Your search for "This" did not find any bible verses that matched.
Discovery Box| (0.15) | (Sos 1:6) | 5 sn The verb הָרָה (harah, “to burn in anger, to be angry”) creates an interesting wordplay or pun on the preceding line: “The sun burned me (= my skin).” The sun burned her skin because her brothers had burned (נִהֲרוּ, niharu) in anger against her. This is an example of a polysemantic wordplay which explains the two basic meanings of הָרָה (“to burn, to be angry”) (W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry [JSOTSup], 241-42). |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 12:4) | 1 tn The noun טַחֲנָה (takhanah) refers to a “grinding-mill” where grain is ground into flour (HALOT 374 s.v. טַחֲנָה). The term is here used as a double entendre, figuratively describing the loss of one’s teeth at the onset of old age. The figurative usage also draws upon the polysemantic nature of this noun; the related Arabic root tahinat means “molar tooth” (HALOT 374 s.v. *טֹחֲנָה). |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 11:6) | 2 tn The terms “morning” (בֹּקֶר, boqer) and “evening” (עֶרֶב, ʿerev) form a merism (a figure of speech using two polar extremes to include everything in between) that connotes “from morning until evening.” The point is not that the farmer should plant at two times in the day (morning and evening), but that he should plant all day long (from morning until evening). This merism is reflected in several translations: “in the morning…until evening” (NEB, Moffatt). |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 9:14) | 3 tn The root גדל (“mighty; strong; large”) is repeated in 9:13b for emphasis: “a mighty (גָדוֹל, gadol) king…building strong (גְדֹלִים, gedolim) siege works.” This repetition highlights the contrast between the vast power and resources of the attacking king, and the meager resources of the “little” (קְטַנָּה, qetannah) city with “few” (מְעָט, meʿat) men in it to defend it. |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 7:18) | 4 tn Heb “both.” The term “warnings” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity. Alternately, “both [extremes]” or “both [fates].” The point of this expression is either (1) “ he achieves both things,” (2) “he escapes all these misfortunes,” (3) “he does his duty by both,” or (4) “he avoids both extremes.” See D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 3:580-81. |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 7:18) | 3 tn Or “will escape both”; or “will go forth in both.” The Hebrew phrase יֵצֵא אֶת־כֻּלָּם (yetseʾ ʾet kullam, “he will follow both of them”) has been interpreted in several ways: (1) To adopt a balanced lifestyle that is moderately righteous while allowing for self-indulgence in moderate wickedness (“to follow both of them,” that is, to follow both righteousness and wickedness). However, this seems to unnecessarily encourage an antinomian rationalization of sin and moral compromise. (2) To avoid the two extremes of being over-righteous and over-wicked. This takes יֵצֵא in the sense of “to escape,” e.g., Gen 39:12, 15; 1 Sam 14:14; Jer 11:11; 48:9; cf. HALOT 426 s.v. יצא 6.c; BDB 423 s.v. יָצָא 1.d. (3) To follow both of the warnings given in 7:16-17. This approach finds parallels in postbiblical rabbinic literature denoting the action of discharging one’s duty of obedience and complying with instruction. In postbiblical rabbinic literature the phrase יְדֵי יֵצֵא (yetseʾ yede, “to go out of the hands of”) is an idiom meaning “to comply with the requirements of the law” (Jastrow 587 s.v. יָצָא Hif.5.a). This fits nicely with the context of 7:16-17 in which Qoheleth issued two warnings. In 7:18a Qoheleth exhorted his readers to follow both of his warnings: “It is best to grasp the first warning without letting go of the second warning.” The person who fears God will heed both warnings. He will not depend upon his own righteousness and wisdom, but upon God’s sovereign bestowal of blessings. Likewise, he will not exploit the exceptions to the doctrine of retribution to indulge in sin, rationalizing sin away just because the wicked sometimes do not get what they deserve. |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 6:9) | 3 tn Heb “the roaming of the soul.” The expression מֵהֲלָךְ־נָפֶשׁ (mehalakh nafesh, “the roaming of the soul”) is a metonymy for unfulfilled desires. The term “soul” (נֶפֶשׁ, nefesh) is used as a metonymy of association for man’s desires and appetites (BDB 660 s.v. נֶפֶשׁ 5.c; 6.a). This also involves the personification of the roving appetite as “roving” (מֵהֲלָךְ); see BDB 235 s.v. הָלַךְ II.3.f; 232 I.3. |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 3:6) | 1 tn The term לְאַבֵּד (leʾabbed, Piel infinitive construct from אָבַד, ʾavad, “to destroy”) means “to lose” (e.g., Jer 23:1) as the contrast with בָּקַשׁ (baqash, “to seek to find”) indicates (HALOT 3 s.v. I אבד; BDB 2 s.v. אבד 3). This is the declarative or delocutive-estimative sense of the Piel: “to view something as lost” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 28, §145; IBHS 403 §24.2g). |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 2:21) | 4 tn The noun רָעָה (raʿah, “evil”) probably means “misfortune” (HALOT 1263 s.v. רָעָה 4) or “injustice; wrong” (HALOT 