Discovery Box| (0.05) | (Jer 29:16) | 1 sn Jeremiah answers their claims that the Lord has raised up prophets to encourage them that their stay will be short by referring to the Lord’s promise that the Lord’s plans are not for restoration but for further destruction. |
| (0.05) | (Isa 29:15) | 1 tn Heb “Woe [to] those who deeply hide counsel from the Lord.” This probably alludes to political alliances made without seeking the Lord’s guidance. See 30:1-2 and 31:1. |
| (0.05) | (Isa 21:8) | 2 tn The Hebrew term translated “Lord” here is אֲדֹנָי (ʾadonay). Some translations take this to refer to the Lord (cf. NAB, NASB, NRSV), while others take it to refer to the guard’s human master (“my lord”; cf. NIV, NLT). |
| (0.05) | (Isa 3:1) | 1 tn Heb “the master, the Lord of Heaven’s Armies [traditionally, the “Lord of hosts”].” On the title “the Lord of Heaven’s Armies,” see the note at 1:9. |
| (0.05) | (Isa 1:24) | 1 tn Heb “the master, the Lord who commands armies [traditionally, “the Lord of hosts”].” On the title “the Lord of Heaven’s Armies,” see the note at v. 9. |
| (0.05) | (Pro 2:7) | 5 tn The word can be taken as in apposition explaining the subject of the first colon—the Lord is a shield, the Lord stores up. The word then is a metaphor for the protection afforded by the Lord. |
| (0.05) | (Psa 130:1) | 1 sn Psalm 130. The psalmist, confident of the Lord’s forgiveness, cries out to the Lord for help in the midst of his suffering and urges Israel to do the same. |
| (0.05) | (Psa 48:8) | 2 tn Heb “the Lord of hosts.” The title “Lord of hosts” here pictures the Lord as a mighty warrior-king who leads armies into battle (see Pss 24:10; 46:7, 11). |
| (0.05) | (Psa 35:23) | 1 sn Though he is confident that the Lord is aware of his situation (see v. 22a), the psalmist compares the Lord’s inactivity to sleep and urges him to wake up. |
| (0.05) | (Psa 26:3) | 2 sn The psalmist’s awareness of the Lord’s faithfulness and…loyalty toward him motivates him to remain loyal to the Lord and to maintain his moral purity. |
| (0.05) | (1Ki 5:5) | 2 tn Heb “a house for the name of the Lord.” The word “name” sometimes refers to one’s reputation or honor. The “name” of the Lord sometimes designates the Lord himself, being indistinguishable from the proper name. |
| (0.05) | (1Ki 5:3) | 1 tn Heb “a house for the name of the Lord.” The word “name” sometimes refers to one’s reputation or honor. The “name” of the Lord sometimes designates the Lord himself, being indistinguishable from the proper name. |
| (0.05) | (1Sa 10:1) | 3 tn Heb “Is it not that the Lord has anointed you?” The question draws attention to the fact and is a rhetorical way of affirming the Lord’s choice of Saul. The translation reflects the rhetorical force of the question. |
| (0.05) | (Exo 26:37) | 2 sn In all the details of this chapter the expositor should pay attention to the overall message rather than engage in speculation concerning the symbolism of the details. It is, after all, the divine instruction for the preparation of the dwelling place for Yahweh. The point could be said this way: The dwelling place of Yahweh must be prepared in accordance with, and by the power of, his divine word. If God was to fellowship with his people, then the center of worship had to be made to his specifications, which were in harmony with his nature. Everything was functional for the approach to God through the ritual by divine provisions. But everything also reflected the nature of God, the symmetry, the order, the pure wood, the gold overlay, or (closer to God) the solid gold. And the symbolism of the light, the table, the veil, the cherubim—all of it was revelatory. All of it reflected the reality in heaven. Churches today do not retain the pattern and furnishings of the old tabernacle. However, they would do well to learn what God was requiring of Israel, so that their structures are planned in accordance with the theology of worship and the theology of access to God. Function is a big part, but symbolism and revelation