(0.17) | (Pro 3:3) | 2 sn The picture of tying mercy and truth on the neck (also at 6:21) is similar to tying God’s commands on the hand or letting them be frontlets for the eyes (Deut 6:8; 11:18). To live by these characteristics is compared to wearing them like clothes, to have these qualities adorn the “wearer.” The picture of writing them on the heart emphasizes the inward appropriation of the teachings as a complement to their outward manifestation. |
(0.17) | (Psa 109:22) | 1 tc The verb in the Hebrew text (חָלַל, khalal) appears to be a Qal form from the root חלל meaning “pierced; wounded.” However, the Qal of this root is otherwise unattested. The translation assumes an emendation to יָחִיל (yakhil), a Qal imperfect from חוּל (khul, “tremble”) or to חֹלַל (kholal), a Polal perfect from חוּל (khul). See Ps 55:4, which reads לִבִּי יָחִיל בְּקִרְבִּי (libbi yakhil beqirbbi, “my heart trembles [i.e., “beats violently”] within me”). |
(0.17) | (Psa 101:4) | 1 tn Heb “a perverse heart will turn aside from me.” The adjective עִקֵּשׁ (ʿiqqesh) has the basic nuance “twisted; crooked” and by extension refers to someone or something that is morally perverse (see Ps 18:26). It appears frequently in the Book of Proverbs, where it is used of evil people (22:5), speech (8:8; 19:1), thoughts (11:20; 17:20), and life styles (2:15; 28:6). |
(0.17) | (Psa 86:11) | 3 tn Heb “Bind my heart to the fearing of your name.” The verb translated “bind” occurs only here in the Piel stem. It appears twice in the Qal, meaning “be joined” in both cases (Gen 49:6; Isa 14:20). To “fear” God’s name means to have a healthy respect for him which in turn motivates one to obey his commands (see Pss 61:5; 102:15). |
(0.17) | (Psa 77:6) | 1 tn Heb “I will remember my song in the night, with my heart I will reflect. And my spirit searched.” As in v. 4, the words of v. 6a are understood as what the psalmist said earlier. Consequently the words “I said” are supplied in the translation for clarification (see v. 10). The prefixed verbal form with vav (ו) consecutive at the beginning of the final line is taken as sequential to the perfect “I thought” in v. 6. |
(0.17) | (Job 15:12) | 2 tn The verb simply means “to take.” The RSV has “carry you away.” E. Dhorme (Job, 212-13) goes further, saying that it implies being unhinged by passion, to be carried away by the passions beyond good sense (pp. 212-13). Pope and Tur-Sinai suggest that the suffix on the verb is datival, and translate it, “What has taken from you your mind?” But the parallelism shows that “your heart” and “your eyes” are subjects. |
(0.17) | (Job 9:23) | 3 tn The term מַסַּת (massat), a hapax legomenon, was translated “trial” in the older versions, but it is not from נָסָה (nasah, “to tempt; to test; to try”); instead it is from מָסַס (masas, “to flow”). It is used in the Niphal to speak of the heart “melting” in suffering. So the idea behind this image is that of despair. This is the view that most interpreters adopt; it requires no change of the text whatsoever. |
(0.17) | (Job 9:4) | 4 tn The verb is the Hiphil of the verb קָשָׁה (qashah, “to be hard”). It frequently is found with the word for “neck,” describing people as “stiff-necked,” i.e., stubborn, unbending. So the idea of resisting God fits well. The fact that this word occurs in Exodus with the idea of hardening the heart against God may indicate that there is an allusion to Pharaoh here. |
(0.17) | (2Ki 10:30) | 1 tn Heb “Because you have done well by doing what is proper in my eyes—according to all which was in my heart you have done to the house of Ahab—sons of four generations will sit for you on the throne of Israel.” In the Hebrew text the Lord’s statement is one long sentence (with a parenthesis). The translation above divides it into shorter sentences for stylistic reasons. |
(0.17) | (Deu 10:16) | 1 tn Heb “circumcise the foreskin of” (cf. KJV, ASV, NRSV). Reference to the Abrahamic covenant prompts Moses to recall the sign of that covenant, namely, physical circumcision (Gen 17:9-14). Just as that act signified total covenant obedience, so spiritual circumcision (cleansing of the heart) signifies more internally a commitment to be pliable and obedient to the will of God (cf. Deut 30:6; Jer 4:4; 9:26). |
(0.17) | (Exo 20:20) | 1 tn נַסּוֹת (nassot) is the Piel infinitive construct; it forms the purpose of God’s coming with all the accompanying phenomena. The verb can mean “to try, test, prove.” The sense of “prove” fits this context best because the terrifying phenomena were intended to put the fear of God in their hearts so that they would obey. In other words, God was inspiring them to obey, not simply testing to see if they would. |
(0.17) | (Exo 17:12) | 2 tn The term used here is the adjective כְּבֵדִים (kevedim). It means “heavy,” but in this context the idea is more that of being tired. This is the important word that was used in the plague stories: when the heart of Pharaoh was hard, then the Israelites did not gain their freedom or victory. Likewise here, when the staff was lowered because Moses’ hands were “heavy,” Israel started to lose. |
