Texts Notes Verse List Exact Search
Results 81 - 100 of 123 for Saul's (0.000 seconds)
Jump to page: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
  Discovery Box
(0.35) (2Sa 1:10)

tc The MT lacks the definite article, but this is may be due to textual transmission error. It is preferable to read the א (alef) of אֶצְעָדָה (ʾetsʿadah) as a ה (he) giving הַצְּעָדָה (hatseʿadah). There is no reason to think that the soldier confiscated from Saul’s dead body only one of two or more bracelets that he was wearing (cf. NLT “one of his bracelets”).

(0.35) (1Sa 13:14)

tn This verb form, as well as the one that follows (“appointed”), indicates completed action from the standpoint of the speaker. This does not necessarily mean that the Lord had already conducted his search and made his choice, however. The forms may be used for rhetorical effect to emphasize the certainty of the action. The divine search for a new king is as good as done, emphasizing that the days of Saul’s dynasty are numbered.

(0.35) (1Sa 14:51)

tn 1 Chr 9:35-36 indicates that Jeiel (= Abiel?) had two sons (among others) named Ner and Kish (see also 1 Sam 9:1 and 1 Chr 8:30, where some Greek manuscripts include the name Ner, though it is absent in the Hebrew text). If this Kish was the father of Saul and Ner was the father of Abner, then Saul and Abner were cousins. However, according to 1 Chr 8:33 and 9:39, Ner, not Abiel, was the father of Kish. In this case, Kish and Abner were brothers and Abner was Saul’s uncle. The simplest solution to the problem is to see two men named Kish in the genealogy: Abiel (Jeiel) was the father of Ner and Kish I. Ner was the father of Abner and Kish II. Kish II was the father of Saul. The Kish mentioned in 1 Sam 9:1 was the father of Saul (v. 2) and must be identified as Kish II. In this case the genealogy is “gapped,” with Ner being omitted. Abiel was the grandfather of Kish II.

(0.35) (1Sa 13:1)

tc The MT does not have “thirty.” A number appears to have dropped out of the Hebrew text here, since as it stands the MT (literally, “a son of a year”) must mean that Saul was only one year old when he began to reign! The KJV, attempting to resolve this, reads “Saul reigned one year,” but that is not the normal meaning of the Hebrew text represented by the MT. Although most LXX mss lack the entire verse, some Greek mss have “thirty years” here (while others have “one year” like the MT). The Syriac Peshitta has Saul’s age as twenty-one. But this seems impossible to harmonize with the implied age of Saul’s son Jonathan in the following verse. Taking into account the fact that in v. 2 Jonathan was old enough to be a military leader, some scholars prefer to supply in v. 1 the number forty (cf. ASV, NASB). The present translation (“thirty”) is a possible but admittedly uncertain proposal based on a few Greek mss and followed by a number of English versions (e.g., NIV, NCV, NLT). Other English versions simply supply ellipsis marks for the missing number (e.g., NAB, NRSV).

(0.32) (1Sa 13:1)

tc The MT has “two years” here. If this number is to be accepted as correct, the meaning apparently would be that after a lapse of two years at the beginning of Saul’s reign, he then went about the task of consolidating an army as described in what follows (cf. KJV, ASV, CEV). But if the statement in v. 1 is intended to be a comprehensive report on the length of Saul’s reign, the number is too small. According to Acts 13:21 Saul reigned for forty years. Some English versions (e.g., NIV, NCV, NLT), taking this forty to be a round number, add it to the “two years” of the MT and translate the number here as “forty-two years.” While this is an acceptable option, the present translation instead replaces the MT’s “two” with the figure “forty.” Admittedly the textual evidence for this decision is weak, but the same can be said of any attempt to restore sense to this difficult text (note the ellipsis marks at this point in NAB, NRSV). The Syriac Peshitta lacks this part of v. 1.

(0.29) (Act 9:8)

sn He could see nothing. This sign of blindness, which was temporary until v. 18, is like the sign of muteness experienced by Zechariah in Luke 1. It allowed some time for Saul (Paul) to reflect on what had happened without distractions.

(0.29) (Psa 59:1)

sn According to the superscription, David wrote this psalm on the occasion when Saul sent assassins to surround David’s house and kill him in the morning (see 1 Sam 19:11). However, the psalm itself mentions foreign enemies (vv. 5, 8). Perhaps these references reflect a later adaptation of an original Davidic psalm.

(0.29) (Psa 57:1)

sn According to the superscription, David wrote this psalm on the occasion when he fled from Saul and hid in “the cave.” This probably refers to either the incident recorded in 1 Sam 22:1 or to the one recorded in 1 Sam 24:3.

