Discovery Box| (0.21) | (Act 25:10) | 3 tn Although BDAG 175 s.v. βῆμα 3 gives the meaning “tribunal” for this verse, and a number of modern translations use similar terms (“court,” NIV; “tribunal,” NRSV), since the bema was a standard feature in Greco-Roman cities of the time, there is no need for an alternative translation here. Here of course Paul’s reference to “Caesar’s judgment seat” is a form of metonymy; since Festus is Caesar’s representative, Festus’ judgment seat represents Caesar’s own. |
| (0.21) | (Act 9:25) | 1 tn The opening in the wall is not specifically mentioned here, but the parallel account in 2 Cor 11:33 mentions a “window” or “opening” (θυρίς, thuris) in the city wall through which Paul was lowered. One alternative to introducing mention of the opening is to translate Acts 9:25 “they let him down over the wall,” as suggested in L&N 7.61. This option is not employed by many translations, however, because for the English reader it creates an (apparent) contradiction between Acts 9:25 and 2 Cor 11:33. In reality the account here is simply more general, omitting the detail about the window. |
| (0.21) | (Act 7:43) | 3 tc ‡ Most mss, including several significant ones (P74 א A C E Ψ 33 1739 M h p vg syh mae bo Cyr), have ὑμῶν (humōn, “your”) here, in conformity with the LXX of Amos 5:26. But other significant and diverse witnesses lack the pronoun: The lack of ὑμῶν in B D 36 453 gig syp sa Irlat Or is difficult to explain if it is not the autographic wording here. NA28 has the word in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity. |
| (0.21) | (Act 2:14) | 2 tn Or “You Jewish men.” “Judea” is preferred here because it is paired with “Jerusalem,” a location. This suggests locality rather than ethnic background is the primary emphasis in the context. As for “men,” the Greek term here is ἀνήρ (anēr), which only exceptionally is used in a generic sense of both males and females. In this context, where “all” who live in Jerusalem are addressed, it is conceivable that this is a generic usage, although it can also be argued that Peter’s remarks were addressed primarily to the men present, even if women were there. |
| (0.21) | (Joh 14:2) | 5 tn Or “If not, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you?” What is the meaning of the last clause with or without the ὅτι? One of the questions that must be answered here is whether or not τόπος (topos) is to be equated with μονή (monē). In Rev 12:8 τόπος is used to refer to a place in heaven, which would suggest that the two are essentially equal here. Jesus is going ahead of believers to prepare a place for them, a permanent dwelling place in the Father’s house (see the note on this phrase in v. 2). |
| (0.21) | (Joh 6:69) | 3 sn You have the words of eternal life…you are the Holy One of God! In contrast to the response of some of his disciples, here is the response of the Twelve, whom Jesus then questioned concerning their loyalty to him. This was the big test, and the Twelve, with Peter as spokesman, passed with flying colors. The confession here differs considerably from the synoptic accounts (Matt 16:16, Mark 8:29, and Luke 9:20) and concerns directly the disciples’ personal loyalty to Jesus, in contrast to those other disciples who had deserted him (John 6:66). |
| (0.21) | (Joh 4:16) | 1 tc Most witnesses have “Jesus” here, either with the article (אc C2 D L Ws Ψ 086 M lat) or without (א* A Θ ƒ1,13 al), while several significant and early witnesses lack the name (P66,75 B C* 33vid). It is unlikely that scribes would have deliberately expunged the name of Jesus from the text here, especially since it aids the reader with the flow of the dialogue. Further, that the name occurs both anarthrously and with the article suggests that it was a later addition. (For similar arguments, see the note on “woman” in 4:11). |
| (0.21) | (Luk 16:13) | 3 sn The term money is used to translate mammon, the Aramaic term for wealth or possessions. The point is not that money is inherently evil, but that it is often misused so that it is a means of evil; see 1 Tim 6:6-10, 17-19. Here “money” is personified as a potential master and thus competes with God for the loyalty of the disciple. The passage is ultimately not a condemnation of wealth (there is no call here for absolute poverty) but a call for unqualified discipleship. God must be first, not money or possessions. |
| (0.21) | (Luk 13:7) | 5 tc ‡ Several witnesses (P75 A L Θ Ψ 070 ƒ13 33 579 892 al lat co) have “therefore” (οὖν, oun) here. This conjunction has the effect of strengthening the logical connection with the preceding statement but also of reducing the rhetorical power and urgency of the imperative. In light of the slightly greater internal probability of adding a conjunction to an otherwise asyndetic sentence, as well as significant external support for the omission (א B D W ƒ1 M), the shorter reading appears to be more likely as the earlier wording here. NA28 puts the conjunction in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity. |
| (0.21) | (Luk 12:46) | 2 tn Or “unbelieving.” Here the translation employs the slightly more ambiguous “unfaithful,” which creates a link with the point of the parable—faithfulness versus unfaithfulness in servants. The example of this verse must be taken together with the examples of vv. 47-48 as part of a scale of reactions with the most disobedient response coming here. The fact that this servant is placed in a distinct group, unlike the one in vv. 47-48, also suggests ultimate exclusion. This is the hypocrite of Matt 24:51. |
