(0.47) | (Pro 29:22) | 3 tn Heb “an abundance of transgression.” The phrase means “abounding in transgression” (BDB 913 s.v. רַב 1.d]). Not only does the angry person stir up dissension, but he also frequently causes sin in himself and in others (e.g., 14:17, 29; 15:18; 16:32; 22:24). |
(0.42) | (Eze 21:24) | 2 tn Heb “Because you have brought to remembrance your guilt when your transgressions are uncovered so that your sins are revealed in all your deeds—because you are remembered, by the hand you will be seized.” |
(0.42) | (1Sa 2:24) | 1 tn The verb is a Hiphil participle from עָבַר (ʿabar). The Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew (p. 309) understands it to mean “spread[ing] about” in this context. The term can also mean “causing to transgress.” |
(0.42) | (Num 14:41) | 1 tn The line literally has, “Why is this [that] you are transgressing….” The demonstrative pronoun is enclitic; it brings the force of “why in the world are you doing this now?” |
(0.33) | (Amo 4:4) | 2 tn The Hebrew word translated “rebel” (also in the following line) could very well refer here to Israel’s violations of their covenant with God (see also the term “crimes” in 1:3 [with note] and the phrase “covenant transgressions” in 2:4 [with note] and 3:14). |
(0.33) | (Amo 2:4) | 1 tn This is the same Hebrew term that is translated “crimes” in the previous oracles (see at 1:3). The change to “covenant transgressions” reflects the probability that the prophet is condemning the nation of Israel for violating stipulations of the Mosaic Law. |
(0.33) | (Amo 2:1) | 1 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3. |
(0.33) | (Amo 1:13) | 1 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3. |
(0.33) | (Amo 1:11) | 1 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3. |
(0.33) | (Amo 1:9) | 1 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3. |
(0.33) | (Amo 1:6) | 2 tn Traditionally, “transgressions” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) or “sins” (NIV). For an explanation of the atrocities outlined in this oracle as treaty violations of God’s mandate to Noah in Gen 9:5-7, see the note on the word “violations” in 1:3. |
(0.33) | (Dan 8:23) | 1 tc The present translation reads הַפְּשָׁעִים (happeshaʿim, “the rebellious acts”) for the MT הַפֹּשְׁעִים (happosheʿim, “the rebels”). While the MT is understandable (cf. NIV, “when rebels have become completely wicked”), the filling up of transgressions is a familiar OT expression (cf. Gen 15:16) and fits this context well. Cf. the LXX, Theodotion, the Vulgate, and the Syriac. |
(0.33) | (Lam 2:14) | 3 tn Heb “worthless and enticements.” The words שָׁוְא וּמַדּוּחִים (shavʾ umaddukhim) form a nominal hendiadys meaning “worthless enticements” or “misleading falsehoods.” The noun מַדּוּחַ (madduakh), meaning “enticement” or “transgression,” is a hapax legomenon (term that appears only once in the Hebrew OT). It is related to the verb נָדָח (nadakh, “to entice, lead astray”), which often refers to idolatry. |
(0.33) | (Pro 29:6) | 1 tn The Syriac and Tg. Prov 29:6 simplify the meaning by writing it with a passive verb: “the evil man is ensnared by his guilt.” The metaphor of the snare indicates that the evil person will be caught in his own transgression. |
(0.33) | (Pro 17:19) | 1 tn Heb “the one who loves transgression, the one who loves a quarrel.” There is some ambiguity in the first line. The meaning would not differ greatly if either were taken as the subject, but the parallelism suggests that the proverb is about a quarrelsome and arrogant person who loves sin and invites destruction. |
(0.33) | (Pro 12:13) | 2 tn Heb “transgression of the lips.” The noun “lips” is a genitive of specification and it functions as a metonymy of cause for speech: sinful talk or sinning by talking. J. H. Greenstone suggests that this refers to litigation; the wicked attempt to involve the innocent (Proverbs, 131). |
(0.33) | (Job 34:37) | 2 tc If this reading stands, it would mean that Job shows contempt, meaning that he mocks them and accuses God. It is a bold touch, but workable. Of the many suggested emendations, Dhorme alters some of the vowels and obtains a reading “and casts doubt among us,” and then takes “transgression” from the first colon for the complement. Some commentators simply delete the line. |
(0.33) | (Lev 5:5) | 1 sn What all the transgressions in Lev 5:1-4 have in common is that the time is past for handling the original situation properly (i.e., testifying in court, following purity regulations, or fulfilling an oath), so now the person has become guilty and needs to follow corrective sacrificial procedures. |
(0.29) | (Rom 4:25) | 3 tn Grk “because of.” However, in light of the unsatisfactory sense that a causal nuance would here suggest, it has been argued that the second διά (dia) is prospective rather than retrospective (D. Moo, Romans [NICNT], 288-89). The difficulty of this interpretation is the structural balance that both διά phrases provide (“given over because of our transgressions…raised because of our justification”). However the poetic structure of this verse strengthens the likelihood that the clauses each have a different force. |
(0.29) | (Jer 2:20) | 3 tc The MT of this verse has two examples of the old second feminine singular perfect, שָׁבַרְתִּי (shavarti) and נִתַּקְתִּי (nittaqti), which the Masoretes mistook for first singulars leading to the proposal to read אֶעֱבוֹר (ʾeʿevor, “I will not transgress”) for אֶעֱבֹד (ʾeʿevod, “I will not serve”). The latter understanding of the forms is accepted in KJV but rejected by almost all modern English versions as being less appropriate to the context than the reading accepted in the translation given here. |