Texts Notes Verse List Exact Search

Your search for "What" did not find any bible verses that matched.

Results 1041 - 1060 of 2402 for What's (0.000 seconds)
Jump to page: First Prev 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 Next Last
  Discovery Box
(0.31) (Ecc 1:15)

tn A parallel statement occurs in 7:13 which employs the active form of עָוַת, (ʿavat, “to bend”) with God as the subject: “Who is able to strengthen what God bends?” The passive form occurs here: “No one is able to straighten what is bent” (מְעֻוָּת לֹא־יוּכַל לֹתְקֹן, meʿuvvat loʾ yukhal loteqon). In the light of 7:13, the personal agent of the passive form is God.

(0.31) (Pro 25:8)

tn Heb “do not go out hastily to strive”; the verb “to strive” means dispute in the legal context. The last clause of v. 7, “what your eyes have seen,” does fit very well with the initial clause of v. 8. It would then say: What you see, do not take hastily to court, but if the case was not valid, he would end up in disgrace.

(0.31) (Pro 18:2)

tn Heb “his heart.” This is a metonymy meaning “what is on his mind” (cf. NAB “displaying what he thinks”; NRSV “expressing personal opinion”). This kind of person is in love with his own ideas and enjoys spewing them out (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 515). It is the kind of person who would ask a question, not to learn, but to show everyone how clever he is (cf. TEV).

(0.31) (Pro 14:19)

tn The verb שָׁחַח (shakhakh) means “to crouch, cower, bow” whether from weariness or in submission. As a dynamic verb in the perfect conjugation form, it is past or perfective. Here the sage takes the viewpoint of assuring the learner of what has happened in the past, asserting it to be prototypical of what will continue to happen. Some translations emphasize the future implication (NIV, NASB, CEV, NLT) while others opt to portray the lesson as a characteristic present (ESV, KJV, Holman).

(0.31) (Pro 10:31)

tn Heb “the tongue of perversions.” The noun תַּהְפֻּכוֹת (tahpukhot, “perversions”) functions as a genitive of content; it refers to what the tongue says—perverse things. The plural form depicts a plural of character. The term לָשׁוֹן (lashon, “tongue”) functions as a synecdoche of part (= tongue) for the whole person (= the speaker). The tongue is emphasized because this person is characterized by perverse speech. The term תַּהְפֻּכוֹת (“perversions”) refers to those who turn things upside down, overthrow, or pervert what is right.

(0.31) (Pro 9:3)

tn The Hebrew imperfect can be a general present. The prior perfect verbs tell what she has done in preparation, while the imperfect tells what she now does. But it is also possible, given the past time context of the previous verbs, that the imperfect should be understood as past habitual, “she would call,” or as a preterite (without the vav consecutive), “she called.” This would be in line with the next verse which uses a perfect, “she has said.”

(0.31) (Pro 1:25)

tn The verbs in this series are a participle, a preterite/vayyiqtol, and finally a perfect. “Neglected” is a preterite (matching the preterite “refused” in 1:24) giving the contrasting response to what Lady Wisdom did. “Did not comply” is a Hebrew perfect in order to expand on what “neglected” means, rather than give an additional response as another preterite would imply. For the word “comply, consent,” see 1:20.

(0.31) (Psa 49:12)

tn Heb “but mankind in honor does not remain.” The construction vav (ו) + noun at the beginning of the verse can be taken as contrastive in relation to what precedes. The Hebrew term יְקָר (yeqar, “honor”) probably refers here to the wealth mentioned in the preceding context. The imperfect verbal form draws attention to what is characteristically true. Some scholars emend יָלִין (yalin, “remains”) to יָבִין (yavin, “understands”) but this is an unnecessary accommodation to the wording of v. 20.

(0.31) (Psa 18:3)

tn Heb “worthy of praise, I cried out [to] the Lord.” Some take מְהֻלָּל (mehullal, “worthy of praise”) with what precedes and translate, “the praiseworthy one,” or “praiseworthy.” However, the various epithets in vv. 1-2 have the first person pronominal suffix, unlike מְהֻלָּל. If one follows the traditional verse division and takes מְהֻלָּל with what follows, it is best understood as substantival and as appositional to יְהוָה (yehvah): “[to the] praiseworthy one I cried out, [to the] Lord.”

