(1.00) | (Pro 31:17) | 1 tn The first word of the eighth line begins with ח (khet), the eighth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. |
(0.86) | (2Pe 2:5) | 1 tn “Along with seven others” is implied in the cryptic, “the eighth, Noah.” A more literal translation thus would be, “he did protect Noah [as] the eighth…” |
(0.81) | (2Ki 24:12) | 2 sn That is, the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, 597 b.c. |
(0.81) | (1Ki 12:32) | 1 sn The eighth month would correspond to October-November in modern reckoning. |
(0.81) | (1Ki 8:66) | 1 tn Heb “on the eighth day” (that is, the day after the second seven-day sequence). |
(0.71) | (Neh 8:18) | 3 tn Heb “on the eighth day an assembly.” The words “they held” have been supplied in the translation for clarity. |
(0.71) | (Lev 9:1) | 1 sn This eighth day is the one after the seven days of ordination referred to in Lev 8:33-35. |
(0.61) | (Luk 1:59) | 2 sn They were following OT law (Lev 12:3) which prescribed that a male child was to be circumcised on the eighth day. |
(0.61) | (Luk 1:5) | 4 sn There were twenty-four divisions of priesthood and the priestly division of Abijah was eighth on the list according to 1 Chr 24:10. |
(0.61) | (1Ki 15:8) | 1 tn Heb “lay down with his fathers.” The Old Greek also has these words: “in the twenty-eighth year of Jeroboam.” |
(0.57) | (Act 7:8) | 4 tn Grk “circumcised him on the eighth day,” but many modern readers will not understand that this procedure was done on the eighth day after birth. The temporal clause “when he was eight days old” conveys this idea more clearly. See Gen 17:11-12. |
(0.51) | (Joh 7:22) | 2 tn Grk “a man.” While the text literally reads “circumcise a man” in actual fact the practice of circumcising male infants on the eighth day after birth (see Phil 3:5) is primarily what is in view here. |
(0.40) | (Zec 1:1) | 2 sn The eighth month of Darius’ second year was late October—late November, 520 b.c., by the modern (Julian) calendar. This is two months later than the date of Haggai’s first message to the same community (cf. Hag 1:1). |
(0.40) | (Pro 23:8) | 2 sn This is the eighth saying; it claims that it would be a mistake to accept hospitality from a stingy person. He is always thinking about the cost, his heart is not in it, and any attempt at pleasant conversation will be lost. |
(0.36) | (Joh 7:37) | 1 sn There is a problem with the identification of this reference to the last day of the feast, the greatest day: It appears from Deut 16:13 that the feast went for seven days. Lev 23:36, however, makes it plain that there was an eighth day, though it was mentioned separately from the seven. It is not completely clear whether the seventh or eighth day was the climax of the feast, called here by the author the “last great day of the feast.” Since according to the Mishnah (m. Sukkah 4.1) the ceremonies with water and lights did not continue after the seventh day, it seems more probable that this is the day the author mentions. |
(0.25) | (Joh 7:23) | 3 sn If a male child is circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses is not broken. The Rabbis counted 248 parts to a man’s body. In the Talmud (b. Yoma 85b) R. Eleazar ben Azariah (ca. a.d. 100) states: “If circumcision, which attaches to one only of the 248 members of the human body, suspends the Sabbath, how much more shall the saving of the whole body suspend the Sabbath?” So absolutely binding did rabbinic Judaism regard the command of Lev 12:3 to circumcise on the eighth day, that in the Mishnah m. Shabbat 18.3; 19.1, 2; and m. Nedarim 3.11 all hold that the command to circumcise overrides the command to observe the Sabbath. |
(0.25) | (Amo 1:3) | 2 sn The three…four style introduces each of the judgment oracles of chaps. 1-2. Based on the use of a similar formula in wisdom literature (see Prov 30:18-19, 29-31), one expects to find in each case a list of four specific violations. However, only in the eighth oracle (against Israel) does one find the expected fourfold list. Through this adaptation and alteration of the normal pattern the Lord indicates that his focus is Israel (he is too bent on judging Israel to dwell very long on her neighbors) and he emphasizes Israel’s guilt with respect to the other nations. (Israel’s list fills up before the others’ lists do.) See R. B. Chisholm, “For Three Sins…Even for Four: The Numerical Sayings in Amos,” BSac 147 (1990): 188-97. |
(0.25) | (Jer 30:3) | 4 sn As the nations of Israel and Judah were united in their sin and suffered the same fate—that of exile and dispersion—(cf. Jer 3:8; 5:11; 11:10, 17), so they will ultimately be regathered from the nations and rejoined under one king, a descendant of David; and will regain possession of their ancestral lands. The prophets of both the eighth and seventh century looked forward to this ideal (see, e.g., Hos 1:11 (2:2 HT); Isa 11:11-13; Jer 23:5-6; 30:3; 33:7; Ezek 37:15-22). This has already been anticipated in Jer 3:18. |
(0.25) | (Isa 1:23) | 6 sn The rich oppressors referred to in Isaiah and the other eighth-century prophets were not rich capitalists in the modern sense of the word. They were members of the royal military and judicial bureaucracies in Israel and Judah. As these bureaucracies grew, they acquired more and more land and gradually commandeered the economy and legal system. At various administrative levels bribery and graft become commonplace. The common people outside the urban administrative centers were vulnerable to exploitation in such a system, especially those, like widows and orphans, who had lost their family provider through death. Through confiscatory taxation, conscription, excessive interest rates, and other oppressive governmental measures and policies, they were gradually disenfranchised and lost their landed property, and with it, their rights as citizens. The socio-economic equilibrium envisioned in the law of Moses was radically disturbed. |
(0.25) | (Psa 126:1) | 3 tn Heb “turns with a turning [toward] Zion.” The Hebrew noun שִׁיבַת (shivat) occurs only here in the OT. For this reason many prefer to emend the form to the more common שְׁבִית (shevit) or שְׁבוּת (shevut), both of which are used as a cognate accusative of שׁוּב (shuv; see Ps 14:7). However an Aramaic cognate of שְׁבִית appears in an eighth century b.c. Old Aramaic inscription with the verb שׁוּב. This cognate noun appears to mean “return” (see J. Fitzmyer, The Aramaic Treaties of Sefire [BibOr], 119-20) or “restoration” (see DNWSI 2:1125). Therefore it appears that שְׁבִית should be retained and understood as a cognate accusative of שׁוּב. In addition to Fitzmyer (119-20) see L. C. Allen, who offers the literal translation, “turn with a turning toward” (Psalms 101-150 [WBC], 170). Allen takes שְׁבִית as construct and understands “Zion” as an objective genitive. |