| (0.21) | (Luk 12:38) | 1 sn The second or third watch of the night would be between 9 p.m. and 3 a.m. on a Roman schedule and 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. on a Jewish schedule. Luke uses the four-watch schedule of the Romans in Acts 12:4, so that is more probable here. Regardless of the precise times of the watches, however, it is clear that the late-night watches when a person is least alert are in view here. |
| (0.21) | (Luk 3:31) | 1 sn The use of Nathan here as the son of David is different than Matthew, where Solomon is named. Nathan was David’s third son. It is not entirely clear what causes the difference. Some argue Nathan stresses a prophetic connection, but it is not clear how (through confusion with the prophet Nathan?). Others note the absence of a reference to Jeconiah later, so that here there is a difference to show the canceling out of this line. The differences appear to mean that Matthew’s line is a “royal and physical” line, while Luke has a “royal and legal” line. |
| (0.21) | (Mar 12:41) | 2 tc Most mss, predominantly of the Western and Byzantine texts (A D W Θ ƒ1,13 33 2542 M lat), have ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (ho Iēsous, “Jesus”) as the explicit subject here, while א B L Δ Ψ 892 lack the name. A natural scribal tendency is to expand the text, especially to add the Lord’s name as the explicit subject of a verb. Scribes much less frequently omitted the Lord’s name (cf. the readings of W Θ 565 1424 in Mark 12:17). The internal and external evidence support one another here in behalf of the shorter reading. |
| (0.21) | (Mar 6:33) | 3 tc The translation here follows the reading προῆλθον (proēlthon, “they preceded”), found in א B (0187) 892 lat co. Some mss (D 28 33 700) read συνῆλθον (sunēlthon, “arrived there with them”), while the majority of mss, most of them late (P84vid [A ƒ13] M syh), conflate the two readings (προῆλθον αὐτοὺς καὶ συνῆλθον πρὸς αὐτόν, “they preceded them and came together to him”). The reading adopted here thus has better external credentials than the variants. As well, it is the harder reading internally, being changed “by copyists who thought it unlikely that the crowd on the land could have outstripped the boat” (TCGNT 78). |
| (0.21) | (Mar 5:1) | 2 tc The textual tradition here is quite complicated. Most later mss (A C ƒ13 M syp,h) read “Gadarenes,” which is the better reading in Matt 8:28. Other mss (א2 L Δ Θ ƒ1 28 33 565 579 700 892 1241 1424 al sys bo) have “Gergesenes.” Others (א* B D latt sa) have “Gerasenes,” which is the reading followed in the translation here and in Luke 8:26. The difference between Matthew and Mark (which is parallel to Luke) may well have to do with uses of variant regional terms. |
| (0.21) | (Mar 3:21) | 1 tc Western witnesses D W it, instead of reading οἱ παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ (hoi par’ autou, here translated “family”), have περὶ αὐτοῦ οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ λοιποί (peri autou hoi grammateis kai hoi loipoi, “[when] the scribes and others [heard] about him”). But this reading is obviously motivated, for it removes the embarrassing statement about Jesus’ family’s opinion of him as “out of his mind” and transfers this view to the Lord’s opponents. The fact that virtually all other witnesses have οἱ παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ here, coupled with the strong internal evidence for the shorter reading, shows this Western reading to be secondary. |
| (0.21) | (Mat 6:24) | 3 sn The term money is used to translate mammon, the Aramaic term for wealth or possessions. The point is not that money is inherently evil, but that it is often misused so that it is a means of evil; see 1 Tim 6:6-10, 17-19. Here “money” is personified as a potential master and thus competes with God for the loyalty of the disciple. The passage is ultimately not a condemnation of wealth (there is no call here for absolute poverty) but a call for unqualified discipleship. God must be first, not money or possessions. |
| (0.21) | (Hab 3:4) | 1 tc The subject, נֹגָהּ (nogah, “brightness”), is masculine but the verb is feminine. The LXX and most English translations add “his” to the subject. The verb form in the MT, an imperfect form of the stative verb הָיָה (hayah, “to be”) should always be future tense, as here in the LXX, and in English translations in the Psalms. But here most English translations use past or present. The BHS editors suggest emending the verb תִּהְיֶה (tihyeh) to the preposition and suffix תַּחְתָּיו (takhtayv) to make “[his] brightness is as lightning beneath him.” While this gets rid of the grammatical problem using similar looking consonants, it is speculative. |
| (0.21) | (Amo 3:11) | 2 tn Heb “He will bring down your power from you.” Some emend the text to read, “Your power will be brought down from you.” The shift, however, from an active to a passive sense also appears at 3:14 (“I will destroy Bethel’s altars. The horns of the altar will be cut off.”) The pronouns (“your…you”) are feminine singular, indicating that the personified city of Samaria is addressed here. Samaria’s “power” here is her defenses and/or wealth. |
| (0.21) | (Joe 2:6) | 3 tn Heb “all faces gather beauty”; or “all faces gather a glow.” The Hebrew word פָּארוּר (paʾrur) is found in the OT only here and in Nah 2:11. Its meaning is very uncertain. Some scholars associate it with a root that signifies “glowing”; hence, “all faces gather a glow of dread.” Others associate the word with פָּרוּר (parur, “pot”); hence, “all faces gather blackness.” Still others take the root to signify “beauty”; hence, “all faces gather in their beauty,” in the sense of growing pale due to fear. This is the view assumed here. |
