(0.30) | (Psa 51:16) | 2 tn The translation assumes that the cohortative is used in a hypothetical manner in a formally unmarked conditional sentence, “You do not want a sacrifice, should I offer [it]” (cf. NEB). For other examples of cohortatives in the protasis (“if” clause) of a conditional sentence, see GKC 320 §108.e. (It should be noted, however, that GKC understands this particular verse in a different manner. See GKC 320 §108.f, where it is suggested that the cohortative is part of an apodosis with the protasis being suppressed.) |
(0.30) | (Psa 46:10) | 2 tn Heb “do nothing/be quiet (see 1 Sam 15:16) and know.” This statement may be addressed to the hostile nations, indicating they should cease their efforts to destroy God’s people, or to Judah, indicating they should rest secure in God’s protection. Since the psalm is an expression of Judah’s trust and confidence, it is more likely that the words are directed to the nations, who are actively promoting chaos and are in need of a rebuke. |
(0.30) | (Psa 6:10) | 1 tn In the structure of the Psalm, this verse is either another petition or a statement of confidence. If a petition, the four prefixed verbal forms in this verse should be understood as jussives. By form, many prefixed verbs can be either imperfect or jussive. But the third verb in the series, יָשֻׁבוּ (yashuvu), can be distinguished as an imperfect by its qibbuts theme vowel, and is not a jussive (which would have had a qamets hatuph or holem). Expecting all four verbs to be the same due to parallelism leads to the conclusion that this section is a statement of confidence, in which the imperfect verbs should be treated as future. |
(0.30) | (Job 5:22) | 2 tn The verb is a negated jussive. According to GKC it is used here to express the conviction that something cannot or should not happen (GKC 322 §109.e). The examples in GKC are generally not compelling, faltering in the Psalms by not accounting for changes in speaking voices, and especially concerning the idea that something cannot happen. However, the notion that something should (not) happen is the sort of deontic modality typical of the jussive generally, here sounding like advice (GKC 321 §109.b). |
(0.30) | (2Ki 10:6) | 2 sn Jehu’s command is intentionally vague. Does he mean that they should bring the guardians (those who are “heads” over Ahab’s sons) for a meeting, or does he mean that they should bring the literal heads of Ahab’s sons with them (so reads Lucian’s Greek translation, the Syriac Peshitta, and some mss of the Targum)? The city leaders interpret his words in the literal sense, but Jehu’s command is so ambiguous he is able to deny complicity in the executions (see v. 9). |
(0.30) | (1Sa 30:23) | 1 tc This clause is difficult in the MT. The present translation accepts the text as found in the MT and understands this clause to be elliptical, with an understood verb such as “look” or “consider.” On the other hand, the LXX seems to reflect a slightly different Hebrew text, reading “after” where the MT has “my brothers.” The Greek translation yields the following translation: “You should not do this after the Lord has delivered us.” Although the Greek reading should be taken seriously, it seems better to follow the MT here. |
(0.30) | (Jos 18:28) | 3 tn The structure of this list presents problems. In v. 28 no conjunction appears before “Haeleph” or “Kiriath” in the Hebrew text. This suggests they should be compounded with the preceding names, yielding “Zelah Haeleph” and “Gibeah Kiriath” respectively. This results in a list of only 12 cities, however, while the summary statement (v. 28) gives the number 14. One should note, however, that the city lists in chap. 15 do not consistently use the conjunction before the name of each city. See also Josh 19:7, where no conjunction appears before “Rimmon,” but the summary assumes that Ain and Rimmon are distinct. |
(0.29) | (Rev 17:5) | 2 tn Some translations consider the word μυστήριον (mustērion, “mystery”) a part of the name written (“Mystery Babylon the Great,” so KJV, NIV), but the gender of both ὄνομα (onoma, “name”) and μυστήριον are neuter, while the gender of “Babylon” is feminine. This strongly suggests that μυστήριον should be understood as an appositive to ὄνομα (“a name, i.e., a mystery”). |
