Results 201 - 220 of 374 for accountable (0.000 seconds)
(0.22)(Joh 9:5)

sn Jesus&#8217; statement <i>I am the light of the worldi> connects the present account with 8:12. Here (seen more clearly than at 8:12) it is obvious what the author sees as the significance of Jesus&#8217; statement. &#8220;Light&#8221; is not a metaphysical definition of the person of Jesus but a description of his effect on the world, forcing everyone in the world to &#8216;choose up sides&#8217; for or against him (cf. 3:19-21).

(0.22)(Joh 19:40)

tn The Fourth Gospel uses <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#8000;&#952;&#959;&#957;&#943;&#959;&#953;&#962;font> (<font face="Greektl">oqonioi&quot;font>) to describe the wrappings, and this has caused a good deal of debate, since it appears to contradict the synoptic accounts which mention a <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#963;&#953;&#957;&#948;&#8061;&#957;font> (<font face="Greektl">sindwnfont>), a large single piece of linen cloth. If one understands <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#8000;&#952;&#959;&#957;&#943;&#959;&#953;&#962;font> to refer to smaller strips of cloth, like bandages, there would be a difference, but diminutive forms have often lost their diminutive force in Koine Greek (BDF &#167;111.3), so there may not be any difference.

(0.22)(Act 18:6)

sn <i>He protested by shaking out his clothes.i> A symbolic action of protest, similar but not identical to the practice of shaking the dust off one&#8217;s feet (see Acts 13:51). The two symbolic actions are related, however, since what is shaken off here is the dust raised by the feet and settling in the clothes. The meaning is, &#8220;I am done with you! You are accountable to God.&#8221;

(0.22)(Act 22:13)

tn <i>Grki> &#8220;hour,&#8221; but <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#8037;&#961;&#945;font> (<font face="Greektl">Jwrafont>) is often used for indefinite short periods of time (so BDAG 1102-3 s.v. <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#8037;&#961;&#945;font> 2.c: &#8220;<font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#945;&#8016;&#964;&#8135; &#964;&#8135; &#8037;&#961;&#8115;font> <i>at that very time, at once, instantlyi>&#8230;Lk 2:38, 24:33; Ac 16:18; 22:13&#8221;). A comparison with the account in Acts 9:18 indicates that this is clearly the meaning here.

(0.22)(Rom 4:19)

tc &#8225; Most witnesses (<font face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">&#1488;font> A C D <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#936;font> 33 <font face="Greek Uncials">&#207;font> bo) have <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#7972;&#948;&#951;font> (<font face="Greektl">hdhfont>, &#8220;already&#8221;) at this point in v. 19. But B F G 630 1739 1881 <i>pci> lat sa lack it. Since it appears to heighten the style of the narrative and since there is no easy accounting for an accidental omission, it is best to regard the shorter text as original. NA<sup>27sup> includes the word in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.

(0.22)(Rom 9:28)

tn There is a wordplay in Greek (in both the LXX and here) on the phrase translated &#8220;completely and quickly&#8221; (<font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#963;&#965;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#955;&#8182;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#963;&#965;&#957;&#964;&#941;&#956;&#957;&#969;&#957;font>, <font face="Greektl">suntelwn kai suntemnwnfont>). These participles are translated as adverbs for smoothness; a more literal (and more cumbersome) rendering would be: &#8220;The Lord will act by closing the account [or completing the sentence], and by cutting short the time.&#8221; The interpretation of this text is notoriously difficult. Cf. BDAG 975 s.v. <font face="Galaxie Unicode Greek">&#963;&#965;&#957;&#964;&#941;&#956;&#957;&#969;font>.

