(0.25) | (Mar 2:19) | 2 tn Grk “sons of the wedding hall,” an idiom referring to wedding guests, or more specifically, friends of the bridegroom present at the wedding celebration (L&N 11.7). |
(0.25) | (Mar 2:10) | 1 sn Now Jesus put the two actions together. The walking of the man would be proof (so that you may know) that his sins were forgiven and that God had worked through Jesus (i.e., the Son of Man). |
(0.25) | (Mat 21:32) | 2 sn The word translated change your minds is the same verb used in v. 29 (there translated had a change of heart). Jesus is making an obvious comparison here, in which the religious leaders are viewed as the disobedient son. |
(0.25) | (Mat 21:31) | 1 tc Verses 29-31 involve a rather complex and difficult textual problem. The variants cluster into three different groups: (1) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. The second son is called the one who does his father’s will. This reading is found in the Western witnesses (D it). But the reading is so hard as to be nearly impossible. One can only suspect some tampering with the text, extreme carelessness on the part of the scribe, or possibly a recognition of the importance of not shaming one’s parent in public. (Any of these reasons is not improbable with this group of witnesses, and with codex D in particular.) The other two major variants are more difficult to assess. Essentially, the responses make sense (the son who does his father’s will is the one who changes his mind after saying “no”): (2) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. But here, the first son is called the one who does his father’s will (unlike the Western reading). This is the reading found in א C L W (Z) Δ 0102 0281 ƒ1 33 565 579 1241 1424*,c M and several versional witnesses. (3) The first son says “yes” but does not go, and the second son says “no” but later has a change of heart. This is the reading found in B Θ ƒ13 700 and several versional witnesses. Both of these latter two variants make good sense and have significantly better textual support than the first reading. The real question, then, is this: Is the first son or the second the obedient one? If one were to argue simply from the parabolic logic, the second son would be seen as the obedient one (hence, the third reading). The first son would represent the Pharisees (or Jews) who claim to obey God, but do not (cf. Matt 23:3). This accords well with the parable of the prodigal son (in which the oldest son represents the unbelieving Jews). Further, the chronological sequence of the second son being obedient fits well with the real scene: Gentiles, tax collectors, and prostitutes were not, collectively, God’s chosen people, but they did repent and come to God, while the Jewish leaders claimed to be obedient to God but did nothing. At the same time, the external evidence is weaker for this reading (though stronger than the first reading), not as widespread, and certainly suspect because of how neatly it fits. One suspects scribal manipulation at this point. Thus the second reading looks to be superior to the other two on both external and transcriptional grounds. But what about intrinsic evidence? One can surmise that Jesus didn’t always give predictable responses. In this instance, he may well have painted a picture in which the Pharisees saw themselves as the first son, only to stun them with his application (v. 32). For more discussion see TCGNT 44-46. |
(0.25) | (Mat 16:21) | 3 sn The necessity that the Son of Man suffer is the particular point that needed emphasis since for many 1st century Jews the Messiah was a glorious and powerful figure, not a suffering one. |
(0.25) | (Mat 10:3) | 1 sn Bartholomew means “son of Tolmai” in Aramaic. It has frequently been suggested that this is another name for Nathanael mentioned in John 1:45, although this is not certain. |
(0.25) | (Mat 9:15) | 1 tn Grk “sons of the wedding hall,” an idiom referring to wedding guests, or more specifically friends of the bridegroom present at the wedding celebration (L&N 11.7). |
(0.25) | (Mat 9:6) | 1 sn Now Jesus put the two actions together. The walking of the man would be proof (so that you may know) that his sins were forgiven and that God had worked through Jesus (i.e., the Son of Man). |
(0.25) | (Mat 8:12) | 1 sn Not to be missed here is the high irony that those who would be expected to participate in God’s eschatological kingdom (the sons of the kingdom) instead end up separated from God, experiencing remorse in the outer darkness. |
(0.25) | (Hag 1:14) | 3 tn Heb “the spirit of Joshua son of Jehozadak, the high priest” (as in many English versions), but this is subject to misunderstanding. See the note on the name “Jehozadak” at the end of v. 1. |
(0.25) | (Hag 2:2) | 2 tn Many English versions have “Joshua (the) son of Jehozadak the high priest,” but this is subject to misunderstanding. See the note on the name “Jehozadak” at the end of v. 1. |
(0.25) | (Hag 1:12) | 1 tn Many English versions have “Joshua [the] son of Jehozadak, the high priest,” but this is subject to misunderstanding. See the note on the name “Jehozadak” at the end of v. 1. |
(0.25) | (Amo 1:4) | 3 sn Ben Hadad may refer to Hazael’s son and successor (2 Kgs 13:3, 24) or to an earlier king (see 1 Kgs 20), perhaps the ruler whom Hazael assassinated when he assumed power. |
(0.25) | (Dan 11:10) | 1 sn The sons of Seleucus II Callinicus were Seleucus III Ceraunus (ca. 227-223 b.c.) and Antiochus III the Great (ca. 223-187 b.c.). |
(0.25) | (Dan 11:6) | 7 sn Antiochus II eventually divorced Berenice and remarried his former wife Laodice, who then poisoned her husband, had Berenice put to death, and installed her own son, Seleucus II Callinicus (ca. 246-227 b.c.), as the Seleucid king. |
(0.25) | (Eze 2:1) | 1 sn The phrase son of man occurs ninety-three times in the book of Ezekiel. It simply means “human one” and distinguishes the prophet from the nonhuman beings that are present in the world of his vision. |
(0.25) | (Jer 22:15) | 3 sn The father referred to here is the godly king Josiah. He followed the requirements for kings set forth in 22:3 in contrast to his son, who did not (22:13). |
(0.25) | (Jer 22:11) | 1 tn Heb “For thus said the Lord concerning Shallum son of Josiah, king of Judah, who reigned instead of his father, who went away from this place: He will not return there again.” |
(0.25) | (Jer 20:15) | 1 tn Heb “Cursed be the man who brought my father the news, saying, ‘A son, a male, has been born to you,’ making glad his joy.” This verse has been restructured for English stylistic purposes. |
(0.25) | (Jer 16:3) | 2 tn Heb “Thus says the Lord concerning the sons and daughters who are born in the place and concerning their mothers who give them birth and their fathers who fathered them in this land.” |