Discovery Box| (0.25) | (Act 25:8) | 1 tn Grk “Paul saying in his defense”; the participle ἀπολογουμένου (apologoumenou) could be taken temporally (“when Paul said…”), but due to the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the participle was translated as a finite verb and a new sentence begun here in the translation. BDAG 116-17 s.v. ἀπολογέομαι has “W. ὅτι foll. τοῦ Παύλου ἀπολογουμένου, ὅτι when Paul said in his defense (direct quot. foll.) Ac 25:8.” |
| (0.25) | (Act 16:34) | 5 tn The phrase “together with his entire household” is placed at the end of the English sentence so that it refers to both the rejoicing and the belief. A formal equivalence translation would have “and he rejoiced greatly with his entire household that he had come to believe in God,” but the reference to the entire household being baptized in v. 33 presumes that all in the household believed. |
| (0.25) | (Joh 13:4) | 3 tn Grk “taking a towel he girded himself.” Jesus would have wrapped the towel (λέντιον, lention) around his waist (διέζωσεν ἑαυτόν, diezōsen heauton) for use in wiping the disciples’ feet. The term λέντιον is a Latin loanword (linteum) which is also found in the rabbinic literature (see BDAG 592 s.v.). It would have been a long piece of linen cloth, long enough for Jesus to have wrapped it about his waist and still used the free end to wipe the disciples’ feet. |
| (0.25) | (Joh 8:41) | 4 sn We were not born as a result of immorality! is ironic because Jesus’ opponents implied that it was not themselves but Jesus who had been born as a result of immoral behavior. This shows they did not know Jesus’ true origin and were not aware of the supernatural events surrounding his birth. The author does not even bother to refute the opponents’ suggestion but lets it stand, assuming his readers will know the true story. |
| (0.25) | (Joh 6:56) | 2 sn Resides in me, and I in him. Note how in John 6:54 eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood produces eternal life and the promise of resurrection at the last day. Here the same process of eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood leads to a relationship of mutual indwelling (resides in me, and I in him). This suggests strongly that for the author (and for Jesus) the concepts of ‘possessing eternal life’ and of ‘residing in Jesus’ are virtually interchangeable. |
| (0.25) | (Joh 5:37) | 2 sn You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time. Cf. Deut 4:12. Also see Deut 5:24 ff., where the Israelites begged to hear the voice no longer—their request (ironically) has by this time been granted. How ironic this would be if the feast is Pentecost, where by the 1st century a.d. the giving of the law at Sinai was being celebrated. |
| (0.25) | (Luk 9:9) | 2 tn The expression ἐζήτει ἰδεῖν αὐτόν (ezētei idein auton, “was seeking to see him”) probably indicates that Herod, for curiosity’s sake or more likely for evil purposes, wanted to get to know Jesus, i.e., who he was and what he was doing. See I. H. Marshall, Luke (NIGTC), 357. Herod finally got his wish in Luke 23:6-12, with inconclusive results from his point of view. |
| (0.25) | (Luk 8:44) | 3 sn The edge of his cloak may simply refer to the edge or hem of the garment, but it could refer to the kraspedon, the tassel on the four corners of the garment, two in front and two behind, that served to remind the wearer of God’s commands (Num 15:37-41; Deut 22:12; D. L. Bock, Luke [BECNT], 1:794). The woman thus touched the very part of Jesus’ clothing that indicated his ritual purity. |
| (0.25) | (Luk 6:4) | 3 sn Jesus’ response to the charge that what his disciples were doing was not lawful is one of analogy: ‘If David did it for his troops in a time of need, then so can I with my disciples.’ Jesus is clear that on the surface there was a violation here. What is not as clear is whether he is arguing a “greater need” makes this permissible or that this was within the intention of the law all along. |
| (0.25) | (Luk 3:1) | 3 sn Herod refers here to Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great. He ruled from 4 b.c.-a.d. 39, sharing the rule of his father’s realm with his two brothers. One brother, Archelaus (Matt 2:22) was banished in a.d. 6 and died in a.d. 18; the other brother, Herod Philip (mentioned next) died in a.d. 34. |
