Your search for "By" did not find any bible verses that matched.
Discovery Box| (0.20) | (Luk 7:4) | 2 tn Although the participle παραγενόμενοι (paragenomenoi) is preceded by the Greek article (οἱ, hoi) which would normally cause it to be regarded as an adjectival or substantival participle, most modern translations, probably as a result of the necessities of contemporary English style, render it as a temporal participle (“when they came”). |
| (0.20) | (Luk 6:43) | 3 tc Most mss, especially later ones (A C D Θ Ψ 33 M lat sy sa), lack the adverb πάλιν (palin, “again”) here. Its presence is attested, however, by several good witnesses (P75 א B L W Ξ ƒ1,13 579 892 1241 2542). |
| (0.20) | (Luk 6:33) | 2 tc Most mss (A D L Θ Ξ Ψ ƒ13 33 M lat) include γάρ (gar, “for”) following καί (kai, here translated “even”), but a few significant mss (א B W 700 892* 1241) lack the conjunction. The inclusion of the conjunction seems to be motivated by clarity and should probably be considered inauthentic. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 6:21) | 1 sn You who hunger are people like the poor Jesus has already mentioned. The term has OT roots both in conjunction with the poor (Isa 32:6-7; 58:6-7, 9-10; Ezek 18:7, 16) or by itself (Pss 37:16-19; 107:9). |
| (0.20) | (Luk 5:14) | 3 sn The silence ordered by Jesus was probably meant to last only until the cleansing took place with the priests and sought to prevent Jesus’ healings from becoming the central focus of the people’s reaction to him. See also 4:35, 41; 8:56 for other cases where Jesus asks for silence with reference to miracles. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 4:25) | 1 sn Elijah’s days. Jesus, by discussing Elijah and Elisha, pictures one of the lowest periods in Israel’s history. These examples, along with v. 24, also show that Jesus is making prophetic claims as well as messianic ones. See 1 Kgs 17-18. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 4:24) | 3 sn Jesus argues that he will get no respect in his own hometown. There is a wordplay here on the word acceptable (δεκτός, dektos), which also occurs in v. 19: Jesus has declared the “acceptable” year of the Lord (here translated year of the Lord’s favor), but he is not “accepted” by the people of his own hometown. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 3:38) | 1 sn The reference to the son of God here is not to a divine being, but to one directly formed by the hand of God. He is made in God’s image, so this phrase could be read as appositional (“Adam, that is, the son of God”). See Acts 17:28-29. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 3:23) | 4 sn The parenthetical remark as was supposed makes it clear that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus. But a question still remains whose genealogy this is. Mary is nowhere mentioned, so this may simply refer to the line of Joseph, who would have functioned as Jesus’ legal father, much like stepchildren can have when they are adopted by a second parent. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 3:17) | 1 sn A winnowing fork is a pitchfork-like tool used to toss threshed grain in the air so that the wind blows away the chaff, leaving the grain to fall to the ground. The note of purging is highlighted by the use of imagery involving sifting though threshed grain for the useful kernels. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 3:2) | 1 sn Use of the singular high priesthood to mention two figures is unusual but accurate, since Annas was the key priest from a.d. 6-15 and then his relatives were chosen for many of the next several years. After two brief tenures by others, his son-in-law Caiaphas came to power and stayed there until a.d. 36. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 2:38) | 3 tn The imperfect ἐλάλει (elalei) here looks at a process of declaration, not a single moment. She clearly was led by God to address men and women about the hope Jesus was. The testimony of Luke 1–2 to Jesus has involved all types of people. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 2:25) | 5 sn Once again, by mentioning the Holy Spirit, Luke stresses the prophetic enablement of a speaker. The Spirit has fallen on both men (Zechariah, 1:67) and women (Elizabeth, 1:41) in Luke 1-2 as they share the will of the Lord. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 1:76) | 2 tn Or “a prophet,” but since Greek nouns can be definite without the article, and since in context this is a reference to the eschatological forerunner of the Messiah (cf. John 1:17), the concept is better conveyed to the English reader by the use of the definite article “the.” |
| (0.20) | (Luk 1:67) | 2 sn Prophesied. The reference to prophecy reflects that Zechariah is enabled by the Spirit to speak God’s will. He does so in this case through a praise psalm, which calls for praise and then gives the reason why God should be praised. |
| (0.20) | (Luk 1:35) | 4 tc A few mss (C* Θ ƒ1 33 pc) add “by you” here. This looks like a scribal addition to bring symmetry to the first three clauses of the angel’s message (note the second person pronoun in the previous two clauses), and is too poorly supported to be seriously considered as authentic. |
| (0.20) | (Mar 13:15) | 1 sn Most of the roofs in the NT were flat roofs made of pounded dirt, sometimes mixed with lime or stones, supported by heavy wooden beams. They generally had an easy means of access, either a sturdy wooden ladder or stone stairway, sometimes on the outside of the house. |
| (0.20) | (Mar 12:12) | 3 sn The point of the parable in Mark 12:1-12 is that the leaders of the nation have been rejected by God and the vineyard (v. 9, referring to the nation and its privileged status) will be taken from them and given to others (an allusion to the Gentiles). |
| (0.20) | (Mar 9:50) | 2 sn The difficulty of this saying is understanding how salt could lose its saltiness since its chemical properties cannot change. It is thus often assumed that Jesus was referring to chemically impure salt, perhaps a natural salt which, when exposed to the elements, had all the genuine salt leached out, leaving only the sediment or impurities behind. Others have suggested the background of the saying is the use of salt blocks by Arab bakers to line the floor of their ovens: Under the intense heat these blocks would eventually crystallize and undergo a change in chemical composition, finally being thrown out as unserviceable. A saying in the Talmud (b. Bekhorot 8b) attributed to R. Joshua ben Chananja (ca. a.d. 90), recounts how when he was asked the question “When salt loses its flavor, how can it be made salty again?” is said to have replied, “By salting it with the afterbirth of a mule.” He was then asked, “Then does the mule (being sterile) bear young?” to which he replied: “Can salt lose its flavor?” The point appears to be both are impossible. The saying, while admittedly late, suggests that culturally the loss of flavor by salt was regarded as an impossibility. Genuine salt can never lose its flavor. In this case the saying by Jesus here may be similar to Matt 19:24, where it is likewise impossible for the camel to go through the eye of a sewing needle. |
| (0.20) | (Mar 9:42) | 1 tn Grk “the millstone of a donkey.” This refers to a large flat stone turned by a donkey in the process of grinding grain (BDAG 661 s.v. μύλος 2; L&N 7.68-69). The same term is used in the parallel account in Matt 18:6. |