1262 s.v. רָעָה 2.b). The phrase רָעָה רַבָּה (raʿah rabbah) connotes “grave injustice” or “great misfortune” (e.g., Eccl 2:17; 5:12, 15; 6:1; 10:5). It is expressed well as: “This too is…a great misfortune” (NAB, NIV, MLB) and “utterly wrong!” (NEB). |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 2:21) | 1 tn Heb “he must give.” The third person masculine singular suffix on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yittenennu, Qal imperfect third person masculine singular from נָתַן, natan, “to give” plus third person masculine singular suffix) refers back to עֲמָלוֹ (ʿamalo, “his labor”) which is treated in this line as a metonymy of cause for effect, that is, “he must give it” = “he must give his labor” = “he must give the fruit of his labor.” |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 2:9) | 2 tn Heb “I became great and I surpassed” (וְהוֹסַפְתִּי וְגָדַלְתִּי, vegadalti vehosafti). This is a verbal hendiadys in which the second verb functions adverbially, modifying the first: “I became far greater.” Most translations miss the hendiadys and render the line in a woodenly literal sense (KJV, ASV, RSV, NEB, NRSV, NAB, NASB, MLB, Moffatt), while only a few recognize the presence of hendiadys here: “I became greater by far” (NIV) and “I gained more” (NJPS). |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 2:3) | 7 tn Heb “and my heart was leading along in wisdom.” The vav + noun, וְלִבִּי (velibbi) introduces a disjunctive, parenthetical clause designed to qualify the speaker’s remarks lest he be misunderstood: “Now my heart/mind….” He emphasizes that he never lost control of his senses in this process. It was a purely mental, cognitive endeavor; he never actually gave himself over to wanton self-indulgence in wine or folly. |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 1:14) | 3 tn As mentioned in the note on “everything” in 1:2, the term הַכֹּל (hakkol, “everything”) is often limited in reference to the specific topic at hand in the context (e.g., BDB 482 s.v. כֹּל 2). The argument of 1:12-15, like 1:3-11, focuses on secular human achievement. This is clear from the repetition of the root עָשַׂה (ʿasah, “do, work, accomplish, achieve”) in 1:12-13. |
| (0.15) | (Ecc 1:13) | 8 tn The syntax of this line in Hebrew is intentionally redundant, e.g. (literally), “It is a grievous task [or “unpleasant business”] that God has given to the sons of man to be occupied with it.” The referent of the third masculine singular suffix on לַעֲנוֹת בּוֹ (laʿanot bo, “to be occupied with it”) is עִנְיַן רָע (ʿinyan raʿ, “a grievous task, a rotten business”). |
| (0.15) | (Pro 31:22) | 3 tn The first word of the thirteenth line begins with מ (mem), the thirteenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. The word rendered “coverlets” appears in 7:16, where it has the idea of “covered.” K&D 17:335 suggests “pillows” or “mattresses” here. The Greek version has “lined overcoats” or “garments,” but brings over the last word of the previous verse to form this line and parallel the second half, which has clothing in view. |
| (0.15) | (Pro 31:18) | 3 tn The imperfect verb יִכְבֶּה (yikbeh) is used in its past habitual sense. The verbs describing the woman from verses 12-29 include 19 perfects and 9 preterites which describe actions with past time references. Thus the four imperfect verbs that describe her (vv. 14, 18, 21, 27) should be understood as modal and operating in a past time frame. Technically this verb does not describe her directly, though it refers to her lamp. |
| (0.15) | (Pro 31:15) | 4 sn The word חֹק (khoq) probably means “allotted portion of food” as before, but some suggest it means the task that is allotted to the servants, meaning that the wise woman gets up early enough to give out the work assignments (Tg. Prov 31:15, RSV, NRSV, TEV, NLT). That is possible, but seems an unnecessary direction for the line to take. Others, however, simply wish to delete this last colon, leaving two cola and not three, but that is unwarranted. |
| (0.15) | (Pro 31:4) | 3 tn The MT has אֵו (ʾev), a Kethib/Qere reading. The Kethib is אוֹ (ʾo) but the Qere is אֵי (ʾe). Some follow the Qere and take the word as a shortened form of וַֹיֵּה, “where?” This would mean the ruler would be always asking for drink (cf. ASV). Others reconstruct to אַוֵּה (ʾavveh, “to desire; to crave”). In either case, the verse would be saying that a king is not to be wanting/seeking alcohol. |
| (0.15) | (Pro 30:20) | 1 sn Equally amazing is the insensitivity of the adulterous woman to the sin. The use of the word “way” clearly connects this and the preceding material. Its presence here also supports the interpretation of the final clause in v. 19 as referring to sexual intimacy. While that is a wonder of God’s creation, so is the way that human nature has distorted it and ruined it. |
| (0.15) | (Pro 30:15) | 4 tn This verb is a Hebrew imperfect for the future tense, while the next verb is a Hebrew perfect for the perfective. Most translations render both as present tense “are satisfied…say” (KJV, NIV, ESV, Holman, while NASB gives both as future “will not be satisfied…will not say”). Using both the future and the past is more emphatic, these never have been and never will be satisfied. |