instruct the planning of everything to be used. Christians live in the light of the fulfillment of Christ, and so they know the realities that the old foreshadowed. While a building is not necessary for worship (just as Israel worshiped in places other than the sanctuary), it is practical, and if there is going to be one, then the most should be made of it in the teaching and worshiping of the assembly. This chapter, then, provides an inspiration for believers on preparing a functional, symbolical, ordered place of worship that is in harmony with the word of God. And there is much to be said for making it as beautiful and uplifting as is possible—as a gift of freewill offering to God. Of course, the most important part of preparing a place of worship is the preparing of the heart. Worship, to be acceptable to God, must be in Christ. He said that when the temple was destroyed he would raise it up in three days. While he referred to his own body, he also alluded to the temple by the figure. When they put Jesus to death, they were destroying the temple; at his resurrection he would indeed begin a new form of worship. He is the tent, the curtain, the atonement, that the sanctuary foreshadowed. And then, believers also (when they receive Christ) become the temple of the Lord. So the NT will take the imagery and teaching of this chapter in a number of useful ways that call for more study. This does not, however, involve allegorization of the individual tabernacle parts. |
| (0.05) | (1Co 2:1) | 3 tc ‡ A few significant mss (P46vid א* A C as well as some versions and fathers) read μυστήριον (mustērion, “mystery”) instead of μαρτύριον (marturion, “testimony”). But the latter has wider ms support (א2 B D F G Ψ 33 1739 1881 M and some versions), though not quite as impressive. μαρτύριον may have been changed by scribes in anticipation of Paul’s words in 2:7, or conversely, μυστήριον may have been changed to conform to 1:6. Transcriptionally, since “the mystery of God/Christ” is a well-worn expression in the corpus Paulinum (1 Cor 2:7; 4:1; Eph 3:4; Col 2:2; 4:3), while “testimony of Christ” occurs in Paul only once (1 Cor 1:6, though “testimony of the Lord” appears in 2 Tim 1:8), and “testimony of God” never, it is likely that scribes changed the text to the more usual expression. A decision is difficult in this instance, but a slight preference should be given to μαρτύριον. |
| (0.05) | (Nah 1:2) | 5 tn The verb נָטַר (natar) is a synonym of נָצַר (natsar) andשָׁמַר (shamar), each including a meaning “to keep, guard.” נָטַר (natar) is used elsewhere of keeping a vineyard (Song 1:6; 8:11-12) and guarding a secret (Dan 7:28). It describes a person bearing a grudge, seeking revenge, and refusing to forgive (Lev 19:18). It is also used in collocation with לְעוֹלָם (leʿolam, “forever, always”) and לָעַד (laʿad, “continually”) to picture God harboring rage against his enemies forever (Jer 3:5, 12; Amos 1:11; Ps 103:9). Contra HALOT (695 s.v.), it does not mean “to control anger” or “to be slow to anger” and is not collocated with אָף (ʾaf, “anger”) as the entry implies (see TWOT 2:576 and NIDOTTE 1581, s.v.). The long-term rage depicted by נָטַר (“maintain rage”) serves as an appropriate bridge to the following statement in Nahum that the Lord is slow to anger but furious in judgment. God seeks vengeance against his enemies; he continually rages and maintains his anger; he is slow to anger, but will eventually burst out with the full fury of his wrath. |
| (0.05) | (Jer 51:10) | 2 tn There is some difference of opinion as to the best way to render the Hebrew expression here. Literally it means “brought forth our righteousnesses.” BDB 842 s.v. צְדָקָה 7.b interprets this of the “righteous acts” of the people of Judah and compares the usage in Isa 64:6; Ezek 3:20; 18:24; 33:13. However, Judah’s acts of righteousness (or more simply, their righteousness) were scarcely revealed in their deliverance. Most of the English versions and commentaries refer to “vindication,” i.e., the Lord has exonerated or proven Israel’s claims to be true. However, that would require more explanation than the idea of “deliverance,” which is a perfectly legitimate usage of the term (cf. BDB 842 s.v. צְדָקָה 6.a, and compare the usage in Isa 46:13; 51:6, 8; 56:1). The present translation interprets the plural form here as a plural of intensity or amplification (GKC 397-98 §124.e), and the suffix as a genitive of advantage (IBHS 147 §9.5.2e). This interpretation is also reflected in REB and God’s Word. |