| (0.25) | (Luk 2:5) | 2 tn Traditionally, “Mary, his betrothed.” Although often rendered in contemporary English as “Mary, who was engaged to him,” this may give the modern reader a wrong impression, since Jewish marriages in this period were typically arranged marriages. The term ἐμνηστευμένῃ (emnēsteumenē) may suggest that the marriage is not yet consummated, not necessarily that they are not currently married. Some mss read “the betrothed to him wife”; others, simply “his wife.” These readings, though probably not autographic, may give the right sense. |
| (0.25) | (Mar 2:26) | 3 sn Jesus’ response to the charge that what his disciples were doing was against the law is one of analogy: “If David did it for his troops in a time of need, then so can I with my disciples.” Jesus is clear that on the surface there was a violation here. What is not as clear is whether he is arguing a “greater need” makes this permissible or that this was within the intention of the law all along. |
| (0.25) | (Mat 13:55) | 1 sn The reference to Jesus as the carpenter’s son is probably derogatory, indicating that they knew Jesus only as a common laborer like themselves. The reference to his mother…Mary (even though Jesus’ father was probably dead by this point) appears to be somewhat derogatory, for a man was not regarded as his mother’s son in Jewish usage unless an insult was intended (cf. Judg 11:1-2; John 6:42; 8:41; 9:29). |
| (0.25) | (Mat 12:4) | 3 sn Jesus’ response to the charge that what his disciples were doing was against the law is one of analogy: “If David did it for his troops in a time of need, then so can I with my disciples.” Jesus is clear that on the surface there was a violation here. What is not as clear is whether he is arguing a “greater need” makes this permissible or that this was within the intention of the law all along. |
| (0.25) | (Mat 11:4) | 2 sn What you hear and see. The following activities all paraphrase various OT descriptions of the time of promised salvation: Isa 35:5-6; 26:19; 29:18-19; 61:1. Jesus is answering John’s question not by acknowledging a title (the Christ), but by pointing to the nature of his works, which verify his identity and indicate the fulfillment of the OT promises. |
| (0.25) | (Mat 8:20) | 2 sn According to Matt 4:13 Jesus made his home in Capernaum, so in spite of the common interpretation of this statement he was not technically homeless. More likely Jesus’ reply here has to do with the increasing opposition and rejection he and his disciples are encountering, so the question amounts to this: Does the man who wants to follow him understand the rejection he will be facing? The implication is that he does not. |
| (0.25) | (Mal 4:5) | 1 sn I will send you Elijah the prophet. In light of the ascension of Elijah to heaven without dying (2 Kgs 2:11), Judaism has always awaited his return as an aspect of the messianic age (see, e.g., John 1:19-28). Jesus identified John the Baptist as Elijah because he came in the “spirit and power” of his prototype Elijah (Matt 11:14; 17:1-13; Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36). |
| (0.25) | (Zec 6:13) | 1 sn The priest here in the immediate context is Joshua but the fuller and more distant allusion is to the Messiah, a ruling priest. The notion of the ruler as a priest-king was already apparent in David and his successors (Pss 2:2, 6-8; 110:2, 4), and it finds mature expression in David’s greater Son, Jesus Christ, who will combine both offices in his kingship (Heb 5:1-10; 7:1-25). |
| (0.25) | (Hab 3:6) | 5 tn Heb “ancient ways [or, “doings”] are his.” The meaning of this line is unclear. Traditionally it has been translated, “his ways are eternal.” However, in this context (see vv. 3, 7) it is more likely that the line speaks of the Lord taking the same route as in the days of Moses and Deborah (see Deut 33:2; Judg 5:4). See J. J. M. Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah (OTL), 154. |
| (0.25) | (Lam 3:22) | 1 tn It is difficult to capture the nuances of the Hebrew word חֶסֶד (khesed). When used of the Lord it is often connected to his covenant loyalty. This is the only occasion when the plural form of חֶסֶד (khesed) precedes the plural form of רַחֲמִים (rakhamim, “mercy, compassion”). The plural forms, as with this one, tend to be in late texts. The plural may indicate several concrete expressions of God’s kindnesses or may indicate the abstract concept of his kindness. |
