isa 1:12 ; Mic 6:6-8 ).


See the note on the place name Beth Aven in 4:15 .


The term רְצוּץ ( rÿtsuts , “crushed”) is a metaphor for weakness (e.g., 2 Kgs 18:21 ; Isa 36:6; 42:3 ) and oppression (e.g., Deut 28:33 ; 1 Sam 12:3, 4 ; Amos 4:1 ; Isa 58:6 ). Here it is used as a figure to describe the devastating effects of the Lord ’s judgment.


Contrary to popular misunderstanding, Hosea does not reject animal sacrifice nor cultic ritual, and advocate instead obedience only. Rather, God does not delight in ritual sacrifice without the accompanying prerequisite moral obedience ( 1 Sam 15:22 ; Pss 40:6-8; 51:16-17 ; Prov 21:3 ; Isa 1:11-17 ; Jer 7:21-23 ; Hos 6:6 ; Mic 6:6-8 ). However, if prerequisite moral obedience is present, he delights in sacrificial worship as an outward expression ( Ps 51:19 ). Presented by a repentant obedient worshiper, whole burnt offerings were “an aroma pleasing” to the Lord ( Lev 1:9, 13 ).


Beginning with 11:12 , the verse numbers through 12:14 in the English Bible differ by one from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text ( BHS ), with 11:12 ET = 12:1 HT, 12:1 ET = 12:2 HT, etc., through 12:14 ET = 12:15 HT. From 13:1 to 13:16 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Hebrew Bible are again the same.


The Lord answers Ephraim’s self-assertion (“I am rich!”) with the self-introduction formula (“I am the Lord your God!”) which introduces judgment oracles and ethical instructions.


In Hosea the name “Ephraim” does not refer to the tribe, but to the region of Mount Ephraim where the royal residence of Samaria was located. It functions as a synecdoche of location (Mount Ephraim) for its inhabitants (the king of Samaria; e.g., 5:13; 8:8, 10 ).


Beginning with 13:16 , the verse numbers through 14:9 in the English Bible differ by one from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text ( BHS ), with 13:16 ET = 14:1 HT, 14:1 ET = 14:2 HT, etc., through 14:9 ET = 14:10 HT. Thus ch. in the Hebrew Bible has 10 verses.


The repetition of the root לָקַח ( laqakh ) creates a striking wordplay in 14:2 . If Israel will bring ( לָקַח ) its confession to God, he will accept ( לָקַח ) repentant Israel and completely forgive its sin.


The noun מְשׁוּבָתָה ( mÿshuvatah , “waywardness”; cf. KJV “backsliding”) is from the same root as שׁוּבָה ( shuvah , “return!”) in 14:1 [2]. This repetition of שׁוּב ( shuv ) creates a wordplay which emphasizes reciprocity: if Israel will return ( שׁוּבָה , shuvah ) to the Lord , he will cure her of the tendency to turn away ( מְשׁוּבָתָה ) from him.


The verb שָׁב , shav , “will turn” (Qal perfect 3rd person masculine singular from שׁוּב , shuv , “to turn”) continues the wordplay on שׁוּב in 14:1-4 [2-5]. If Israel will “return” ( שׁוּב ) to the Lord , he will heal Israel’s tendency to “turn away” ( מְשׁוּבָתָה , mÿshuvatah ) and “turn” ( שָׁב ) from his anger.


The dating of the book of Joel is a matter of dispute. Some scholars date the book as early as the ninth century b.c. , during the reign of the boy-king Joash. This view is largely based on the following factors: an argument from silence (e.g., the book of Joel does not mention a king, perhaps because other officials de facto carried out his responsibilities, and there is no direct mention in the book of such later Israelite enemies as the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians); inconclusive literary assumptions (e.g., the eighth-century prophet Amos in Amos 9:13 alludes to Joel 3:18 ); the canonical position of the book (i.e., it is the second book of the Minor Prophets); and literary style (i.e., the book is thought to differ in style from the postexilic prophetic writings). While such an early date for the book is not impossible, none of the arguments used to support it is compelling. Later dates for the book that have been defended by various scholars are, for example, the late seventh century or early sixth century or sometime in the postexilic period (anytime from late sixth century to late fourth century). Most modern scholars seem to date the book of Joel sometime between 400 and 350 b.c. For a helpful discussion of date see J. A. Thompson, “The Date of the Book of Joel,” A Light unto My Path , 453-64. Related to the question of date is a major exegetical issue: Is the army of chapter two to be understood figuratively as describing the locust invasion of chapter one, or is the topic of chapter two an invasion of human armies, either the Babylonians or an eschatological foe? If the enemy could be conclusively identified as the Babylonians, for example, this would support a sixth-century date for the book.


