(0.22) | (Act 13:11) | 3 sn The term translated mistiness here appears in the writings of the physician Galen as a medical technical description of a person who is blind. The picture of judgment to darkness is symbolic as well. Whatever power Elymas had, it represented darkness. Magic will again be an issue in Acts 19:18-19. This judgment is like that of Ananias and his wife in Acts 5:1-11. |
(0.22) | (Act 12:19) | 4 tn The meaning “led away to execution” for ἀπαχθῆναι (apachthēnai) in this verse is given by BDAG 95 s.v. ἀπάγω 2.c. Although an explicit reference to execution is lacking here, it is what would usually occur in such a case (Acts 16:27; 27:42; Code of Justinian 9.4.4). “Led away to torture” is a less likely option (Pliny the Younger, Letters 10, 96, 8). |
(0.22) | (Act 11:15) | 2 tn The words “he did” are not in the Greek text but are implied. They form an ellipsis which must be supplied for the modern English reader. Some modern translations supply “it” rather than “he” because the gender of πνεῦμα (pneuma) in Greek is neuter, but there are sufficient NT contexts that use masculine pronouns to refer to the Spirit to justify the use of a masculine pronoun here in the translation. |
(0.22) | (Act 10:14) | 1 sn Peter insisted he would not violate the law by eating anything defiled and ritually unclean. These food laws were one of the practices that distinguished Jews from their Gentile neighbors. The practice made table fellowship with Gentiles awkward. For an example of Jewish attitudes to this, see Dan 1:8-16; 1 Macc 1:41-64; Letter of Aristeas 142; Tacitus, History 5.5. |
(0.22) | (Act 9:33) | 1 tn Since the participle κατακείμενον (katakeimenon), an adjectival participle modifying Αἰνέαν (Ainean), has been translated into English as a relative clause (“who had been confined to a mattress”), it would be awkward to follow with a second relative clause (Grk “who was paralyzed”). Furthermore, the relative pronoun here has virtually a causal force, giving the reason for confinement to the mattress, so it is best translated “because.” |
(0.22) | (Act 4:8) | 3 tc The Western and Byzantine texts, as well as one or two Alexandrian witnesses, read τοῦ ᾿Ισραήλ (tou Israēl, “of Israel”) after πρεσβύτεροι (presbuteroi, “elders”; so D E Ψ 33 1739 M it), while most of the better witnesses, chiefly Alexandrian (P74 א A B 0165 1175 vg sa bo), lack this modifier. The longer reading was most likely added by scribes to give literary balance to the addressees in that “Rulers” already had an adjunct while “elders” was left absolute. |
(0.22) | (Act 2:7) | 1 tn Grk “They were astounded and amazed, saying.” The two imperfect verbs, ἐξίσταντο (existanto) and ἐθαύμαζον (ethaumazon), show both the surprise and the confusion on the part of the hearers. The verb ἐξίσταντο (from ἐξίστημι, existēmi) often implies an illogical perception or response (BDAG 350 s.v. ἐξίστημι): “to be so astonished as to almost fail to comprehend what one has experienced” (L&N 25.218). |
(0.22) | (Act 1:1) | 2 tn Or “first.” The translation “former” is preferred because “first” could imply to the modern English reader that the author means that his previous account was the first one to be written down. The Greek term πρῶτος (prōtos) does not necessarily mean “first” in an absolute sense, but can refer to the first in a set or series. That is what is intended here—the first account (known as the Gospel of Luke) as compared to the second one (known as Acts). |
(0.22) | (Joh 13:23) | 3 tn Grk “was reclining in the bosom (or “lap”) of Jesus” (according to both L&N 17.25 and BDAG 65 s.v. ἀνάκειμαι 2 an idiom for taking the place of honor at a meal, but note the similar expression in John 1:18). Whether this position or the position to the left of Jesus should be regarded as the position of second highest honor (next to the host, in this case Jesus, who was in the position of highest honor) is debated. F. Prat, “Les places d’honneur chez les Juifs contemporains du Christ” (RSR 15 [1925]: 512-22), who argued that the table arrangement was that of the Roman triclinium (a U-shaped table with Jesus and two other disciples at the bottom of the U), considered the position to the left of Jesus to be the one of second highest honor. Thus the present translation renders this “a place of honor” without specifying which one (since both of the two disciples to the right and to the left of Jesus would be in positions of honor). Other translations differ as to how they handle the phrase ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ (en tō kolpō tou Iēsou; “leaning on Jesus’ bosom,” KJV; “lying close to the breast of Jesus,” RSV; “reclining on Jesus’ breast,” NASB; “reclining next to him,” NIV, NRSV) but the symbolic significance of the beloved disciple’s position seems clear. He is close to Jesus and in an honored position. The phrase as an idiom for a place of honor at a feast is attested in the Epistles of Pliny (the Younger) 4.22.4, an approximate contemporary of Paul. |