(0.29) (1Ch 10:13)

tn Heb “and Saul died in his unfaithfulness by which he acted unfaithfully against the Lord, concerning the Lord’s message which he did not keep, also to inquire of a medium to seek [an oracle].” The LXX adds “and the prophet Samuel answered him.” The text alludes to the incident recorded in 1 Sam 28.

(0.29) (2Sa 9:1)

sn 2 Samuel 9-20 is known as the Succession Narrative. It is a literary unit that describes David’s efforts at consolidating his own kingdom following the demise of King Saul; it also provides the transition to subsequent leadership on the part of David’s successor Solomon.

(0.29) (2Sa 1:1)

sn Ziklag was a city in the Negev which had been given to David by Achish king of Gath. For more than a year David used it as a base from which he conducted military expeditions (see 1 Sam 27:5-12). According to 1 Sam 30:1-19, Ziklag was destroyed by the Amalekites while Saul fought the Philistines.

(0.29) (1Sa 28:13)

tn Heb “gods.” The modifying participle (translated “coming up”) is plural, suggesting that underworld spirits are the referent. But in the following verse Saul understands the plural word to refer to a singular being. The reference is to the spirit of Samuel.

(0.29) (1Sa 26:19)

tn Heb “may he smell.” The implication is that Saul should seek to appease God, for such divine instigation to evil would be a sign of God’s disfavor. For a fuller discussion of this passage see R. B. Chisholm, Jr., “Does God Deceive?” BSac 155 (1998): 19-21.

(0.29) (1Sa 22:23)

tn Or “the one who.” This may refer specifically to Saul, in which case David acknowledges that Abiathar’s life is endangered because of his allegiance to David. The translation assumes that the statement is more generalized, meaning that any enemy of Abiathar is an enemy of David. In other words, David promises that he will protect Abiathar with his very own life.

(0.29) (1Sa 16:14)

tn Or “an injurious spirit”; cf. NLT “a tormenting spirit.” The phrase need not refer to an evil, demonic spirit. The Hebrew word translated “evil” may refer to the character of the spirit or to its effect upon Saul. If the latter, another translation option might be “a mischief-making spirit.”

(0.29) (1Sa 15:12)

tc At the end of v. 12 the LXX and one Old Latin ms include the following words not found in the MT: “to Saul. And behold, he was offering as a burnt offering to the Lord the best of the spoils that he had brought from the Amalekites.” The Lucianic Greek translation does not include this text.

(0.29) (1Sa 14:33)

tn Heb “You have acted deceptively.” In this context the verb refers to violating an agreement, in this case the dietary and sacrificial regulations of the Mosaic law. The verb form is second masculine plural; apparently Saul here addresses those who are eating the animals.

(0.25) (Psa 51:11)

sn Do not take…away. The psalmist expresses his fear that, due to his sin, God will take away the Holy Spirit from him. NT believers enjoy the permanent gift of the Holy Spirit and need not make such a request nor fear such a consequence. However, in the OT God’s Spirit empowered certain individuals for special tasks and only temporarily resided in them. For example, when God rejected Saul as king and chose David to replace him, the divine Spirit left Saul and came upon David (1 Sam 16:13-14). An alternative understanding of this verse is that the term Holy Spirit is simply metaphorical for the Lord’s presence, but this is unlikely given the other use of the term in Isa 63:10, where the Holy Spirit is personal and distinct from God himself.

(0.25) (Exo 17:2)

tn The verb נָסָה (nasah) means “to test, tempt, try, prove.” It can be used of people simply trying to do something that they are not sure of (such as David trying on Saul’s armor), or of God testing people to see if they will obey (as in testing Abraham, Gen 22:1), or of people challenging others (as in the Queen of Sheba coming to test Solomon), and of the people in the desert in rebellion putting God to the test. By doubting that God was truly in their midst, and demanding that he demonstrate his presence, they tested him to see if he would act. There are times when “proving” God is correct and required, but that is done by faith (as with Gideon); when it is done out of unbelief, then it is an act of disloyalty.

(0.25) (Joh 4:14)

tn The verb ἁλλομένου (hallomenou) is used of quick movement (like jumping) on the part of living beings. This is the only instance of its being applied to the action of water. However, in the LXX it is used to describe the “Spirit of God” as it falls on Samson and Saul. See Judg 14:6, 19; 15:14; 1 Kgdms 10:2, 10 LXX (= 1 Sam 10:6, 10 ET); and Isa 35:6 (note context).



TIP #05: Try Double Clicking on any word for instant search. [ALL]
created in 0.05 seconds
powered by bible.org