Bilangan 31:8

31:8 They killed the kings of Midian in addition to those slain – Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba – five Midianite kings. ¹  They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. ² 

Bilangan 31:2

31:2 “Exact vengeance ³  for the Israelites on the Midianites ⁴  – after that you will be gathered to your people.” ⁵ 

Pengkhotbah 2:15

2:15 So I thought to myself, “The fate of the fool will happen even to me! ⁶ 

Then what did I gain by becoming so excessively ⁷  wise?” ⁸ 

So I lamented to myself, ⁹ 

“The benefits of wisdom ¹⁰  are ultimately ¹¹  meaningless!”

Yudas 1:11

1:11 Woe to them! For they have traveled down Cain’s path, ¹²  and because of greed ¹³  have abandoned themselves ¹⁴  to ¹⁵  Balaam’s error; hence, ¹⁶  they will certainly perish ¹⁷  in Korah’s rebellion.

[31:8]  ¹ sn Here again we see that there was no unified empire, but Midianite tribal groups.

[31:8]  ² sn And what was Balaam doing among the Midianites? The implication is strong. This pagan diviner had to submit to the revealed will of God in the oracles, but he nonetheless could be hired. He had been a part of the attempt to destroy Israel that failed; he then apparently became part of the plan, if not the adviser, to destroy them with sexual immorality and pagan ritual.

[31:2]  ³ tn The imperative is followed by its cognate accusative to stress this vengeance. The Midianites had attempted to destroy Israel with their corrupt pagan practices, and now will be judged. The accounts indicate that the effort by Midian was calculated and evil.

[31:2]  ⁴ sn The war was commanded by the Lord and was to be divine vengeance on the Midianites. So it was holy war. No Israelites then could take spoils in this – it was not a time for plunder and aggrandizement. It was part of the judgment of God upon those who would destroy or pervert his plan and his people.

[31:2]  ⁵ sn This would be the last major enterprise that Moses would have to undertake. He would soon die and “be gathered to his people” as Aaron was.

[2:15]  ⁶ tn The emphatic use of the 1st person common singular personal pronoun אֲנִי (’ani, “me”) with the emphatic particle of association גַּם (gam, “even, as well as”; HALOT 195–96 s.v. גַּם) appears to emphasize the 1st person common singular suffix on יִקְרֵנִי (yiqreni) “it will befall [or “happen to”] me” (Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular + 1st person common singular suffix from קָרָה, qarah, “to befall; to happen to”); see GKC 438 §135.e. Qoheleth laments not that the fate of the wise man is the same as that of the fool, but that even he himself – the wisest man of all – would fare no better in the end than the most foolish.

[2:15]  ⁷ tn The adjective יוֹתֵר (yoter) means “too much; excessive,” e.g., 7:16 “excessively righteous” (HALOT 404 s.v. יוֹתֵר 2; BDB 452 s.v. יוֹתֵר). It is derived from the root יֶתֶר (yeter, “what is left over”); see HALOT 452 s.v. I יֶתֶר. It is related to the verbal root יתר (Niphal “to be left over”; Hiphil “to have left over”); see HALOT 451–52 s.v. I יתר. The adjective is related to יִתְרוֹן (yitron, “advantage; profit”) which is a key-term in this section, creating a word-play: The wise man has a relative “advantage” (יִתְרוֹן) over the fool (2:13-14a); however, there is no ultimate advantage because both share the same fate, i.e., death (2:14b-15a). Thus, Qoheleth’s acquisition of tremendous wisdom (1:16; 2:9) was “excessive” because it exceeded its relative advantage over folly: it could not deliver him from the same fate as the fool. He had striven to obtain wisdom, yet it held no ultimate advantage.

[2:15]  ⁸ tn Heb “And why was I wise (to) excess?” The rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “I gained nothing!” (E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949).

[2:15]  ⁹ tn Heb “So I said in my heart.”

[2:15]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “and also this,” referring to the relative advantage of wisdom over folly.

[2:15]  ¹¹ tn The word “ultimately” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[1:11]  ¹² tn Or “they have gone the way of Cain.”

[1:11]  ¹³ tn Grk “for wages.”

[1:11]  ¹⁴ tn The verb ἐκχέω (ekcew) normally means “pour out.” Here, in the passive, it occasionally has a reflexive idea, as BDAG 312 s.v. 3. suggests (with extra-biblical examples).

[1:11]  ¹⁵ tn Or “in.”

[1:11]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “and.” See note on “perish” later in this verse.

[1:11]  ¹⁷ tn The three verbs in this verse are all aorist indicative (“have gone down,” “have abandoned,” “have perished”). Although the first and second could be considered constative or ingressive, the last is almost surely proleptic (referring to the certainty of their future judgment). Although it may seem odd that a proleptic aorist is so casually connected to other aorists with a different syntactical force, it is not unparalleled (cf. Rom 8:30).