Elders here refers not necessarily to men advanced in years, but to leaders within the community.


The circumstances that precipitated the book of Joel surrounded a locust invasion in Palestine that was of unprecedented proportions. The locusts had devastated the country’s agrarian economy, with the unwelcome consequences extending to every important aspect of commercial, religious, and national life. To further complicate matters, a severe drought had exhausted water supplies, causing life-threatening shortages for animal and human life (cf. v. 20 ). Locust invasions occasionally present significant problems in Palestine in modern times. The year 1865 was commonly known among Arabic-speaking peoples of the Near East as sent el jarad , “year of the locust.” The years 1892, 1899, and 1904 witnessed significant locust invasions in Palestine. But in modern times there has been nothing equal in magnitude to the great locust invasion that began in Palestine in February of 1915. This modern parallel provides valuable insight into the locust plague the prophet Joel points to as a foreshadowing of the day of the Lord. For an eyewitness account of the 1915 locust invasion of Palestine see J. D. Whiting, “Jerusalem’s Locust Plague,” National Geographic 28 (December 1915): 511-50.


The word drunkards has a double edge here. Those accustomed to drinking too much must now lament the unavailability of wine. It also may hint that the people in general have become religiously inebriated and are unresponsive to the Lord. They are, as it were, drunkards from a spiritual standpoint.


Joel addresses the first of three groups particularly affected by the locust plague. In v. 5 he describes the effects on the drunkards, who no longer have a ready supply of intoxicating wine; in vv. 11-12 he describes the effects on the farmers, who have watched their labors come to naught because of the insect infestation; and in vv. 13-14 he describes the effects on the priests, who are no longer able to offer grain sacrifices and libations in the temple.


As becomes increasingly clear in what follows, this nation is to be understood figuratively. It refers to the locust invasion as viewed from the standpoint of its methodical, destructive advance across the land (BDB 156 s.v. גּוֹי 2). This term is used figuratively to refer to animals one other time ( Zeph 2:14 ).


The verb is feminine singular, raising a question concerning its intended antecedent. A plural verb would be expected here, the idea being that all the inhabitants of the land should grieve. Perhaps Joel is thinking specifically of the city of Jerusalem, albeit in a representative sense. The choice of the feminine singular verb form has probably been influenced to some extent by the allusion to the young widow in the simile of v. 8 .


Heb “the husband of her youth.” The woman described here may already be married, so the reference is to the death of a husband rather than a fiancé ( a husband-to-be ). Either way, the simile describes a painful and unexpected loss to which the national tragedy Joel is describing may be compared.


Fire here and in v. 20 is probably not to be understood in a literal sense. The locust plague, accompanied by conditions of extreme drought, has left the countryside looking as though everything has been burned up (so also in Joel 2:3 ).


The interpretation of 2:1-11 is very difficult. Four views may be mentioned here. (1) Some commentators understand this section to be describing a human invasion of Judah on the part of an ancient army. The exact identity of this army (e.g., Assyrian or Babylonian) varies among interpreters depending upon issues of dating for the book of Joel. (2) Some commentators take the section to describe an eschatological scene in which the army according to some is human, or according to others is nonhuman (i.e., angelic). (3) Some interpreters argue for taking the section to refer to the potential advent in the fall season of a severe east wind (i.e., Sirocco) that would further exacerbate the conditions of the land described in chapter one. (4) Finally, some interpreters understand the section to continue the discussion of locust invasion and drought described in chapter one, partly on the basis that there is no clear exegetical evidence in 2:1-11 to suggest a shift of referent from that of chapter one.


Since the invaders are compared to warriors, this suggests that they are not actually human, but instead an army of locusts.


Witnesses of locust invasions have described the visual effect of large numbers of these creatures crawling over one another on the ground. At such times the ground is said to appear to be in motion, creating a dizzying effect on some observers. The reference in v. 10 to the darkening of the sun and moon probably has to do with the obscuring of visibility due to large numbers of locusts swarming in the sky.


Mosaic law allowed men recently married, or about to be married, to be exempt for a year from certain duties that were normally mandatory, such as military obligation (cf. Deut 20:7; 24:5 ). However, Joel pictures a time of such urgency that normal expectations must give way to higher requirements.


