(0.17) | (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. |
(0.17) | (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. |
(0.17) | (Luk 18:22) | 4 sn The call for sacrifice comes with a promise of eternal reward:…you will have treasure in heaven. Jesus’ call is a test to see how responsive the man is to God’s direction through him. Will he walk the path God’s agent calls him to walk? For a rich person who got it right, see Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10. |
(0.17) | (Luk 12:7) | 1 sn This represents the second call by Jesus not to be afraid in the section (previously in v. 4). Since the previous reference was related to fear of persecution, it is probable that this one does as well. Once again the sparrows are mentioned and the argument is from lesser to greater (if God cares about individual hairs on the head and about sparrows, how much more does he care about people). |
(0.17) | (Luk 10:14) | 1 sn Jesus’ general point is that in the day of judgment the Gentile cities will come off better than the cities of Galilee. This is not to indicate toleration for the sins of the Gentile cities, but to show how badly the judgment will go for the Galilean ones. In the OT prophetic oracles were pronounced repeatedly against Tyre and Sidon: Isa 23:1-18; Ezek 26:1-28:26; Joel 4:4; Zech 9:2-4. |
(0.17) | (Luk 9:39) | 4 tn Or “bruising,” or “crushing.” This verb appears to allude to the damage caused when it throws him to the ground. According to L&N 19.46 it is difficult to know from this verb precisely what the symptoms caused by the demon were, but it is clear they must have involved severe pain. The multiple details given in the account show how gruesome the condition of the boy was. |
(0.17) | (Luk 8:32) | 4 sn Many have discussed why Jesus gave them permission, since the animals were destroyed. However, this is another example of a miracle that is a visual lesson. The demons are destructive: They were destroying the man. They destroyed the pigs. They destroy whatever they touch. The point was to take demonic influence seriously, as well as Jesus’ power over it as a picture of the larger battle for human souls. There would be no doubt how the man’s transformation had taken place. |
(0.17) | (Luk 2:34) | 4 sn The phrase the falling and rising of many emphasizes that Jesus will bring division in the nation, as some will be judged (falling) and others blessed (rising) because of how they respond to him. The language is like Isa 8:14-15 and conceptually like Isa 28:13-16. Here is the first hint that Jesus’ coming will be accompanied with some difficulties. |
(0.17) | (Luk 2:7) | 3 sn There was no place for them in the inn. There is no drama in how this is told. There is no search for a variety of places to stay or a heartless innkeeper. (Such items are later, nonbiblical embellishments.) Bethlehem was not large and there was simply no other place to stay. The humble surroundings of the birth are ironic in view of the birth’s significance. |
(0.17) | (Mar 10:21) | 2 sn The call for sacrifice comes with a promise of eternal reward: You will have treasure in heaven. Jesus’ call is a test to see how responsive the man is to God’s direction through him. Will he walk the path God’s agent calls him to walk? For a rich person who got it right, see Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10. |
(0.17) | (Mar 5:13) | 2 sn Many have discussed why Jesus gave them permission, since the animals were destroyed. However, this is another example of a miracle that is a visual lesson. The demons are destructive: They were destroying the man. They destroyed the pigs. They destroy whatever they touch. The point was to take demonic influence seriously, as well as Jesus’ power over it as a picture of the larger battle for human souls. There would be no doubt how the man’s transformation had taken place. |
(0.17) | (Mat 19:21) | 2 sn The call for sacrifice comes with a promise of eternal reward: You will have treasure in heaven. Jesus’ call is a test to see how responsive the man is to God’s direction through him. Will he walk the path God’s agent calls him to walk? For a rich person who got it right, see Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10. |
(0.17) | (Mat 11:22) | 1 sn Jesus’ general point is that in the day of judgment the Gentile cities will come off better than the cities of Galilee. This is not to indicate toleration for the sins of the Gentile cities, but to show how badly the judgment will go for the Galilean ones. In the OT prophetic oracles were pronounced repeatedly against Tyre and Sidon: Isa 23:1-18; Ezek 26:1-28:26; Joel 4:4; Zech 9:2-4. |
(0.17) | (Mat 10:31) | 1 sn This represents the third call by Jesus not to be afraid in the section (previously in vv. 26, 28). Since these two previous references were related to fear of persecution, it is probable that this one does as well. Once again the sparrows are mentioned and the argument is from lesser to greater (if God cares about individual hairs on the head and about sparrows, how much more does he care about people). |
(0.17) | (Amo 1:3) | 4 sn Like threshing sledges with iron teeth. A threshing sledge was made of wooden boards embedded with sharp stones or iron teeth. As the sledge was pulled over the threshing floor, the stones or iron teeth would separate the grain from the stalks. See O. Borowski, Agriculture in Iron Age Israel, 64-65. Here the threshing metaphor is used to emphasize how violently and inhumanely the Arameans (the people of Damascus) had treated the people of Gilead (located east of the Jordan River). |
(0.17) | (Eze 1:5) | 1 tc Heb “from its midst” (מִתּוֹכָהּ, mitokhah). The LXX reads ἐν τῷ μέσῳ (en tō mesō, “in the midst of it”). The LXX also reads ἐν for מִתּוֹךְ (mitokh) in v. 4. The translator of the LXX of Ezekiel either read בְּתוֹךְ (betokh, “within”) in his Hebrew exemplar or could not imagine how מִתּוֹךְ could make sense and so chose to use ἐν. The Hebrew would be understood by adding “from its midst emerged the forms of four living beings.” |
(0.17) | (Lam 4:1) | 3 tn Heb “had grown dim.” The verb יוּעַם (yu’am), Hophal imperfect third person masculine singular from עָמַם (’amam, “to conceal, darken”), literally means “to be dimmed” or “to be darkened.” Most English versions render this literally: the gold has “become dim” (KJV, NKJV), “grown dim” (RSV, NRSV), “is dulled” (NJPS), and “grown dull” (TEV); however, the NIV has captured the sense well: “How the gold has lost its luster.” |
(0.17) | (Jer 43:10) | 5 tn The Greek version reads the verbs in this sentence as third person (“he will set”) and second person (“you have buried”). This fits the context better, but it is difficult to explain how the Hebrew could have arisen from this smoother reading. The figure of substitution (metonymy of cause for effect) is probably involved: “I will have him set” and “I have had you bury.” The effect of these substitutions is to emphasize the sovereignty of God. |
(0.17) | (Jer 35:8) | 1 tn Heb “We have not drunk wine all our days.” Actually, vv. 8b-9a are a series of infinitive constructs plus the negative לְבִלְתִּי (levilti) that explain the particulars of how they have obeyed, i.e., by not drinking wine…and by not building….” The more direct declarative statement is used here to shorten the sentence and is more in keeping with contemporary style. |
(0.17) | (Jer 2:21) | 1 tc Heb “I planted you as a choice vine, all of it true seed. How then have you turned into a putrid thing to me, a strange [or wild] vine.” The question expresses surprise and consternation. The translation is based on a redivision of the Hebrew words סוּרֵי הַגֶּפֶן (sure haggefen) into סוֹרִיָּה גֶּפֶן (soriyyah gefen) and the recognition of a hapax legomenon סוֹרִיָּה (soriyyah) meaning “putrid, stinking thing.” See HALOT 749 s.v. סוֹרִי. |