Your search for "That" did not find any bible verses that matched.
Discovery Box| (0.20) | (1Sa 2:16) | 1 tn The Hebrew has a preterite verb, normally “and then he said.” In this case it gives the next event in a sequence that is modal and describes something typical in past time. Most English translations add “if” because this is a possible and common scenario rather than a specific incident only. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 2:9) | 1 tn Heb “guards the feet of.” The expression means that God watches over and protects the godly in all of their activities and movements. The imperfect verbal forms in v. 9 are understood as indicating what is typically true. Another option is to translate them with the future tense. See v. 10b. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 2:1) | 2 tn The verb עָלַץ (ʿalats) is a fientive verb. (Some emotion verbs in Hebrew are stative and some are fientive.) The Qal perfect form of a fientive verb is past or perfective (past action with a result that continues into the present). The LXX renders “my heart was strengthened.” |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 2:3) | 2 tn Heb “proudly, proudly.” If MT is original, the repetition of the word is for emphasis, stressing the arrogance of those addressed. However, a few medieval Hebrew manuscripts and some other textual witnesses do not reflect the repetition, suggesting that the Hebrew text may be dittographic. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:21) | 2 sn The only vow that has been mentioned so far is Hannah’s. This either implies an additional vow not made known to us, or implies Elkanah’s affirmation of her vow. According to Num 30:6-8 a husband could nullify his wife’s vow, or allow it to stand. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:22) | 2 tn The perfect conjugation, used with a dynamic root, may be be past or past perfect. In a כִּי (ki) clause in narrative, it typically refers to a reason that occurred prior to the event in the main timeline. Most translations, however, render it as simple past (KJV, NRSV, NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman). |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:9) | 1 tn Heb “after eating in Shiloh, and after drinking.” Since Hannah had refused to eat, it must refer to the others. The Hebrew also sets off the phrase “and after drinking” probably to prepare the reader for Eli’s mistaken assumption that Hannah had had too much too drink. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:5) | 3 tn Or “and [because] the Lord had closed her womb.” So also in v. 6.” The conjunction, commonly “and,” could represent a second reason for giving her a double portion. Or because it is a noun first clause, it simply provides background information to be read in light of the statement that he loved her. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:6) | 2 tn Heb “for the purpose of troubling her.” The word “just” has been added for English idiom. The Hiphil form of the verb רָעַם (raʿam) may mean to disturb, humiliate, or provoke to anger. The picture seems to be that Peninnah would deliberately choose ways to irritate Hannah, for no other purpose except to see her provoked, humiliated, or depressed. |
| (0.20) | (1Sa 1:3) | 2 sn From the book of Judges we know that Israel often struggled with idolatry during this time period. This introduction to Elkanah portrays him as a faithful worshiper of the Lord (whatever his faults may have been) at a time when “each man did what he considered to be right” (Judg 17:6; 21:25). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 4:6) | 1 sn I would ruin my own inheritance. It is not entirely clear how acquiring Ruth and raising up an heir for the deceased Elimelech would ruin this individual’s inheritance. Perhaps this means that the inheritance of his other children would be diminished. See R. L. Hubbard, Jr., Ruth (NICOT), 245-46. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 4:4) | 4 tn Heb “but if he will not redeem, tell me.” Most English versions emend the third person verb form (“he”) to the second person form because Boaz is addressing the closer relative. But it is possible that he briefly addresses the witnesses and refers to the closer relative in the third person. See J. M. Sasson, Ruth, 118. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 3:9) | 4 sn By proposing marriage, Ruth goes beyond the letter of Naomi’s instructions (see v. 4, where Naomi told Ruth that Boaz would tell her what to do). Though she is more aggressive than Naomi told her to be, she is still carrying out the intent of Naomi’s instructions, which were designed to lead to marriage. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 3:10) | 6 sn Whether rich or poor. This statement seems to indicate that Ruth could have married anyone. However, only by marrying a גֹּאֵל (goʾel, “family guardian”; traditionally “redeemer”) could she carry on her dead husband’s line and make provision for Naomi. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 3:1) | 2 tn Heb “My daughter, should I not seek for you a resting place so that it may go well for you [or which will be good for you]?” The idiomatic, negated rhetorical question is equivalent to an affirmation (see 2:8-9) and has thus been translated in the affirmative (so also NAB, NCV, NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:13) | 5 tn Ruth here uses a word (שִׁפְחָה, shifkhah) that describes the lowest level of female servant (see 1 Sam 25:41). Note Ruth 3:9 where she uses the word אָמָה (ʾamah), which refers to a higher class of servant. |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:8) | 3 tn The switch from the negative particle אַל (ʾal, see the preceding statement, “do not leave”) to לֹא (loʾ) may make this statement more emphatic. It may indicate that the statement is a policy applicable for the rest of the harvest (see v. 21). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 2:8) | 2 tn Heb “my daughter.” This form of address is a mild form of endearment, perhaps merely rhetorical. It might suggest that Boaz is older than Ruth, but not necessarily significantly so. A few English versions omit it entirely (e.g., TEV, CEV). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 1:8) | 1 tn Heb “each to the house of her mother.” Naomi’s words imply that it is more appropriate for the two widows to go home to their mothers, rather than stay with their mother-in-law (see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther [WBC], 75). |
| (0.20) | (Rut 1:2) | 2 sn The name Naomi (נָעֳמִי, noʿomi) is from the adjective נֹעַם (noʿam, “pleasant, lovely”) and literally means “my pleasant one” or “my lovely one.” Her name will become the subject of a wordplay in 1:20-21 when she laments that she is no longer “pleasant” but “bitter” because of the loss of her husband and two sons. |
