Discovery Box| (0.40) | (Gen 28:19) | 1 tn The name Bethel means “house of God” in Hebrew (see v. 17). |
| (0.40) | (Gen 22:2) | 1 tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity. |
| (0.40) | (Gen 21:22) | 1 sn God is with you. Abimelech and Phicol recognized that Abraham enjoyed special divine provision and protection. |
| (0.40) | (Gen 17:7) | 3 tn Heb “to be to you for God and to your descendants after you.” |
| (0.40) | (Gen 10:28) | 2 sn The name Abimael is a genuine Sabean form which means “my father, truly, he is God.” |
| (0.40) | (Gen 9:6) | 4 tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity. |
| (0.40) | (Gen 5:22) | 2 tn Heb “and Enoch walked with God, after he became the father of Methuselah, [for] 300 years.” |
| (0.40) | (Gen 3:22) | 3 tn The infinitive explains in what way the man had become like God: “knowing good and evil.” |
| (0.40) | (Gen 2:21) | 1 tn Heb “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on the man.” |
| (0.40) | (Gen 2:3) | 2 tn Heb “God.” The pronoun (“he”) has been employed in the translation for stylistic reasons. |
| (0.40) | (Gen 1:4) | 2 tn The Hebrew word טוֹב (tov) in this context signifies whatever enhances, promotes, produces, or is conducive for life. It is the light that God considers “good,” not the darkness. Whatever is conducive to life in God’s creation is good, for God himself is good, and that goodness is reflected in all of his works. |
| (0.40) | (1Jo 4:8) | 1 tn The author proclaims in 4:8 ὁ θεὸς ἀγάπη ἐστίν (ho theos agapē estin), but from a grammatical standpoint this is not a proposition in which subject and predicate nominative are interchangeable (“God is love” does not equal “love is God”). The predicate noun is anarthrous, as it is in two other Johannine formulas describing God, “God is light” in 1 John 1:5 and “God is Spirit” in John 4:24. The anarthrous predicate suggests a qualitative force, not a mere abstraction, so that a quality of God’s character is what is described here. |
| (0.40) | (Gal 3:19) | 6 tn Many modern translations (NASB, NIV, NRSV) render this word (μεσίτης, mesitēs; here and in v. 20) as “mediator,” but this conveys a wrong impression in contemporary English. If this is referring to Moses, he certainly did not “mediate” between God and Israel but was an intermediary on God’s behalf. Moses was not a mediator, for example, who worked for compromise between opposing parties. He instead was God’s representative to his people who enabled them to have a relationship, but entirely on God’s terms. |
| (0.40) | (Rom 1:1) | 5 tn The genitive in the phrase εὐαγγέλιον θεοῦ (euangelion theou, “the gospel of God”) could be translated as (1) a subjective genitive (“the gospel which God brings”) or (2) an objective genitive (“the gospel about God”). Either is grammatically possible. This is possibly an instance of a plenary genitive (see ExSyn 119-21; M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek, §§36-39). If so, an interplay between the two concepts is intended: The gospel which God brings is in fact the gospel about himself. However, in view of God’s action in v. 2 concerning this gospel, a subjective genitive notion (“the gospel which God brings”) is slightly preferred. |
| (0.40) | (Lam 5:20) | 1 sn The verbs “to forget” and “to remember” are often used figuratively in scripture when God is the subject, particularly in contexts of judgment (God forgets his people) and restoration of blessing (God remembers his people). In this case, the verb “to forget” functions as a hypocatastasis (implied comparison), drawing a comparison between God’s judgment and rejection of Jerusalem to a person forgetting that Jerusalem even exists. God’s judgment of Jerusalem was so intense and enduring that it seemed as though he had forgotten her. The synonymous parallelism makes this clear. |
| (0.40) | (Jdg 5:8) | 1 tn Or “warriors.” The Hebrew text reads literally, “He chose God/gods new.” Some take “Israel” as the subject of the verb, “gods” as object, and “new” as an adjective modifying “gods.” This yields the translation, “(Israel) chose new gods.” In this case idolatry is the cause of the trouble alluded to in the context. The present translation takes “God” as subject of the verb and “new” as substantival, referring to the new leaders raised up by God (see v. 9a). For a survey of opinions and a defense of the present translation, see B. Lindars, Judges 1-5, 239-40. |
| (0.40) | (Deu 4:34) | 1 tn The translation assumes the reference is to Israel’s God in which case the point is this: God’s intervention in Israel’s experience is unique in the sense that he has never intervened in such power for any other people on earth. The focus is on the uniqueness of Israel’s experience. Some understand the divine name here in a generic sense, “a god,” or “any god.” In this case God’s incomparability is the focus (cf. v. 35, where this theme is expressed). |
| (0.40) | (Exo 23:10) | 1 sn This section concerns religious duties of the people of God as they worship by giving thanks to God for their blessings. The principles here are: God requires his people to allow the poor to share in their bounty (10-11); God requires his people to provide times of rest and refreshment for those who labor for them (12); God requires allegiance to himself (13); God requires his people to come before him in gratitude and share their bounty (14-17); God requires that his people safeguard proper worship forms (18-19). |
| (0.40) | (Gen 35:5) | 2 tn Heb “and the fear of God was upon the cities which were round about them.” The expression “fear of God” apparently refers (1) to a fear of God (objective genitive; God is the object of their fear). (2) But it could mean “fear from God,” that is, fear which God placed in them (cf. NRSV “a terror from God”). Another option (3) is that the divine name is used as a superlative here, referring to “tremendous fear” (cf. NEB “were panic-stricken”; NASB “a great terror”). |
| (0.40) | (Ecc 3:11) | 7 tn Heb “the work that God has done.” The phrase אֶת־הַמַּעֲשֶׂה אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂה (ʾet hammaʿaseh ʾasher ʿasah, “the work which he [i.e., God] has done”) is an internal cognate accusative (direct object and verb are from the same root), used for emphasis (see IBHS 167 §10.2.1g). The repetition of the verb עָשַׂה (“to do”) in 3:11 and 3:14 suggests that this phrase refers to God’s foreordination of all the events and timing of human affairs: God has “made” ( = “foreordained”; עָשַׂה) everything appropriate in his sovereign timing (3:11a), and all that God has “done” ( = “foreordained”; עָשַׂה) will come to pass (3:14). Thus, the verb עָשַׂה functions as a metonymy of effect (i.e., God’s actions) for cause (i.e., God’s sovereign foreordination). The temporal clause “from beginning to end” (3:11) supports this nuance. |
