Discovery Box| (0.22) | (1Ki 20:28) | 1 tn Heb “the man of God.” |
| (0.22) | (1Ki 19:14) | 2 tn Traditionally, “the God of hosts.” |
| (0.22) | (1Ki 19:10) | 2 tn Traditionally, “the God of hosts.” |
| (0.22) | (1Ki 13:26) | 2 tn Heb “the man of God.” |
| (0.22) | (1Ki 13:29) | 2 tn Heb “the man of God.” |
| (0.22) | (1Ki 13:31) | 1 tn Heb “the man of God.” |
| (0.22) | (Jdg 18:31) | 3 tn Heb “the house of God.” |
| (0.22) | (Jdg 13:8) | 2 tn Heb “the man of God.” |
| (0.22) | (Jdg 13:6) | 1 tn Heb “The man of God.” |
| (0.22) | (Psa 98:3) | 2 tn Heb “the deliverance of our God,” with “God” being a subjective genitive (= God delivers). |
| (0.22) | (Psa 69:9) | 3 sn God’s house, the temple, here represents by metonymy God himself. |
| (0.22) | (Nah 3:16) | 1 tn Or “Increase!” or “You have increased.” The form and meaning of the MT perfect tense verb הִרְבֵּית (hirbet; from רָבָה [ravah], “to increase”) is debated. The LXX translated it as a simple past meaning. However, some scholars argue for an imperatival form or an imperatival nuance due to the presence of the two preceding volitive forms: הִתְכַּבֵּד (hitkabbed) and הִתְכַּבְּדִי (hitkabbedi, “Multiply…multiply!”). For example, the editors of BHS propose emending the perfect tense הִרְבֵּית to the imperative form הַרְבִי (harvi, “multiply!”). K. J. Cathcart (Nahum in the Light of Northwest Semitic [BibOr], 145) retains the MT perfect form but classifies it as a precative perfect with an imperatival nuance (“increase!”). Some scholars deny the existence of the precative perfect in Hebrew (G. R. Driver, Tenses in Hebrew, 25-26); however, others argue for its existence (IBHS 494-95 §30.5.4). |
| (0.21) | (Jdg 10:6) | 5 tn Heb “the gods of Syria, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the Ammonites, and the gods of the Philistines.” |
| (0.21) | (Jam 2:18) | 1 tn There is considerable doubt about where the words of the “someone” end and where James’ reply begins. Some see the quotation running to the end of v. 18; others to the end of v. 19. But most punctuate as shown above. The “someone” is then an objector, and the sense of his words is something like, “Some have faith; others have works; don’t expect everyone to have both.” James’ reply is that faith cannot exist or be seen without works. |
| (0.21) | (Heb 8:5) | 3 tn The word τύπος (tupos) here has the meaning “an archetype serving as a model, type, pattern, model” (BDAG 1020 s.v. 6.a). This is in keeping with the horizontal imagery accepted for this verse (see sn on “sketch” earlier in the verse). Here Moses was shown the future heavenly sanctuary which, though it did not yet exist, became the outline for the earthly sanctuary. |
| (0.21) | (Gal 3:20) | 1 tn The meaning of this verse is disputed. According to BDAG 634 s.v. μεσίτης, “It prob. means that the activity of an intermediary implies the existence of more than one party, and hence may be unsatisfactory because it must result in a compromise. The presence of an intermediary would prevent attainment, without any impediment, of the purpose of the εἶς θεός in giving the law.” See also A. Oepke, TDNT 4:598-624, esp. 618-19. |
| (0.21) | (Luk 11:3) | 1 tn Or “Give us bread each day for the coming day,” or “Give us each day the bread we need for today.” The term ἐπιούσιος (epiousios) does not occur outside of early Christian literature (other occurrences are in Matt 6:11 and Didache 8:2), so its meaning is difficult to determine. Various suggestions include “daily,” “the coming day,” and “for existence.” See BDAG 376 s.v.; L&N 67:183, 206. |
| (0.21) | (Luk 1:1) | 2 tn This is sometimes translated “narrative,” but the term itself can refer to an oral or written account. It is the verb “undertaken” which suggests a written account, since it literally is “to set one’s hand” to something (BDAG 386 s.v. ἐπιχειρέω). “Narrative” is too specific, denoting a particular genre of work for the accounts that existed in the earlier tradition. Not all of that material would have been narrative. |
| (0.21) | (Mat 6:11) | 1 tn Or “Give us bread today for the coming day,” or “Give us today the bread we need for today.” The term ἐπιούσιος (epiousios) does not occur outside of early Christian literature (other occurrences are in Luke 11:3 and Didache 8:2), so its meaning is difficult to determine. Various suggestions include “daily,” “the coming day,” and “for existence.” See BDAG 376-77 s.v.; L&N 67:183, 206. |
| (0.21) | (Isa 50:1) | 3 sn The Lord admits he did divorce Zion, but that too was the result of the nation’s sins. The force of the earlier rhetorical question comes into clearer focus now. The question does not imply that a certificate does not exist and that no divorce occurred. Rather, the question asks for the certificate to be produced so the accuser can see the reason for the divorce in black and white. The Lord did not put Zion away arbitrarily. |