(0.31) (Psa 10:15)

tn Heb “you will not find.” It is uncertain how this statement relates to what precedes. Some take בַּל (bal), which is used as a negative particle in vv. 10:4, 6, 11, 18, as asseverative here, “Indeed find (i.e., judge his wickedness).” The translation assumes that the final words are an asyndetic relative clause which refers back to what the wicked man boasted in God’s face (“you will not find [i.e., my wickedness]”). See v. 13.

(0.31) (Psa 1:6)

tn Heb “but the way of the wicked perishes.” The “way of the wicked” may refer to their course of life (Ps 146:9; Prov 4:19; Jer 12:1) or their sinful behavior (Prov 12:26; 15:9). The Hebrew imperfect verbal form probably describes here what typically happens, though one could take the form as indicating what will happen (“will perish”).

(0.31) (Psa 1:5)

tn Heb “arise in,” but the verb is used metonymically here in the sense of “stand”; “endure,” as in 1 Sam 13:14 and Job 8:15. The negated Hebrew imperfect verbal form is here taken as indicating incapability or lack of potential, though one could understand the verb form as indicating what is typical (“do not withstand”) or what will happen (“will not withstand”).

(0.31) (Job 17:15)

tn The repetition of “my hope” in the verse has thrown the versions off, and their translations have led commentators also to change the second one to something like “goodness,” on the assumption that a word cannot be repeated in the same verse. The word actually carries two different senses here. The first would be the basic meaning “hope,” but the second a metonymy of cause, namely, what hope produces, what will be seen.

(0.31) (Job 13:12)

tn The word is זִכְרֹנֵיכֶם (zikhronekhem, “your remembrances”). The word זִכָּרֹן (zikkaron) not only can mean the act of remembering, but also what is remembered—what provokes memory or is worth being remembered. In the plural it can mean all the memorabilia, and in this verse all the sayings and teachings. H. H. Rowley (Job [NCBC], 99) suggests that in Job’s speech it could mean “all your memorized sayings.”

(0.31) (Job 6:10)

sn The “words” are the divine decrees of God’s providence, the decisions that he makes in his dealings with people. Job cannot conceal these—he knows what they are. What Job seems to mean by this clause in this verse is that there is nothing that would hinder his joy of dying for he has not denied or disobeyed God’s plan.

(0.31) (2Sa 15:27)

tn The Greek tradition understands the Hebrew word as an imperative (“see”). Most Greek mss have ἴδετε (idete); the Lucianic recension has βλέπε (blepe). It could just as well be taken as a question: “Don’t you see what is happening?” The present translation takes the word as a question, with the implication that Zadok is a priest and not a prophet (i.e., “seer”) and therefore unable to know what the future holds.

(0.31) (Num 27:14)

sn Using the basic meaning of the word קָדַשׁ (qadash, “to be separate, distinct, set apart”), we can understand better what Moses failed to do. He was supposed to have acted in a way that would have shown God to be distinct, different, holy. Instead, he gave the impression that God was capricious and hostile—very human. The leader has to be aware of what image he is conveying to the people.

(0.31) (Num 23:12)

tn The verb שָׁמַר (shamar) means “to guard, watch, observe” and so here with a sense of “be careful” or even “take heed” (so KJV, ASV). The nuance of the imperfect tense would be obligatory: “I must be careful”—to do what? to speak what the Lord has put in my mouth. The infinitive construct “to speak” is therefore serving as the direct object of שָׁמַר.

(0.31) (Num 20:12)

sn Using the basic meaning of the word קָדַשׁ (qadash, “to be separate, distinct, set apart”), we can understand better what Moses failed to do. He was supposed to have acted in a way that would have shown God to be distinct, different, holy. Instead, he gave the impression that God was capricious and hostile—very human. The leader has to be aware of what image he is conveying to the people.

(0.31) (Exo 4:10)

sn Now Moses took up another line of argumentation, the issue of his inability to speak fluently (vv. 10-17). The point here is that God’s servants must yield themselves as instruments to God, the Creator. It makes no difference what character traits they have or what weaknesses they think they have (Moses manages to speak very well) if God is present. If the sovereign God has chosen them, then they have everything that God intended them to have.



TIP #19: Use the Study Dictionary to learn and to research all aspects of 20,000+ terms/words. [ALL]
created in 0.06 seconds
powered by bible.org