Your search for "By" did not find any bible verses that matched.
Discovery Box| (0.20) | (Isa 5:2) | 2 sn At this point the love song turns sour as the Lord himself breaks in and completes the story (see vv. 3-6). In the final line of v. 2 the love song presented to the Lord becomes a judgment speech by the Lord. |
| (0.20) | (Isa 2:18) | 1 tc The verb “pass away” is singular in the Hebrew text, despite the plural subject (“worthless idols”) that precedes. The verb should be emended to a plural; the final vav (ו) has been accidentally omitted by haplography (note the vav at the beginning of the immediately following form). |
| (0.20) | (Isa 2:5) | 2 tn Heb “let’s walk in the light of the Lord.” In this context, which speaks of the Lord’s instruction and commands, the “light of the Lord” refers to his moral standards by which he seeks to guide his people. One could paraphrase, “let’s obey the Lord’s commands.” |
| (0.20) | (Isa 1:27) | 1 sn The third person reference to the Lord in v. 28 indicates that the prophet is again (see vv. 21-24a) speaking. Since v. 27 is connected to v. 28 by a conjunction, it is likely that the prophet’s words begin with v. 27. |
| (0.20) | (Isa 1:15) | 2 sn This does not just refer to the blood of sacrificial animals, but also the blood, as it were, of their innocent victims. By depriving the poor and destitute of proper legal recourse and adequate access to the economic system, the oppressors have, for all intents and purposes, “killed” their victims. |
| (0.20) | (Isa 1:17) | 2 tn This word refers to a woman who has lost her husband, by death or divorce. The orphan and widow are often mentioned in the OT as epitomizing the helpless and impoverished who have been left without the necessities of life due to the loss of a family provider. |
| (0.20) | (Isa 1:20) | 1 sn The wordplay in the Hebrew draws attention to the options. The people can obey, in which case they will “eat” v. 19 (תֹּאכֵלוּ [toʾkhelu], Qal active participle of אָכַל) God’s blessing, or they can disobey, in which case they will be devoured (Heb “eaten,” תְּאֻכְּלוּ, [teʾukkelu], Qal passive/Pual of אָכַל) by God’s judgment. |
| (0.20) | (Sos 1:16) | 1 sn The statement הִנָּךְ יָפָה רַעְיָתִי (hinnakh yafah raʿyati, “How beautiful you are, my darling”) in 1:15 is virtually mirrored by the Beloved’s statement in 1:16, הִנְּךְ יָפֶה דוֹדִי (hinnekh yafeh dodi, “How handsome you are, my lover”). |
| (0.20) | (Sos 1:4) | 5 tc The MT reads the third person masculine singular suffix on a plural noun חֲדָרָיו (khadarayv, “his chambers”). This is reflected in LXX, Targums, and Vulgate. However, the second person masculine singular suffix on a singular noun חַדְרֶךָ (khadrekha, “your chambers”) is reflected by Syriac Peshitta and Symmachus. See preceding note on the text-critical significance of these variant readings. |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 11:10) | 8 tn The term הֶבֶל (hevel, “vanity”) often connotes the temporal idea “fleeting” (e.g., Prov 31:30; Eccl 3:19; 6:12; 7:15; 9:9). This nuance is suggested here by the collocation of “youth” (הַיַּלְדוּת, hayyaldut) and “the prime of life” (הַשַּׁחֲרוּת, hashakharut). |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 11:7) | 1 tn The term “light” (אוֹר, ʾor) is used figuratively (metonymy of association) in reference to “life” (e.g., Job 3:20; 33:30; Ps 56:14 HT [56:13 ET]). By contrast, death is described as “darkness” (e.g., Eccl 11:8; 12:6-7). |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 10:8) | 2 tn Heb “a serpent will bite him.” The clause “he who breaks through a wall” (וּפֹרֵץ גָּדֵר, uforets gader) is a nominative absolute—the casus pendens is picked up by the resumptive pronoun in the following clause “a serpent will bite him” (יִשְּׁכֶנּוּ נָחָשׁ, yishekhennu nakhash). This construction is used for rhetorical emphasis (see IBHS 76-77 §4.7c). |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 7:14) | 4 tn Heb “anything after him.” This line is misinterpreted by several versions: “that man may not find against him any just complaint” (Douay); “consequently, man may find no fault with Him” (NJPS); “so that man cannot find fault with him in anything” (NAB). |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 6:7) | 2 tn Heb “All man’s work is for his mouth.” The term “mouth” functions as a synecdoche of part (i.e., mouth) for the whole (i.e., person), substituting the organ of consumption for the person’s action of consumption (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 641-43), as suggested by the parallelism with נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh, “his appetite”). |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 6:3) | 3 tn The noun נֶפֶל (nefel) denotes “miscarriage” and by metonymy of effect, “stillborn child” (e.g., Ps 58:9; Job 3:16; Eccl 6:3); cf. HALOT 711. The noun is related to the verb נָפַל (nafal, “to fall,” but occasionally “to be born”; see Isa 26:18); cf. HALOT 710 s.v. נפל 5. |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 3:9) | 2 sn This rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “Man gains nothing from his toil!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51). Any advantage that man might gain from his toil is nullified by his ignorance of divine providence. |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 2:20) | 3 tn Heb “all my toil.” As in 2:18-19, the term עֲמָלִי (ʿamali, “my labor”) is a metonymy of cause (i.e., my labor) for effect (i.e., the fruit of my labor). The metonymy is recognized by several translations: “all the fruits of my labor” (NAB); “all the fruit of my labor” (NASB); “all the gains I had made” (NJPS). |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 2:1) | 4 sn The statement I will try self-indulgent pleasure is a figurative expression known as metonymy of association. As 2:1-3 makes clear, it is not so much Qoheleth who is put to the test with pleasure, but rather that pleasure is put to the test by Qoheleth. |
| (0.20) | (Ecc 1:7) | 2 sn This verse does not refer to the cycle of evaporation or the return of water by underground streams, as sometimes suggested. Rather, it describes the constant flow of river waters to the sea. For all the action of the water—endless repetition and water constantly in motion—there is nothing new accomplished. |
| (0.20) | (Pro 31:30) | 2 tn The first word of the twenty-first line begins with שׁ (shin), the twenty-first letter of the Hebrew alphabet. The graphic distinction between שׁ (shin) and שׂ (sin) had not been made at the time the book of Proverbs was written; that graphic distinction was introduced by the Masoretes, ca. a.d. 1000. |