The allusion to the one from the north is best understood as having locusts in view. It is not correct to say that this reference to the enemy who came form the north excludes the possibility of a reference to locusts and must be understood as human armies. Although locust plagues usually approached Palestine from the east or southeast, the severe plague of 1915, for example, came from the northeast.


Heb “and his foul smell will ascend.” The foul smell probably refers to the unpleasant odor of decayed masses of dead locusts. The Hebrew word for “foul smell” is found only here in the Old Testament. The Hebrew word for “stench” appears only here and in Isa 34:3 and Amos 4:10 . In the latter references it refers to the stench of dead corpses on a field of battle.


For half the year Palestine is generally dry. The rainy season begins with the early rains usually in late October to early December, followed by the latter rains in March and April. Without these rains productive farming would not be possible, as Joel’s original readers knew only too well.


The same four terms for locust are used here as in 1:4 , but in a different order. This fact creates some difficulty for the notion that the four words refer to four distinct stages of locust development.


Here Joel employs military language to describe the locusts. In the prophet’s thinking this invasion was far from being a freak accident. Rather, the Lord is pictured here as a divine warrior who leads his army into the land as a punishment for past sin and as a means of bringing about spiritual renewal on the part of the people.


Beginning with 2:28 , the verse numbers through 3:21 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text ( BHS ), with 2:28 ET = 3:1 HT, 2:29 ET = 3:2 HT, 2:30 ET = 3:3 HT, 2:31 ET = 3:4 HT, 2:32 ET = 3:5 HT, 3:1 ET = 4:1 HT, etc., through 3:21 ET = 4:21 HT. Thus Joel in the Hebrew Bible has 4 chapters, the 5 verses of ch. being included at the end of ch. in the English Bible.


This passage plays a key role in the apostolic explanation of the coming of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost recorded in Acts 2:17-21 . Peter introduces his quotation of this passage with “this is that spoken by the prophet Joel” ( Acts 2:16 ; cf. the similar pesher formula used at Qumran). The New Testament experience at Pentecost is thus seen in some sense as a fulfillment of this Old Testament passage, even though that experience did not exhaustively fulfill Joel’s words. Some portions of Joel’s prophecy have no precise counterpart in that experience. For example, there is nothing in the experience recorded in that exactly corresponds to the earthly and heavenly signs described in Joel 3:3-4 . But inasmuch as the messianic age had already begun and the “last days” had already commenced with the coming of the Messiah (cf. Heb 1:1-2 ), Peter was able to point to Joel 3:1-5 as a text that was relevant to the advent of Jesus and the bestowal of the Spirit. The equative language that Peter employs (“this is that”) stresses an incipient fulfillment of the Joel passage without precluding or minimizing a yet future and more exhaustive fulfillment in events associated with the return of Christ.


Joel 3:1 in the English Bible is 4:1 in the Hebrew text ( BHS) . See also the note at 2:28 .


There is a play on words here. Jehoshaphat in Hebrew means “the Lord has judged,” and the next line in v. 2 further explicates this thought. The location of this valley is uncertain (cf. v. 12 ). Many interpreters have understood the Valley of Jehoshaphat to be the Kidron Valley, located on the east side of old Jerusalem. Since this is described as a scene of future messianic activity and judgment, many Jews and Muslims have desired to be buried in the vicinity, a fact attested to in modern times by the presence of many graves in the area. A variation of this view is mentioned by Eusebius, Onomasticon 1:10. According to this view, the Valley of Jehoshaphat is located in the Hinnom Valley, on the south side of the old city. Yet another view is held by many modern scholars, who understand the reference to this valley to be one of an idealized and nonliteral scene of judgment.


Heb “and they drank.” Joel vividly refers to a situation where innocent human life has little value; its only worth is its use in somehow satisfying selfish appetites of wicked people who have control over others (cf. Amos 2:6 and 8:6 ).


The Sabeans were Arabian merchants who were influential along the ancient caravan routes that traveled through Arabia. See also Job 1:15 ; Isa 43:3; 45:14 ; Ps 72:10 .


Instead of referring to the large plow as a whole, the plowshare is simply the metal tip which actually breaks the earth and cuts the furrow.


This implement was used to prune the vines, i.e., to cut off extra leaves and young shoots (M. Klingbeil, NIDOTTE 1:1117-18). It was a short knife with a curved hook at the end sharpened on the inside like a sickle.


This conversion of farming instruments to instruments of war is the reverse of Isa 2:4 (cf. Mic 4:3 ), where military weapons are transformed into tools for farming. Isaiah describes a time of kingdom blessing and prosperity, whereas Joel describes a time of eschatological conflict and judgment.