(0.17) | (Exo 14:25) | 2 tn The clause is וַיְנַהֲגֵהוּ בִּכְבֵדֻת (vayenahagehu bikhevedut). The verb means “to drive a chariot”; here in the Piel it means “cause to drive.” The suffix is collective, and so the verbal form can be translated “and caused them to drive.” The idea of the next word is “heaviness” or “hardship”; it recalls the previous uses of related words to describe Pharaoh’s heart. Here it indicates that the driving of the crippled chariots was with difficulty. |
(0.17) | (Exo 9:34) | 2 tn The construction is another verbal hendiadys: וַיֹּסֶף לַחֲטֹא (vayyosef lakhatoʾ), literally rendered “and he added to sin.” The infinitive construct becomes the main verb, and the Hiphil preterite becomes adverbial. The text is clearly interpreting as sin the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and his refusal to release Israel. At the least this means that the plagues are his fault, but the expression probably means more than this—he was disobeying Yahweh God. |
(0.17) | (Exo 7:3) | 1 sn The imperfect tense of the verb קָשָׁה (qashah) is found only here in these “hardening passages.” The verb (here the Hiphil for “I will harden”) summarizes Pharaoh’s resistance to what God would be doing through Moses—he would stubbornly resist and refuse to submit; he would be resolved in his opposition. See R. R. Wilson, “The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart,” CBQ 41 (1979): 18-36. |
(0.17) | (Exo 3:15) | 2 sn The words “name” and “memorial” are at the heart of the two parallel clauses that form a poetic pair. The Hebrew word “remembrance” is a poetical synonym for “name” (cf. Job 18:17; Ps 135:13; Prov 10:7; Isa 26:8) and conveys the idea that the nature or character of the person is to be remembered and praised (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 24). |
(0.17) | (1Jo 3:20) | 3 tn The use of two ὅτι (hoti) clauses in close succession is somewhat awkward, but this is nothing new for the author; and indeed he has twice previously used two ὅτι clauses in close proximity in 3:2 and 14. In both those instances the second ὅτι was understood as causal, and (1) some interpreters would do the same here. Unless one understands both of the ὅτι clauses in 3:20 as causal, however (an option rejected based on the analogy with 5:14, see the discussion in the note on “that” at the beginning of the present verse), the first ὅτι clause must be understood as parenthetical in order for the second to be causal. This results in an even more awkward construction. It seems most probable that (2) the second ὅτι clause in 3:20 should also be understood as epexegetical (explanatory), and resumptive to the first. The resultant meaning is as follows: “and we convince our heart before him, that if our heart condemns us, that God is greater than our heart and knows all things.” |
(0.17) | (1Jo 3:20) | 1 tn The first ὅτι (hoti) in 3:20 may be understood either (1) as causal, “because if our heart condemns us,” or (2) as epexegetical (explanatory), “that if our heart condemns us.” There are two other instances of the combination ὅτι ἐάν (hoti ean) in 1 John, 3:2 and 5:14. In 3:14 the ὅτι clearly introduces an indirect discourse (content) clause following οἴδαμεν (oidamen). In 5:14 the ὅτι is epexegetical to a preceding statement (“and this is the confidence [ἡ παρρησία, hē parrēsia] which we have before him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us”). This is analogous to the present situation, and the subject under discussion (the believer’s confidence before God) is also similar (cf. 3:21-22). It is thus more likely, by analogy, that the first ὅτι clause in 3:20, ὅτι ἐὰν καταγινώσκῃ ἡμῶν ἡ καρδία (hoti ean kataginōskē hēmōn hē kardia), should also be understood as epexegetical to the preceding clause, ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ πείσομεν τὴν καρδίαν (emprosthen autou peisomen tēn kardian, “and we convince our heart before him”). |
(0.17) | (Phm 1:12) | 1 tc There are several variants at this point in the text, most of them involving the addition of προσλαβοῦ (proslabou, “receive, accept”) at various locations in the verse. But all such variants seem to be motivated by the harsh syntax of the verse without this verb. Without the verb, the meaning is that Onesimus is Paul’s “very heart,” though this is an awkward expression especially because of τουτ᾿ ἔστιν (tout’ estin, “this is, who is”) in the middle cluttering the construction. Nowhere else in the NT is σπλάγχνα (splanchna, here translated “heart”) used in apposition to people. It is thus natural that scribes would want to fill out the text, and they did so apparently with a verb that was ready at hand (borrowed from v. 17). With the verb the sentence is converted into an object-complement construction: “I have sent him back to you; accept him, that is, as my very heart.” But both the fact that some significant witnesses (א* A F G 33 [69 2400 SBL]) lack the verb, and that its location floats in the various constructions that have it, suggest that the initial text did not have προσλαβοῦ. |
(0.15) | (1Jo 4:10) | 2 sn What is important (as far as the author is concerned) is not whether we love God (or say that we love God—a claim of the opponents is probably behind this), but that God has loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice which removes believers’ sins. This latter point is similar to the point made in 2:2 and is at the heart of the author’s dispute with the opponents because they were denying any salvific value to Jesus’ earthly life and ministry, including his death on the cross. |