(0.22)(2Sa 1:10)

sn The claims that the soldier is making here seem to contradict the story of Saul&#8217;s death as presented in 1 Sam 31:3-5. In that passage it appears that Saul took his own life, not that he was slain by a passerby who happened on the scene. Some scholars account for the discrepancy by supposing that conflicting accounts have been brought together in the MT. However, it is likely that the young man is here fabricating the account in a self-serving way so as to gain favor with David, or so he supposes. He probably had come across Saul&#8217;s corpse, stolen the crown and bracelet from the body, and now hopes to curry favor with David by handing over to him these emblems of Saul&#8217;s royalty. But in so doing the Amalekite greatly miscalculated David&#8217;s response to this alleged participation in Saul&#8217;s death. The consequence of his lies will instead be his own death.

(0.22)(Act 12:23)

sn <i>He was eaten by worms and died.i> Josephus, <i>Ant.i> 19.8.2 (19.343-352), states that Herod Agrippa I died at Caesarea in <sc>> 44. The account by Josephus, while not identical to Luke&#8217;s account, is similar in many respects: On the second day of a festival, Herod Agrippa appeared in the theater with a robe made of silver. When it sparkled in the sun, the people cried out flatteries and declared him to be a god. The king, carried away by the flattery, saw an owl (an omen of death) sitting on a nearby rope, and immediately was struck with severe stomach pains. He was carried off to his house and died five days later. The two accounts can be reconciled without difficulty, since while Luke states that Herod was immediately struck down by an angel, his death could have come several days later. The mention of <i>wormsi> with death adds a humiliating note to the scene. The formerly powerful ruler had been thoroughly reduced to nothing (cf. Jdt 16:17; 2 Macc 9:9; cf. also Josephus, <i>Ant.i> 17.6.5 [17.168-170], which details the sickness which led to Herod the Great&#8217;s death).

(0.21)(Exo 2:3)

sn The circumstances of the saving of the child Moses have prompted several attempts by scholars to compare the material to the Sargon myth. See R. F. Johnson, <i>IDBi> 3:440-50; for the text see L. W. King, <i>Chronicles concerning Early Babylonian Kingsi>, 2:87-90. Those who see the narrative using the Sargon story&#8217;s pattern would be saying that the account presents Moses in imagery common to the ancient world&#8217;s expectations of extraordinary achievement and deliverance. In the Sargon story the infant&#8217;s mother set him adrift in a basket in a river; he was loved by the gods and destined for greatness. Saying Israel used this to invent the account in Exodus would undermine its reliability. But there are other difficulties with the Sargon comparison, not the least of which is the fact that the meaning and function of the Sargon story are unclear. Second, there is no outside threat to the child Sargon. The account simply shows how a child was exposed, rescued, nurtured, and became king (see B. S. Childs, <i>Exodusi> [OTL], 8-12). Third, other details do not fit: Moses&#8217; father is known, Sargon&#8217;s is not; Moses is never abandoned, since he is never out of the care of his parents, and the finder is a princess and not a goddess. Moreover, without knowing the precise function and meaning of the Sargon story, it is almost impossible to explain its use as a pattern for the biblical account. By itself, the idea of a mother putting a child by the river if she wants him to be found would have been fairly sensible, for that is where the women of the town would be washing their clothes or bathing. If someone wanted to be sure the infant was discovered by a sympathetic woman, there would be no better setting (see R. A. Cole, <i>Exodusi> [TOTC], 57). While there need not be a special genre of storytelling here, it is possible that Exodus 2 might have drawn on some of the motifs and forms of the other account to describe the actual event in the sparing of Moses &#8211; if they knew of it. If so it would show that Moses was cast in the form of the greats of the past.

