1tn Heb “at the end of years.” 2tn The word “visit” is supplied in the translation for clarity and for stylistic reasons. 3map For location see Map2-B1; Map4-D3; Map5-E2; Map6-A4; Map7-C1. 4tn Heb “and Ahab slaughtered for him sheep and cattle in abundance, and for the people who were with him.” 5tn Heb “to go up.” 6tn Heb “Like me, like you; and like your people, my people; and with you in battle.” 7tn Heb “and Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel.” 8tn Heb “the word of the Lord.” Jehoshaphat is requesting a prophetic oracle revealing the Lord’s will in the matter and their prospects for success. For examples of such oracles, see 2 Sam 5:19, 23-24. 9tn Heb “Should we go against Ramoth Gilead for war or should I refrain?” 10tn Though Jehoshaphat had requested an oracle from “the Lord” (יְהוָה, y˙hvah, “Yahweh”), the Israelite prophets stop short of actually using this name and substitute the title הָאֱלֹהִים (ha’elohim, “the God”). This ambiguity may explain in part Jehoshaphat’s hesitancy and caution (vv. 7-8). He seems to doubt that the 400 are genuine prophets of the Lord. 11tn Heb “to seek the Lord from him.” 12tn Or “hate.” 13tn Heb “all his days.” 14tn The words “his name is” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons. 15tn Heb “at,” which in this case probably means “near.” 16tn Heb “the words of the prophets are [with] one mouth good for the king.” 17tn Heb “let your words be like one of them and speak good.” 18tn Heb “he”; the referent (Micaiah) has been specified in the translation both for clarity and for stylistic reasons. 19sn One does not expect Micaiah, having just vowed to speak only what the Lord tells him, to agree with the other prophets and give the king an inaccurate prophecy. Micaiah’s actions became understandable later, when we discover that the Lord desires to deceive the king and lead him to his demise. The Lord even dispatches a lying spirit to deceive Ahab’s prophets. Micaiah can lie to the king because he realizes this lie is from the Lord. It is important to note that in v. 13 Micaiah only vows to speak the word of his God; he does not necessarily say he will tell the truth. In this case the Lord’s word is deliberately deceptive. Only when the king adjures him to tell the truth (v. 15), does Micaiah do so. 20tn Or “swear an oath by.” 21tn Heb “he”; the referent (Micaiah) has been specified in the translation for clarity. 22tn Heb “he”; the referent (Micaiah) has been specified in the translation for clarity. 23tn Heb “the spirit.” The significance of the article prefixed to רוּחַ (ruakh) is uncertain, but it could contain a clue as to this spirit’s identity, especially when interpreted in light of verse 23. It is certainly possible, and probably even likely, that the article is used in a generic or dramatic sense and should be translated, “a spirit.” In the latter case it would show that this spirit was vivid and definite in the mind of Micaiah the storyteller. However, if one insists that the article indicates a well-known or universally known spirit, the following context provides a likely referent. Verse 23 tells how Zedekiah slapped Micaiah in the face and then asked sarcastically, “Which way did the spirit from the Lord (רוּחַ־יְהוָה, ruakh-y˙hvah) go when he went from me to speak to you?” When the phrase “the spirit of the Lord” refers to the divine spirit (rather than the divine breath or mind, as in Isa 40:7, 13) elsewhere, the spirit energizes an individual or group for special tasks or moves one to prophesy. This raises the possibility that the deceiving spirit of vv. 20-22 is the same as the divine spirit mentioned by Zedekiah in v. 23. This would explain why the article is used on רוּחַ (ruakh); he can be called “the spirit” because he is the well-known spirit who energizes the prophets. 24tn Heb “he”; the referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity. 25tn The Hebrew text has two imperfects connected by וְגַם (v˙gam). These verbs could be translated as specific futures, “you will deceive and also you will prevail,” in which case the Lord is assuring the spirit of success on his mission. However, in a commissioning context (note the following imperatives) such as this, it is more likely that the imperfects are injunctive, in which case one could translate, “Deceive, and also overpower.” 26tn Heb “the bread of affliction and the water of affliction.” 27tn Heb “Listen.” 28tn The Hebrew verbal forms could be imperatives (“Disguise yourself and enter”), but this would make no sense in light of the immediately following context. The forms are better interpreted as infinitives absolute functioning as cohortatives (see IBHS 594 §35.5.2a). Some prefer to emend the forms to imperfects. 29tn Heb “small or great.” 30tn Heb “now a man drew a bow in his innocence” (i.e., with no specific target in mind, or at least without realizing his target was the king of Israel). 31tn Heb “he”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity. 32tn Heb “camp.”