(0.22) | (Joh 12:38) | 3 tn “The arm of the Lord” is an idiom for “God’s great power” (as exemplified through Jesus’ miraculous signs). This response of unbelief is interpreted by the author as a fulfillment of the prophetic words of Isaiah (Isa 53:1). The phrase ὁ βραχίων κυρίου (ho brachiōn kuriou) is a figurative reference to God’s activity and power which has been revealed in the sign-miracles which Jesus has performed (compare the previous verse). |
(0.22) | (Joh 9:6) | 2 tn Or “clay” (moistened earth of a clay-like consistency). The textual variant preserved in the Syriac text of Ephraem’s commentary on the Diatessaron (“he made eyes from his clay”) probably arose from the interpretation given by Irenaeus in Against Heresies: “that which the Artificer, the Word, had omitted to form in the womb, he then supplied in public.” This involves taking the clay as an allusion to Gen 2:7, which is very unlikely. |
(0.22) | (Joh 8:21) | 4 tn The expression ἐν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀποθανεῖσθε (en tē hamartia humōn apothaneisthe) is similar to an expression found in the LXX at Ezek 3:18, 20 and Prov 24:9. Note the singular of ἁμαρτία (the plural occurs later in v. 24). To die with one’s sin unrepented and unatoned would be the ultimate disaster to befall a person. Jesus’ warning is stern but to the point. |
(0.22) | (Joh 6:54) | 1 tn Or “who chews”; Grk ὁ τρώγων (ho trōgōn). The alternation between ἐσθίω (esthiō, “eat,” v. 53) and τρώγω (trōgō, “eats,” vv. 54, 56, 58; “consumes,” v. 57) may simply reflect a preference for one form over the other on the author’s part, rather than an attempt to express a slightly more graphic meaning. If there is a difference, however, the word used here (τρώγω) is the more graphic and vivid of the two (“gnaw” or “chew”). |
(0.22) | (Joh 4:11) | 5 sn Where then do you get this living water? The woman’s reply is an example of the “misunderstood statement,” a technique appearing frequently in John’s Gospel. Jesus was speaking of living water which was spiritual (ultimately a Johannine figure for the Holy Spirit, see John 7:38-39), but the woman thought he was speaking of flowing (fresh drinkable) water. Her misunderstanding gave Jesus the opportunity to explain what he really meant. |
(0.22) | (Joh 3:25) | 1 tc Was this dispute between the Baptist’s disciples and an individual Judean (᾿Ιουδαίου, Ioudaiou) or representatives of the Jewish authorities (᾿Ιουδαίων, Ioudaiōn)? There is good external support for the plural ᾿Ιουδαίων (P66 א* Θ ƒ1,13 565 al latt), but the external evidence for the singular ᾿Ιουδαίου is slightly stronger (P75 א2 A B L Ψ 33 1241 the majority of Byzantine minuscules and others). |
(0.22) | (Joh 1:29) | 2 sn Gen 22:8 is an important passage in the background of the title Lamb of God as applied to Jesus. In Jewish thought this was held to be a supremely important sacrifice. G. Vermès stated: “For the Palestinian Jew, all lamb sacrifice, and especially the Passover lamb and the Tamid offering, was a memorial of the Akedah with its effects of deliverance, forgiveness of sin and messianic salvation” (Scripture and Tradition in Judaism [StPB], 225). |
(0.22) | (Joh 1:13) | 5 tn The third phrase, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρός (oude ek thelēmatos andros), means much the same as the second one. The word here (ἀνηρ, anēr) is often used for a husband, resulting in the translation “or a husband’s decision,” or more generally, “or of any human volition whatsoever.” L. Morris may be right when he sees here an emphasis directed at the Jewish pride in race and patriarchal ancestry, although such a specific reference is difficult to prove (John [NICNT], 101). |
(0.22) | (Luk 23:52) | 1 sn Joseph went to Pilate and asked for the body because he sought to give Jesus an honorable burial. This was indeed a bold move on the part of Joseph of Arimathea, for it clearly and openly identified him with a man who had just been condemned and executed, namely, Jesus. His faith is exemplary, especially for someone who was a member of the council that handed Jesus over for crucifixion (cf. Mark 15:43). |
(0.22) | (Luk 23:32) | 1 tc The text reads either “two other criminals” or “others, two criminals.” The first reading (found in P75 א B) could be read as describing Jesus as a criminal, while the second (found in A C D L W Θ Ψ 070 0250 ƒ1,13 33 M) looks like an attempt to prevent this identification. The first reading, more difficult to explain from the other, is likely autographic. |
(0.22) | (Luk 23:2) | 2 sn They began to accuse him. There were three charges: (1) disturbing Jewish peace; (2) fomenting rebellion through advocating not paying taxes (a lie—20:20-26); and (3) claiming to be a political threat to Rome, by claiming to be a king, an allusion to Jesus’ messianic claims. The second and third charges were a direct challenge to Roman authority. Pilate would be forced to do something about them. |