Your search for "This" did not find any bible verses that matched.
Discovery Box| (0.15) | (Luk 8:5) | 2 tn Luke’s version of the parable, like Mark’s (cf. Mark 4:1-9) uses the collective singular to refer to the seed throughout, so singular pronouns have been used consistently throughout this parable in the English translation. However, the parallel account in Matt 13:1-9 begins with plural pronouns in v. 4 but then switches to the collective singular in v. 5 ff. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 8:5) | 1 sn A sower went out to sow. The background for this well-known parable is a field through which a well-worn path runs in the Palestinian countryside. Sowing would occur in late fall or early winter (October to December) in the rainy season, looking for sprouting in April or May and a June harvest. The use of seed as a figure for God’s giving life has OT roots: Isa 55:10-11. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 7:24) | 4 tn It is debated whether this expression should be read figuratively (“to see someone who is easily blown over?”) or literally (“to see the wilderness vegetation blowing in the wind?…No, to see a prophet”). Either view is possible, but the following examples suggest the question should be read literally, meaning that an extraordinary event like the arrival of a prophet (rather than the common occurrence of plants blowing in the wind) drew them to the desert. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 7:7) | 3 tc The aorist imperative ἰαθήτω (iathētō, “must be healed”) is found in P75vid B L 1241 sa. Most mss (א A C D W Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 33 M latt bo) have instead a future indicative, ἰαθήσεται (iathēsetai, “will be healed”). This is most likely an assimilation to Matt 8:8, and thus, as a motivated reading, should be considered secondary. The meaning either way is essentially the same. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 5:39) | 3 tc Most mss, especially the later ones (A C Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 33 M lat), read χρηστότερος (chrēstoteros, “better”), a smoother reading. The reading of the text (found in P4 א B L W 1241) is preferred as the more difficult reading. This reading could suggest that the new thing Jesus brings is not even considered, since the “old wine” is already found quite acceptable. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 5:22) | 2 tn Grk “reasonings.” This is the noun form of the infinitive διαλογίζεσθαι (dialogizesthai, “began to reason to themselves”) used in v. 21. Jesus’ reply to them in the latter part of the present verse makes clear that these reasonings were mental and internal, so the translation “thoughts” was used here. On the hostile or evil nature of these thoughts, see G. Schrenk, TDNT 2:97. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 5:21) | 6 sn Uttering blasphemies in the NT has a somewhat broader meaning than mere exclamations or pronouncements. It could mean to say something that dishonored God, but it could also involve claims to divine prerogatives (in this case, to forgive sins on God’s behalf). Such claims were viewed as usurping God’s majesty or honor. The remark here raised directly the issue of the nature of Jesus’ ministry, and even more importantly, the identity of Jesus himself as God’s representative. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 4:18) | 7 sn The essence of Jesus’ messianic work is expressed in the phrase to set free. This line from Isa 58 says that Jesus will do what the nation had failed to do. It makes the proclamation messianic, not merely prophetic, because Jesus doesn’t just proclaim the message—he brings the deliverance. The word translated set free is the same Greek word (ἄφεσις, aphesis) translated release earlier in the verse. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 3:22) | 3 sn The allusions in the remarks of the text recall Ps 2:7a; Isa 42:1 and either Isa 41:8 or, less likely, Gen 22:12, 16. God is marking out Jesus as his chosen one (the meaning of “[in you I take] great delight”), but it may well be that this was a private experience that only Jesus and John saw and heard (cf. John 1:32-33). |
| (0.15) | (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. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 1:46) | 4 sn This psalm (vv. 46-55) is one of the few praise psalms in the NT. Mary praises God and then tells why both in terms of his care for her (vv. 46-49) and for others, including Israel (vv. 50-55). Its traditional name, the “Magnificat,” comes from the Latin for the phrase My soul magnifies the Lord at the hymn’s start. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 1:28) | 5 tc Most mss (A C D Θ ƒ13 33 M latt sy) read here εὐλογημένη σὺ ἐν γυναιξίν (eulogēmenē su en gunaixin, “blessed are you among women”) which also appears in 1:42 (where it is textually certain). This has the earmarks of a scribal addition for balance; the shorter reading, attested by the most significant witnesses and several others (א B L W Ψ ƒ1 565 579 700 1241 co), is thus preferred. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 1:29) | 1 tc Most mss (A C Θ 0130 ƒ13 M lat sy) have ἰδοῦσα (idousa, “when [she] saw [the angel]”) here as well, making Mary’s concern the appearance of the angel. This construction is harder than the shorter reading since it adds a transitive verb without an explicit object. However, the shorter reading has significant support (א B D L W Ψ ƒ1 565 579 1241 sa) and on balance should probably be considered authentic. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 1:28) | 4 tn The address, “favored one” (a perfect participle, Grk “Oh one who is favored”) points to Mary as the recipient of God’s grace, not a bestower of it. She is a model saint in this passage, one who willingly receives God’s benefits. The Vulgate rendering “full of grace” suggests something more of Mary as a bestower of grace, but does not make sense here contextually. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 1:9) | 3 tn Or “temple.” Such sacrifices, which included the burning of incense, would have occurred in the holy place according to the Mishnah (m. Tamid 1.2; 3.1; 5-7). A priest would have given this sacrifice, which was offered for the nation, once in one’s career. It would be offered either at 9 a.m. or 3 p.m., since it was made twice a day. |
| (0.15) | (Luk 1:1) | 2 tn This is sometimes translated “narrative,” but the term itself can refer to an oral or written account. It is the verb “undertaken” which suggests a written account, since it literally is “to set one’s hand” to something (BDAG 386 s.v. ἐπιχειρέω). “Narrative” is too specific, denoting a particular genre of work for the accounts that existed in the earlier tradition. Not all of that material would have been narrative. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 15:43) | 4 sn Asking for the body of Jesus was indeed a bold move on the part of Joseph of Arimathea, for it clearly and openly identified him with a man who had just been condemned and executed, namely, Jesus. His faith is exemplary, especially for someone who was a member of the council that handed Jesus over for crucifixion (cf. Luke 23:51). He did this because he sought to give Jesus an honorable burial. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 14:72) | 1 tn This occurrence of the word ἀλέκτωρ (alektōr, “rooster”) is anarthrous and consequently may not point back explicitly to the rooster which had crowed previously in v. 68. The reason for the anarthrous construction is most likely to indicate generically that some rooster crowed. Further, the translation of ἀλέκτωρ as an indefinite noun retains the subtlety of the Greek in only hinting at the Lord’s prediction v. 30. See also NAB, TEV, NASB. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 11:15) | 5 sn Matthew (21:12-27), Mark (here, 11:15-19), and Luke (19:45-46) record this incident of the temple cleansing at the end of Jesus’ ministry. John (2:13-16) records a cleansing of the temple at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. See the note on the word temple courts in John 2:14 for a discussion of the relationship of these accounts to one another. |
| (0.15) | (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. |
