Your search for "That" did not find any bible verses that matched.
Discovery Box| (0.28) | (Act 19:15) | 4 sn But who are you? This account shows how the power of Paul was so distinct that parallel claims to access that power were denied. In fact, such manipulation, by those who did not know Jesus, was judged (v. 16). The indirect way in which the exorcists made the appeal shows their distance from Jesus. |
| (0.28) | (Act 19:12) | 2 tn Or “were taken.” It might be that as word went out into the region that since the sick could not come to Paul, healing was brought to them this way. The “handkerchiefs” are probably face cloths for wiping perspiration (see BDAG 934 s.v. σουδάριον) while the “aprons” might be material worn by workmen (BDAG 923-24 s.v. σιμικίνθιον). |
| (0.28) | (Act 18:28) | 4 tn Although many English translations have here “that Jesus was the Christ,” in the case of two accusatives following a copulative infinitive, the first would normally be the subject and the second the predicate nominative. Additionally, the first accusative here (τὸν χριστόν, ton christon) has the article, a further indication that it should be regarded as subject of the infinitive. |
| (0.28) | (Act 18:12) | 3 sn Achaia was a Roman province initially created in 146 b.c. that included most of Greece. In 27 b.c. it was divided into the two separate provinces of Macedonia and Achaia. At that time Achaia was composed of the most important parts of Greece (Attica, Boeotia, and the Peloponnesus). |
| (0.28) | (Act 15:29) | 2 sn What has been strangled. That is, to refrain from eating animals that had been killed without having the blood drained from them. According to the Mosaic law (Lev 17:13-14), Jews were forbidden to eat flesh with the blood still in it (note the preceding provision in this verse, and from blood). |
| (0.28) | (Act 15:20) | 4 sn What has been strangled. That is, to refrain from eating animals that had been killed without having the blood drained from them. According to the Mosaic law (Lev 17:13-14), Jews were forbidden to eat flesh with the blood still in it (note the following provision in Acts 15:20, and from blood). |
| (0.28) | (Act 12:15) | 2 tn Grk “she kept insisting that the situation was thus” (cf. BDAG 422 s.v. ἔχω 10.a). Most translations supply a less awkward English phrase like “it was so”; the force of her insistence, however, is that “it was Peter,” which was the point under dispute. |
| (0.28) | (Act 7:5) | 2 tn Grk “He did not give him an inheritance in it.” This could be understood to mean that God did not give something else to Abraham as an inheritance while he was living there. The point of the text is that God did not give any of the land to him as an inheritance, and the translation makes this clear. |
| (0.28) | (Act 2:45) | 1 tn The imperfect verb has been translated as an ingressive (“began…”). Since in context this is a description of the beginning of the community of believers, it is more likely that these statements refer to the start of various activities and practices that the early church continued for some time. |
| (0.28) | (Joh 20:8) | 1 sn What was it that the beloved disciple believed (since v. 7 describes what he saw)? Sometimes it is suggested that what he believed was Mary Magdalene’s report that the body had been stolen. But this could hardly be the case; the way the entire scene is narrated such a trivial conclusion would amount to an anticlimax. It is true that the use of the plural “they” in the following verse applied to both Peter and the beloved disciple, and this appears to be a difficulty if one understands that the beloved disciple believed at this point in Jesus’ resurrection. But it is not an insuperable difficulty, since all it affirms is that at this time neither Peter nor the beloved disciple had understood the scripture concerning the resurrection. Thus it appears the author intends his reader to understand that when the beloved disciple entered the tomb after Peter and saw the state of the graveclothes, he believed in the resurrection, i.e., that Jesus had risen from the dead. |
| (0.28) | (Joh 19:31) | 6 tn Grk “asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and they might be taken down.” Here because of the numerous ambiguous third person references it is necessary to clarify that it was the crucified men whose legs were to be broken and whose corpses were to be removed from the crosses. |
| (0.28) | (Joh 14:20) | 1 sn At that time could be a reference to the parousia (second coming of Christ). But the statement in 14:19, that the world will not see Jesus, does not fit. It is better to take this as the postresurrection appearances of Jesus to his disciples (which has the advantage of taking in a little while in v. 19 literally). |
| (0.28) | (Joh 13:4) | 2 tn The plural τὰ ἱμάτια (ta himatia) is probably a reference to more than one garment (cf. John 19:23-24). If so, this would indicate that Jesus stripped to a loincloth, like a slave. The translation “outer clothes” is used to indicate that Jesus was not completely naked, since complete nudity would have been extremely offensive to Jewish sensibilities in this historical context. |
| (0.28) | (Joh 11:50) | 2 tn Although it is possible to argue that ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos) should be translated “person” here since it is not necessarily masculinity that is in view in Caiaphas’ statement, “man” was retained in the translation because in 11:47 “this man” (οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, outos ho anthrōpos) has as its referent a specific individual, Jesus, and it was felt this connection should be maintained. |
| (0.28) | (Joh 7:8) | 1 sn One always speaks of “going up” to Jerusalem in Jewish idiom, even though in western thought it is more common to speak of south as “down” (Jerusalem lies south of Galilee). The reason for the idiom is that Jerusalem was identified with Mount Zion in the OT, so that altitude was the issue. |
| (0.28) | (Joh 5:35) | 1 sn He was a lamp that was burning and shining. Sir 48:1 states that the word of Elijah “burned like a torch.” Because of the connection of John the Baptist with Elijah (see John 1:21 and the note on John’s reply, “I am not”), it was natural for Jesus to apply this description to John. |
| (0.28) | (Joh 4:6) | 2 sn It was about noon. The suggestion has been made by some that time should be reckoned from midnight rather than sunrise. This would make the time 6 a.m. rather than noon. That would fit in this passage but not in John 19:14 which places the time when Jesus is condemned to be crucified at “the sixth hour.” |
| (0.28) | (Luk 24:51) | 4 sn There is great debate whether this event equals Acts 1:9-11 so that Luke has telescoped something here that he describes in more detail later. The text can be read in this way because the temporal marker in v. 50 is vague. |
| (0.28) | (Luk 24:30) | 1 tn Grk “And it happened that when.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style. |
| (0.28) | (Luk 24:15) | 1 tn Grk “And it happened that while.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated. Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style. |