(0.19)(Exo 16:12)

sn One of the major interpretive difficulties is the comparison between Exod 16 and Num 11. In Numbers we find that the giving of the manna was about 24 months after the Exod 16 time (assuming there was a distinct time for this chapter), that it was after the erection of the tabernacle, that <i>Taberahi> (the Burning) preceded it (not in Exod 16), that the people were tired of the manna (not that there was no bread to eat) and so God would send the quail, and that there was a severe tragedy over it. In Exod 16 both the manna and the quail are given on the same day, with no mention of quail on the following days. Contemporary scholarship generally assigns the accounts to two different sources because complete reconciliation seems impossible. Even if we argue that Exodus has a thematic arrangement and &#8220;telescopes&#8221; some things to make a point, there will still be difficulties in harmonization. Two considerations must be kept in mind: 1) First, they could be separate events entirely. If this is true, then they should be treated separately as valid accounts of things that appeared or occurred during the period of the wanderings. Similar things need not be the same thing. 2) Secondly, strict chronological order is not always maintained in the Bible narratives, especially if it is a didactic section. Perhaps Exod 16 describes the initiation of the giving of manna as God&#8217;s provision of bread, and therefore placed in the prologue of the covenant, and Num 11 is an account of a mood which developed over a period of time in response to the manna. Num 11 would then be looking back from a different perspective.

(0.19)(Gen 11:9)

sn <i>Babeli>. Here is the climax of the account, a parody on the pride of Babylon. In the Babylonian literature the name <font face="Scholar">bab-ilifont> meant &#8220;the gate of God,&#8221; but in Hebrew it sounds like the word for &#8220;confusion,&#8221; and so retained that connotation. The name &#8220;Babel&#8221; (<font face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">&#1489;&#1468;&#1464;&#1489;&#1462;&#1500;font>, <font face="Scholar">bavelfont>) and the verb translated &#8220;confused&#8221; (<font face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">&#1489;&#1468;&#1464;&#1500;&#1463;&#1500;font>, <font face="Scholar">balalfont>) form a paronomasia (sound play). For the many wordplays and other rhetorical devices in Genesis, see J. P. Fokkelman, <i>Narrative Art in Genesisi> (SSN).

(0.19)(Gen 14:4)

sn The story serves as a foreshadowing of the plight of the kingdom of Israel later. Eastern powers came and forced the western kingdoms into submission. Each year, then, they would send tribute east &#8211; to keep them away. Here, in the thirteenth year, they refused to send the tribute (just as later Hezekiah rebelled against Assyria). And so in the fourteenth year the eastern powers came to put them down again. This account from Abram&#8217;s life taught future generations that God can give victory over such threats &#8211; that people did not have to live in servitude to tyrants from the east.

(0.19)(Gen 29:23)

sn <i>His daughter Leahi>. Laban&#8217;s deception of Jacob by giving him the older daughter instead of the younger was God&#8217;s way of disciplining the deceiver who tricked his older brother. D. Kidner says this account is &#8220;the very embodiment of anti-climax, and this moment a miniature of man&#8217;s disillusion, experienced from Eden onwards&#8221; (<i>Genesisi> [TOTC]<i>,i> 160). G. von Rad notes, &#8220;That Laban secretly gave the unloved Leah to the man in love was, to be sure, a monstrous blow, a masterpiece of shameless treachery&#8230;It was certainly a move by which he won for himself far and wide the coarsest laughter&#8221; (<i>Genesisi> [OTL], 291).

(0.19)(Gen 41:45)

sn The name <i>Asenathi> may mean &#8220;she belongs to the goddess Neit&#8221; (see <i>HALOTi> 74 s.v. <font face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">&#1488;&#1469;&#1464;&#1505;&#1456;&#1504;&#1463;&#1514;font>). A novel was written at the beginning of the first century entitled <i>Joseph and Asenathi>, which included a legendary account of the conversion of Asenath to Joseph&#8217;s faith in Yahweh. However, all that can be determined from this chapter is that their children received Hebrew names. See also V. Aptowitzer, &#8220;Asenath, the Wife of Joseph &#8211; a Haggadic Literary-Historical Study,&#8221; <i>HUCAi> 1 (1924): 239-306.

(0.19)(Exo 17:16)

sn The message of this short narrative, then, concerns the power of God to protect his people. The account includes the difficulty, the victory, and the commemoration. The victory must be retained in memory by the commemoration. So the expositional idea could focus on that: The people of God must recognize (both for engaging in warfare and for praise afterward) that victory comes only with the power of God. In the NT the issue is even more urgent, because the warfare is spiritual &#8211; believers do not wrestle against flesh and blood. So only God&#8217;s power will bring victory.

