Texts Notes Verse List Exact Search
Results 441 - 460 of 950 for understands (0.000 seconds)
Jump to page: First Prev 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next Last
  Discovery Box
(0.22) (Lam 2:20)

tn Heb “Look, O Lord! See!” When used in collocation with verbs of cognition, רָאָה (raʾah) means “to see for oneself” or “to take notice” (1 Sam 26:12). The parallelism between seeing and understanding is often emphasized (e.g., Exod 16:6; Isa 5:19; 29:15; Job 11:11; Eccl 6:5). See also 1:11 and compare 1:9, 12, 20; 3:50, 59, 60; 5:1.

(0.22) (Lam 1:15)

tc The MT reads the preposition בּ (bet, “in”) prefixed to קִרְבִּי (qirbi, “my midst”): בְּקִרְבִּי (beqirbi, “in my midst”); however, the LXX reads ἐκ μέσου μου (ek mesou mou) which may reflect a Vorlage of the preposition מִן (min, “from”): מִקִּרְבִּי (miqqirbi, “from my midst”). The LXX may have chosen ἐκ to accommodate understanding סִלָּה (sillah) as ἐξῆρεν (exēren, “to remove, lead away”). The textual deviation may have been caused by an unusual orthographic confusion.

(0.22) (Jer 51:30)

tn Heb “Her dwelling places have been set on fire. Her bars [i.e., the bars on the gates of her cities] have been broken.” The present translation has substituted the word “gates” for “bars” because the intent of the figure is to show that the bars of the gates have been broken, giving access to the city. “Gates” makes it easier for the modern reader to understand the figure.

(0.22) (Jer 50:26)

tn Heb “Pile her up like heaps.” Many commentators understand the comparison to be to heaps of grain (compare usage of עֲרֵמָה [ʿaremah] in Hag 2:16; Neh 13:15; Ruth 3:7). However, BDB 790 s.v. עֲרֵמָה is more likely correct that this refers to heaps of ruins (compare the usage in Neh 4:2 [3:34 HT]).

(0.22) (Jer 46:6)

tn The translation understands the articular adjectives to function as superlatives (cf. GKC 431 §133.g). The negator אַל (ʾal) usually occurs with the jussive, but the form here is imperfect (יָנוּס [yanus] rather than יָנָס [yanos]). It should be understood modally, as an abilitive modal (“unable to”) or deontic modal (ought not [try to]), or as expressing the speaker’s “conviction that something cannot happen” (GKC 317 §107.p).

(0.22) (Jer 17:21)

tn Heb “Be careful at the risk of your lives.” The expression with the preposition בּ (bet) is unique. Elsewhere the verb “be careful” is used with the preposition ל (lamed) in the sense of the reflexive. Hence the word “soul” cannot be simply reflexive here. BDB 1037 s.v. שָׁמַר Niph.1 understands this as a case where the preposition בּ introduces the cost or price (cf. BDB 90 s.v. בּ III.3.a).

(0.22) (Jer 16:19)

tn Heb “O Lord, my strength and my fortress, my refuge in the day of trouble.” The literal reading, which piles up attributes, is of course more forceful than the predications. However, piling up poetic metaphors like this adds to the length of the English sentence and risks lack of understanding on the part of some readers. Some rhetorical force has been sacrificed for the sake of clarity.

(0.22) (Jer 13:12)

sn Some scholars understand this as a popular proverb like that in Jer 31:29 and Ezek 18:2. Instead this is probably a truism; the function of wine jars is to be filled with wine. This may relate to the preceding verses where the Lord set forth his intention for Israel. It forms the basis for a ironic threat of judgment because they have failed to fulfill his purpose.

(0.22) (Jer 12:11)

tn For the use of this verb see the notes on 12:4. Some understand the homonym here as meaning “it [the desolated land] will mourn to me.” However, the only other use of the preposition עַל (ʿal) with this root means “to mourn over” not “to” (cf. Hos 10:5). For the use of the preposition here see BDB 753 s.v. עַל II.1.b and compare the use in Gen 48:7.

(0.22) (Jer 7:24)

tn Or “They went backward and not forward”; Heb “They were to the backward and not to the forward.” The two phrases used here appear nowhere else in the Bible, and the latter preposition plus adverb elsewhere is used temporally meaning “formerly” or “previously.” The translation follows the proposal of J. Bright, Jeremiah (AB), 57. Another option is, “they turned their backs to me, not their faces,” understanding the line as a variant of a line in 2:27.

