Discovery Box| (0.30) | (Gen 6:22) | 2 tn The last clause seems redundant: “and thus (כֵּן, ken) he did.” It underscores the obedience of Noah to all that God had said. |
| (0.30) | (Gen 6:8) | 1 tn The disjunctive clause (conjunction plus subject plus verb) is contrastive here: God condemns the human race, but he is pleased with Noah. |
| (0.30) | (Gen 6:3) | 4 tn Heb “he”; the plural pronoun has been used in the translation since “man” earlier in the verse has been understood as a collective (“humankind”). |
| (0.30) | (Gen 5:3) | 1 tn Heb “and Adam lived 130 years.” In the translation the verb is subordinated to the following verb, “and he fathered,” and rendered as a temporal clause. |
| (0.30) | (Gen 4:4) | 1 tn Heb “But Abel brought, also he….” The disjunctive clause (conjunction plus subject plus verb) stresses the contrast between Cain’s offering and Abel’s. |
| (0.30) | (Gen 2:21) | 2 tn Heb “and he slept.” In the sequence the verb may be subordinated to the following verb to indicate a temporal clause (“while…”). |
| (0.28) | (Rev 1:6) | 2 tn See BDAG 168 s.v. βασιλεία 1.a for the idea of “he made us a kingdom,” which was translated as “he appointed us (to be or function) as a kingdom” (see the note on the word “appointed” earlier in the verse). |
| (0.28) | (3Jo 1:5) | 2 tn BDAG 821 s.v. πιστός 1.b offers the translation “act loyally” for this context, a usage which is not common but does fit well here. Since the author is going to ask Gaius for additional help for these missionaries in the following verse, he begins here by commending Gaius for all that he has already done in this regard. |
| (0.28) | (1Jo 4:20) | 5 sn In 4:20 the author again describes the opponents, who claim to love God. Their failure to show love for their fellow Christians proves their claim to know God to be false: The one who does not love his fellow Christian whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. |
| (0.28) | (1Jo 1:6) | 1 sn The relationship of the phrase keep on walking to if we say is very important for understanding the problem expressed in 1:6. If one should say (εἴπωμεν, eipōmen) that he has fellowship with God, and yet continues walking (περιπατῶμεν, peripatōmen) in the darkness, then it follows (in the apodosis, the “then” clause) that he is lying and not practicing the truth. |
| (0.28) | (2Pe 2:1) | 1 sn But false prophets arose among the people. Peter uses the same verb, γίνομαι (ginomai), in 2 Pet 2:1 as he had used in 1:20 to describe the process of inspiration. He may well be contrasting, by way of a catchword, the two kinds of prophets. |
| (0.28) | (Phi 2:25) | 2 sn The reason why Paul refers to Epaphroditus as his brother, coworker, fellow soldier, etc., is because he wants to build up Epaphroditus in the eyes of the Philippians, since Paul is sending him back instead of Timothy. This accent on Epaphroditus’ character and service is implied in the translation “For he is…” |
| (0.28) | (Rom 8:32) | 1 tn Grk “[he] who.” The relative clause continues the question of v. 31 in a way that is awkward in English. The force of v. 32 is thus: “who indeed did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—How will he not also with him give us all things?” |
| (0.28) | (Act 24:14) | 3 sn That is, the law of Moses. Paul was claiming that he legitimately worshiped the God of Israel. He was arguing that this amounted to a religious dispute rather than a political one, so that the Roman authorities need not concern themselves with it. |
| (0.28) | (Act 23:27) | 6 sn The letter written by the Roman commander Claudius Lysias was somewhat self-serving. He made it sound as if the rescue of a Roman citizen had been a conscious act on his part. In fact, he had made the discovery of Paul’s Roman citizenship somewhat later. See Acts 21:37-39 and 22:24-29. |
| (0.28) | (Act 21:37) | 7 sn “Do you know Greek?” Paul as an educated rabbi was bilingual. Paul’s request in Greek allowed the officer to recognize that Paul was not the violent insurrectionist he thought he had arrested (see following verse). The confusion of identities reveals the degree of confusion dominating these events. |
| (0.28) | (Act 21:33) | 4 tn Grk “and he.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was begun in the translation, and καί (kai) has been replaced with a semicolon. “Then” has been supplied after “he” to clarify the logical sequence. |
| (0.28) | (Act 19:33) | 5 sn The nature of Alexander’s defense is not clear. It appears he was going to explain, as a Jew, that the problem was not caused by Jews, but by those of “the Way.” However, he never got a chance to speak. |
| (0.28) | (Act 17:24) | 2 tn Or “because he is.” The participle ὑπάρχων (huparchōn) could be either adjectival, modifying οὗτος (houtos, “who is Lord…”) or adverbial of cause (“because he is Lord…”). Since the participle διδούς (didous) in v. 25 appears to be clearly causal in force, it is preferable to understand ὑπάρχων as adjectival in this context. |
| (0.28) | (Act 16:3) | 2 tn Grk “and taking him he circumcised him.” The participle λαβών (labōn) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style. Paul’s cultural sensitivity showed in his action here. He did not want Timothy’s lack of circumcision to become an issue (1 Cor 9:15-23). |