(0.19)(Exo 25:9)

sn Among the many helpful studies on the tabernacle, include S. M. Fish, &#8220;And They Shall Build Me a Sanctuary,&#8221; <i>Gratz College of Jewish Studiesi> 2 (1973): 43-59; I. Hart, &#8220;Preaching on the Account of the Tabernacle,&#8221; <i>EvQi> 54 (1982): 111-16; D. Skinner, &#8220;Some Major Themes of Exodus,&#8221; <i>Mid-America Theological Journali> 1 (1977): 31-42; S. McEvenue, &#8220;The Style of Building Instructions,&#8221; <i>Semi> 4 (1974): 1-9; M. Ben-Uri, &#8220;The Mosaic Building Code,&#8221; <i>Creation Research Society Quarterlyi> 19 (1982): 36-39.

(0.19)(Exo 25:20)

tn The verb means &#8220;overshadowing, screening&#8221; in the sense of guarding (see 1 Kgs 8:7; 1 Chr 28:18; see also the account in Gen 3:24). The cherubim then signify two things here: by their outstretched wings they form the throne of God who sits above the ark (with the Law under his feet), and by their overshadowing and guarding they signify this as the place of atonement where people must find propitiation to commune with God. Until then they are barred from his presence. See U. Cassuto, <i>Exodusi>, 330-35.

(0.19)(Lev 4:26)

tn <i>Hebi> &#8220;from.&#8221; In this phrase the preposition <font face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">&#1502;&#1460;&#1503;font> (<font face="Scholar">minfont>) may be referring to the reason or cause (&#8220;on account of, because of&#8221;; GKC 383 &#167;119.<i>zi>). As J. E. Hartley (<i>Leviticusi> [WBC], 47) points out, &#8220;from&#8221; may refer to the removal of the sin, but is an awkward expression. Hartley also suggests that the phrasing might be &#8220;an elliptical expression for <font face="Galaxie Unicode Hebrew">&#1497;&#1456;&#1499;&#1463;&#1508;&#1468;&#1461;&#1512; &#1506;&#1463;&#1500;&#1470;&#1500;&#1456;&#1496;&#1463;&#1492;&#1461;&#1512; &#1488;&#1462;&#1514;&#1470;&#1502;&#1460;&#1503;font>, &#8216;he will make expiation for&#8230;to cleanse&#8230;from&#8230;,&#8217; as in 16:30.&#8221;

(0.19)(Num 16:1)

sn There are three main movements in the story of ch. 16. The first is the rebellion itself (vv. 1-19). The second is the judgment (vv. 20-35). Third is the atonement for the rebels (vv. 36-50). The whole chapter is a marvelous account of a massive rebellion against the leaders that concludes with reconciliation. For further study see G. Hort, &#8220;The Death of Qorah,&#8221; <i>ABRi> 7 (1959): 2-26; and J. Liver, &#8220;Korah, Dathan and Abiram,&#8221; <i>Studiesi> <i>in the Biblei> (ScrHier 8), 189-217.

(0.19)(Num 20:1)

sn This chapter is the account of how Moses struck the rock in disobedience to the <sc>Lordsc>, and thereby was prohibited from entering the land. For additional literature on this part, see E. Arden, &#8220;How Moses Failed God,&#8221; <i>JBLi> 76 (1957): 50-52; J. Gray, &#8220;The Desert Sojourn of the Hebrews and the Sinai Horeb Tradition,&#8221; <i>VTi> 4 (1954): 148-54; T. W. Mann, &#8220;Theological Reflections on the Denial of Moses,&#8221; <i>JBLi> 98 (1979): 481-94; and J. R. Porter, &#8220;The Role of Kadesh-Barnea in the Narrative of the Exodus,&#8221; <i>JTSi> 44 (1943): 130-43.