(0.22) (Jer 7:18)

tn The form for “queen” (מְלֶכֶת [melekhet]), occurring 5 times in Scripture and all in Jeremiah, is not the expected construct form (מַלְכַּת [malkat]). It is as though the Masoretes wanted to read with “heaven” the word for “work” (מְלֶאכֶת [meleʾkhet]), i.e., the “hosts of,” a word that several Hebrew mss read and an understanding the LXX reflects. The other ancient and modern versions generally, however, accept it as a biform for the word “queen.”

(0.22) (Jer 5:19)

tn The MT reads the second masculine plural; this is probably a case of attraction to the second masculine plural pronoun in the preceding line. An alternative would be to understand a shift from speaking first to the people in the first half of the verse and then speaking to Jeremiah in the second half, where the verb is second masculine singular (e.g., “When you [people] say, “Why…?” then you, Jeremiah, tell them…”).

(0.22) (Jer 5:28)

tn The meaning of this word is uncertain. This verb occurs only here. The lexicons generally relate it to the word translated “plate” in Song 5:14 and understand it to mean “smooth, shiny” (so BDB 799 s.v. I עֶשֶׁת) or “fat” (so HALOT 850 s.v. II עֶשֶׁת). The word in Song 5:14 more likely means “smooth” than “plate” (so TEV). So “sleek” is most likely here.

(0.22) (Jer 2:20)

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.

(0.22) (Isa 41:2)

tn The verb יַרְדְּ (yard) is an otherwise unattested Hiphil form from רָדָה (radah, “rule”). But the Hiphil makes no sense with “kings” as object; one must understand an ellipsis and supply “him” (Cyrus) as the object. The Qumran scroll 1QIsaa has יוֹרִיד (yorid), which appears to be a Hiphil form from יָרַד (yarad, “go down”). Others suggest reading יָרֹד (yarod), a Qal form from רָדַד (radad, “beat down”).

(0.22) (Isa 37:14)

tc The Hebrew text has the plural, “letters.” The final mem (ם) may be dittographic (note the initial mem on the form that immediately follows). Some Greek and Aramaic witnesses have the singular. If so, one still has to deal with the yod that is part of the plural ending. J. N. Oswalt refers to various commentators who have suggested ways to understand the plural form (Isaiah [NICOT], 1:652).

(0.22) (Isa 30:1)

tn Heb “and pouring out a libation, but not [from] my spirit.” This translation assumes that the verb נָסַךְ (nasakh) means “pour out,” and that the cognate noun מַסֵּכָה (massekhah) means “libation.” In this case “pouring out a libation” alludes to a ceremony that formally ratifies an alliance. Another option is to understand the verb נָסַךְ as a homonym meaning “weave,” and the cognate noun מַסֵּכָה as a homonym meaning “covering.” In this case forming an alliance is likened to weaving a garment.

(0.22) (Isa 9:8)

tn The present translation assumes that this verse refers to judgment that had already fallen. Both verbs (perfects) are taken as indicating simple past; the vav (ו) on the second verb is understood as a simple vav conjunctive. Another option is to understand the verse as describing a future judgment (see 10:1-4). In this case the first verb is a perfect of certitude; the vav on the second verb is a vav consecutive.

(0.22) (Pro 30:3)

sn The construction uses repetition to make the point emphatically: “I do not know the knowledge of the Holy One.” Agur’s claim to being “brutish” is here clarified—he is not one of those who has knowledge or understanding of God. C. H. Toy thinks the speaker is being sarcastic in reference to others who may have claimed such knowledge (Proverbs [ICC], 521).

(0.22) (Pro 29:15)

tn The word “rod” is a metonymy of cause, in which the instrument being used to discipline is mentioned in place of the process of disciplining someone. So the expression refers to the process of discipline that is designed to correct someone. Some understand the words “rod and reproof” to form a hendiadys, meaning “a correcting [or, reproving] rod” (cf. NAB, NIV “the rod of correction”).



TIP #27: Get rid of popup ... just cross over its boundary. [ALL]
created in 0.06 seconds
powered by bible.org