Judges 13:10

“And the woman made haste, and ran, etc.] It is not improbable what Josephus says f268, that she entreated the angel to stay a little till she fetched her husband, which he assented to, and then made all the haste she could to him, partly through eagerness to acquaint him with it, and partly that she might not make the prophet she took him to be wait too long: and showed her husband; that his prayer was heard: and said unto him, behold, the man hath appeared unto me that came unto me the [other] day; or, as the Targum, “this day”; so Kimchi and Ben Melech; for the word “other” is not in the text. It is very probable it was the same day he came again he had appeared to her; perhaps it was in…”

“Behold: Joh 1:41, Joh 1:42, Joh 4:28, Joh 4:29 the other day: Byyom, rather, "in this day," or "to-day," for the word other is not in the original, and it is probably that the angel appeared in the morning and evening of the same day. Judges 13:12”

“Then she hastened to fetch her husband, who first of all inquired of the person who had appeared, "Art thou the man who said to the woman" (sc., what has been related in Jdg 13:3-5)? And when this was answered in the affirmative, he said still further ( Jdg 13:12), "Should thy word then come to pass, what will be the manner of the boy, and his doing?" The plural דּבריך is construed ad sensum with the singular verb, because the words form one promise, so that the expression is not to be taken distributively, as Rosenmller supposes. This also applies to Jdg 13:17, Mishpat, the right belonging to a boy, i.e., the proper treatment of him. Judges 13:13”