(0.29) | (Rev 6:16) | 2 tn It is difficult to say where this quotation ends. The translation ends it after “withstand it” at the end of v. 17, but it is possible that it should end here, after “Lamb” at the end of v. 16. If it ends after “Lamb,” v. 17 is a parenthetical explanation by the author. |
(0.29) | (Jud 1:12) | 3 tc Several witnesses (A Cvid 88 1243 1846 2492 al), influenced by the parallel in 2 Pet 2:13, read ἀπάταις (apatais, “deceptions”) for ἀγάπαις (agapais, “love-feasts”) in v. 12. However, ἀγάπαις has much stronger and earlier support and makes much better sense in the context; it should therefore be considered authentic. |
(0.29) | (2Jo 1:7) | 2 tn “As” is not in the Greek text. It is supplied for clarity in English, since (like in the same confession in 1 John 4:2) ᾿Ιησοῦν (Iēsoun) should be understood as object and Χριστόν (Christon) as complement of an object-complement double accusative construction. |
(0.29) | (1Jo 3:3) | 3 tn Grk “that one.” Context indicates a reference to Jesus here. The switch from αὐτός (autos) to ἐκείνος (ekeinos) parallels 1 John 2:6 (see note there). Since purity of life is mentioned in the context, this almost certainly refers to Jesus in his earthly life and ministry as the example believers should imitate (a major theme of the author throughout 1 John). |
(0.29) | (1Jo 3:1) | 3 tc The phrase καὶ ἐσμεν (kai esmen, “and we are”) is omitted in 049 69 1175 2492 M. There seems to be no theological reason to omit the words, though possibly some scribes considered it redundant. This has all the earmarks of a classic case of homoioteleuton, for the preceding word (κληθῶμεν, klēthōmen, “we should be called”) ends in -μεν (-men). |
(0.29) | (1Jo 1:6) | 1 sn The relationship of the phrase keep on walking to if we say is very important for understanding the problem expressed in 1:6. If one should say (εἴπωμεν, eipōmen) that he has fellowship with God, and yet continues walking (περιπατῶμεν, peripatōmen) in the darkness, then it follows (in the apodosis, the “then” clause) that he is lying and not practicing the truth. |
(0.29) | (1Pe 5:11) | 1 tn No verb is expressed here but the verb “is” or “belongs” is clearly implied. This doxology expresses a fact for which God should be glorified (as in 4:11), rather than a wish or prayer (“may power be to him”). |
(0.29) | (1Pe 3:17) | 1 tn Grk “if the will of God should will it.” As in 3:14 the Greek construction here implies that suffering for doing good was not what God normally willed, even though it could happen, and in fact may have happened to some of the readers (cf. 4:4, 12-19). |
(0.29) | (Phm 1:12) | 1 tn Grk “whom I have sent.” The Greek sentence was broken up in the English translation for the sake of clarity. Although the tense of the Greek verb here is past (an aorist tense) the reader should understand that Onesimus may well have been standing in the very presence of Paul as he wrote this letter. |
(0.29) | (2Ti 3:16) | 2 sn Inspired by God. Some have connected this adjective in a different way and translated it as “every inspired scripture is also useful.” But this violates the parallelism of the two adjectives in the sentence, and the arrangement of words makes clear that both should be taken as predicate adjectives: “every scripture is inspired…and useful.” |
(0.29) | (1Ti 6:10) | 1 tn This could be taken to mean “a root,” but the phrase “of all evils” clearly makes it definite. This seems to be not entirely true to life (some evils are unrelated to love of money), but it should be read as a case of hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point more strongly). |
(0.29) | (1Ti 2:12) | 1 sn But I do not allow. Although the Greek conjunction δέ (de) can have a simple connective force (“and”), it is best to take it as contrastive here: Verse 11 gives a positive statement (that is to say, that a woman should learn). This was a radical and liberating departure from the Jewish view that women were not to learn the law. |