1tn Heb “at the end of years.”
2tn The word “visit” is supplied in the translation for clarity and for stylistic reasons.
3map For location see Map2-B1; Map4-D3; Map5-E2; Map6-A4; Map7-C1.
4tn Heb “and Ahab slaughtered for him sheep and cattle in abundance, and for the people who were with him.”
5tn Heb “to go up.”
6tn Heb “Like me, like you; and like your people, my people; and with you in battle.”
7tn Heb “and Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel.”
8tn Heb “the word of the Lord.” Jehoshaphat is requesting a prophetic oracle revealing the Lord’s will in the matter and their prospects for success. For examples of such oracles, see 2 Sam 5:19, 23-24.
9tn Heb “Should we go against Ramoth Gilead for war or should I refrain?”
10tn Though Jehoshaphat had requested an oracle from “the Lord” (יְהוָה, y˙hvah, “Yahweh”), the Israelite prophets stop short of actually using this name and substitute the title הָאֱלֹהִים (ha’elohim, “the God”). This ambiguity may explain in part Jehoshaphat’s hesitancy and caution (vv. 7-8). He seems to doubt that the 400 are genuine prophets of the Lord.
11tn Heb “to seek the Lord from him.”
12tn Or “hate.”
13tn Heb “all his days.”
14tn The words “his name is” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
15tn Heb “at,” which in this case probably means “near.”
16tn Heb “the words of the prophets are [with] one mouth good for the king.”
17tn Heb “let your words be like one of them and speak good.”
18tn Heb “he”; the referent (Micaiah) has been specified in the translation both for clarity and for stylistic reasons.
19sn One does not expect Micaiah, having just vowed to speak only what the Lord tells him, to agree with the other prophets and give the king an inaccurate prophecy. Micaiah’s actions became understandable later, when we discover that the Lord desires to deceive the king and lead him to his demise. The Lord even dispatches a lying spirit to deceive Ahab’s prophets. Micaiah can lie to the king because he realizes this lie is from the Lord. It is important to note that in v. 13 Micaiah only vows to speak the word of his God; he does not necessarily say he will tell the truth. In this case the Lord’s word is deliberately deceptive. Only when the king adjures him to tell the truth (v. 15), does Micaiah do so.
20tn Or “swear an oath by.”
21tn Heb “he”; the referent (Micaiah) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
22tn Heb “he”; the referent (Micaiah) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
23tn Heb “the spirit.” The significance of the article prefixed to רוּחַ (ruakh) is uncertain, but it could contain a clue as to this spirit’s identity, especially when interpreted in light of verse 23. It is certainly possible, and probably even likely, that the article is used in a generic or dramatic sense and should be translated, “a spirit.” In the latter case it would show that this spirit was vivid and definite in the mind of Micaiah the storyteller. However, if one insists that the article indicates a well-known or universally known spirit, the following context provides a likely referent. Verse 23 tells how Zedekiah slapped Micaiah in the face and then asked sarcastically, “Which way did the spirit from the Lord (רוּחַ־יְהוָה, ruakh-y˙hvah) go when he went from me to speak to you?” When the phrase “the spirit of the Lord” refers to the divine spirit (rather than the divine breath or mind, as in Isa 40:7, 13) elsewhere, the spirit energizes an individual or group for special tasks or moves one to prophesy. This raises the possibility that the deceiving spirit of vv. 20-22 is the same as the divine spirit mentioned by Zedekiah in v. 23. This would explain why the article is used on רוּחַ (ruakh); he can be called “the spirit” because he is the well-known spirit who energizes the prophets.
24tn Heb “he”; the referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
25tn The Hebrew text has two imperfects connected by וְגַם (v˙gam). These verbs could be translated as specific futures, “you will deceive and also you will prevail,” in which case the Lord is assuring the spirit of success on his mission. However, in a commissioning context (note the following imperatives) such as this, it is more likely that the imperfects are injunctive, in which case one could translate, “Deceive, and also overpower.”
26tn Heb “the bread of affliction and the water of affliction.”
27tn Heb “Listen.”
28tn The Hebrew verbal forms could be imperatives (“Disguise yourself and enter”), but this would make no sense in light of the immediately following context. The forms are better interpreted as infinitives absolute functioning as cohortatives (see IBHS 594 §35.5.2a). Some prefer to emend the forms to imperfects.
29tn Heb “small or great.”
30tn Heb “now a man drew a bow in his innocence” (i.e., with no specific target in mind, or at least without realizing his target was the king of Israel).
31tn Heb “he”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
32tn Heb “camp.”