¹tn Heb “and they do not say in their heart.”
²tn Heb “they [the sinful deeds] are before my face.”
³tc The MT reads <yp!a&n`m= (m<sup>e</sup>na’afim, “adulterers”; Piel participle mpl from [a^n`, na’af, “to commit adultery”), which does not seem to fit the context. The original reading was probably <yp!oa (’ofim, “bakers”; Qal participle mpl from hp^a*, ’afah, “to bake”), which harmonizes well with the baker/oven/fire motif in 7:4-7. The textual deviation was caused by: (1) confusion of n (nun) and w (vav), (2) metathesis of n/w (nun/vav) and a (alef), and (3) dittography of m (mem) from the preceding word. Original <yp!oa <L*K% (kullam ’ofim, “all of them are bakers”) was confused for <yp!a&n`m= <L*K% (“all of them are adulterers”). In spite of this most English translations follow the MT’s reading here.
<sup>4</sup>tc The MT preserves the enigmatic m@ hr*u@B) rWNt^ omK= (k<sup>e</sup>mo tannur bo’erah me, “Like a burning oven, from…?”). The adjectival participle hr*u@B) (“burning”) is feminine while the noun rWNt^ (tannur, “oven”) that it modifies is masculine. The BHS editors solve this problem by simply redividing the words: <h@ ru@B) rWNt^ omK= (c<sup>e</sup>mo tannur bo’er hem, “they are like a burning oven”).
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “the day of.”
<sup>6</sup>tc The MT preserves the awkward 1cpl suffix reading WnK@l=m^ (malakenu, “our king”). The BHS editors suggest reading the 3mpl suffix <K*l=m^ (malkam, “their king”), as reflected in the Aramaic Targum.
<sup>7</sup>tc The MT vocalizes the consonants wljh as Wlj$h# a Hiphil perfect 3cpl from I hl*j* (“to become sick”). However, this is syntactically awkward. The BHS editors suggest revocalizing it as Hiphil infinitive construct + 3ms suffix from ll^j* (khalal, “to begin”) or Hiphil perfect 3cpl from ll^j*. For a discussion of this textual problem, see D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 5:240.
tn Heb “when their king began [to reign].”
<sup>8</sup>tn Heb “he joined hands.”
<sup>9</sup>tn The words “like flour” are not in the Hebrew text, but are implied by the imagery.
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “a cake of bread not turned.” This metaphor compares Ephraim to a ruined cake of bread that was not turned over in time to avoid being scorched and burned (see BDB 728 s.v. hg`u%).
¹¹tn Heb “foreigners consume his strength.”
¹²tn Heb “redeem.”
¹³tn Heb “they do not cry out to me in their heart.”
¹⁴tc The MT reads Wrr*oGt=y] (yitgoraru) which is either (1) Hitpolel imperfect 3mpl (“they assembly themselves”) from I rWG (gur, “to sojourn”; BDB 157 s.v. I rWG) or (2) Hitpolel imperfect 3mpl (“they excite themselves”) from II rWG (gur, “to stir up”; BDB 158 s.v. II rWG). However, the Hebrew lexicographers suggest that both of these options are unlikely. Several other Hebrew mss preserve an alternate textual tradition of Wdd*oGt=y] (yitgodadu) which is a Hitpolel imperfect 3cpl (“they slash themselves”) from dd^G* (gadad, “to cut”; BDB 151 s.v. dd^G*), as also reflected in the LXX. This reflects the pagan Canaanite cultic practice of priests cutting themselves and draining their blood on the ground to elicit agricultural fertility by resurrecting the slain fertility god Baal from the underworld (Deut 14:1; 1 Kgs 18:28; Jer 16:6; 41:5; 47:5).
¹⁵tn Heb “their arms.”
¹⁶tc The MT reads the enigmatic lu* aO WbWvy` (yashuvu lo’ ’al) which is taken variously: “they turn, but not upward” (NASB); “they do not turn to the Most High” (NIV); “they turn, but not to the Most High” (KJV). The BHS editors suggest lu^B^l^ WbWvy` (yashuvu labba’al, “they turn to Baal”; so RSV) or lu^Y~l!B=l^ WbWvy` (yashuvu labb^eliyya’al, “they turn to Belial”; so TEV) which is reflected by the LXX.
¹⁷tn Heb “because their tongue.” The term “tongue” is used figuratively, as a metonymy of cause (tongue) for the effect (prayers to Baal).
¹⁸tn Heb “this [will] be for scorn in the land of Egypt.”