| (0.05) | (Jer 33:22) | 1 sn Context makes it clear that what is in view is an innumerable line of descendants from the righteous ruler that the Lord raises up over Israel and Judah after their regathering and restoration to the land. What is in view, then, is a reinstitution or reinstatement of the Davidic covenant of grant, the perpetual right of the Davidic dynasty to rule over the nation of Israel for all time (see also v. 26). This is guaranteed by the creation order, which is the object of both God’s creative decree (Gen 1:14-19) and his covenant with Noah after the flood (Gen 8:22). (For further discussion on the nature of a covenant of grant see the study note on 32:40.) The rejection of the lines of Jehoiakim (36:30) and Jeconiah (22:30) and the certain captivity and death of Zedekiah (32:4) may have called into question the continuance of the Davidic promise, which always had a certain conditional nature to it (cf. 1 Kgs 2:4; 8:25; 9:5). This promise and this guarantee show that the covenant of grant still stands and will ultimately find its fulfillment. Because this promise never found its fulfillment after the return from exile, it is left to the NT to show how it is fulfilled (cf., e.g., Matt 1:1-17, where it is emphasized that Jesus is the son [and heir] of both Abraham and David). |
| (0.05) | (Jer 23:1) | 3 sn Verses 1-4 of ch. 23 are an extended metaphor in which the rulers are compared to shepherds and the people are compared to sheep. This metaphor has already been met with in 10:21 and is found elsewhere in the context of the Lord’s covenant with David (cf. 2 Sam 7:7-8; Ps 78:70-72). The sheep are God’s people, and he is the ultimate shepherd, who is personally concerned about their care (cf. Pss 23:1; 80:2). He has set rulers over them as his undershepherds, and they are responsible to him for the care of his sheep (see 22:3-4). They have been lax shepherds, allowing the sheep to be scattered and destroyed. So he will punish them. As the true shepherd of Israel he will regather his scattered flock and place new shepherds (rulers) over them. These verses lead to a promise of an ideal ruler set over an Israel that has experienced a new and better exodus (vv. 6-8). For a more complete development of this metaphor with similar messianic and eschatological implications, see Ezek 34. The metaphor has been interpreted in the translation, but some of the flavor remains in the simile. |
| (0.05) | (Isa 66:18) | 1 tc The Hebrew text reads literally “and I, their deeds and their thoughts, am coming.” The syntax here is very problematic, suggesting that the text may need emendation. Some suggest that the words “their deeds and their thoughts” have been displaced from v. 17. This line presents two primary challenges. In the first place, the personal pronoun “I” has no verb after it. Most translations insert “know” for the sake of clarity (NASB, NRSV, NLT, ESV). The NIV has “I, because of their actions and their imaginations…” Since God’s “knowledge” of Israel’s sin occasions judgment, the verb “hate” is an option as well (see above translation). The feminine form of the next verb (בָּאָה, baʾah) could be understood in one of two ways. One could provide an implied noun “time” (עֵת, ʿet) and render the next line “the time is coming/has come” (NASB, ESV). One could also emend the feminine verb to the masculine בָּא (baʾ) and have the “I” at the beginning of the line govern this verb as well (for the Lord is speaking here): “I am coming” (cf. NIV, NCV, NRSV, TEV, NLT). |
