(0.25) | (Deu 18:10) | 3 tn Heb “one who causes to appear” (מְעוֹנֵן, meʿonen). Such a practitioner was thought to be able to conjure up spirits or apparitions (cf. Lev 19:26; Judg 9:37; 2 Kgs 21:6; Isa 2:6; 57:3; Jer 27:9; Mic 5:11). |
(0.25) | (Num 22:6) | 3 tn The construction uses the imperfect tense אוּכַל (ʾukhal, “I will be able”) followed by the imperfect tense נַכֶּה (nakkeh, “we will smite/attack/defeat”). The second verb is clearly the purpose or the result of the first, even though there is no conjunction or particle. |
(0.25) | (Num 13:30) | 3 tn Here again the confidence of Caleb is expressed with the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense: יָכוֹל נוּכַל (yakhol nukhal), “we are fully able” to do this. The verb יָכַל (yakhal) followed by the preposition lamed means “to prevail over, to conquer.” |
(0.25) | (Num 11:14) | 1 tn The word order shows the emphasis: “I am not able, I by myself, to bear all this people.” The infinitive לָשֵׂאת (laseʾt) serves as the direct object of the verb. The expression is figurative, for bearing or carrying the people means being responsible for all their needs and cares. |
(0.25) | (Num 9:6) | 4 tn This clause begins with the vav (ו) conjunction and negative before the perfect tense. Here is the main verb of the sentence: They were not able to observe the Passover. The first part of the verse provides the explanation for their problem. |
(0.25) | (Exo 35:34) | 1 sn The expression means that God has given them the ability and the desire to teach others how to do the work. The infinitive construct “to teach” is related to the word Torah, “instruction, guide, law.” They will be able to direct others in the work. |
(0.25) | (Exo 31:4) | 1 tn The expression is לַחְשֹׁב מַחֲשָׁבֹת (lakhshov makhashavot, “to devise devices”). The infinitive emphasizes that Bezalel will be able to design or plan works that are artistic or skillful. He will think thoughts or devise the plans, and then he will execute them in silver or stone or whatever other material he uses. |
(0.25) | (Exo 21:30) | 1 sn The family of the victim would set the amount for the ransom of the man guilty of criminal neglect. This practice was common in the ancient world, rare in Israel. If the family allowed the substitute price, then the man would be able to redeem his life. |
(0.25) | (Exo 17:2) | 2 sn One wonders if the people thought that Moses and Aaron had water and were withholding it from the people, or whether Moses was able to get it on demand. The people should have come to Moses to ask him to pray to God for water, but their action led Moses to say that they had challenged God (B. Jacob, Exodus, 476). |
(0.25) | (Exo 10:5) | 3 tn The text has וְלֹא יוּכַל לִרְאֹת (veloʾ yukhal lirʾot, “and he will not be able to see”). The verb has no expressed subjects. The clause might, therefore, be given a passive translation: “so that [it] cannot be seen.” The whole clause is the result of the previous statement. |
(0.25) | (Exo 4:11) | 1 sn The argumentation by Moses is here met by Yahweh’s rhetorical questions. They are intended to be sharp—it is reproof for Moses. The message is twofold. First, Yahweh is fully able to overcome all of Moses’ deficiencies. Second, Moses is exactly the way that God intended him to be. So the rhetorical questions are meant to prod Moses’ faith. |
(0.25) | (Exo 2:7) | 3 sn No respectable Egyptian woman of this period would have undertaken the task of nursing a foreigner’s baby, and so the suggestion by Miriam was proper and necessary. Since she was standing a small distance away from the events, she was able to come forward when the discovery was made. |
(0.25) | (Gen 44:15) | 1 tn Heb “What is this deed you have done?” The demonstrative pronoun (“this”) adds emphasis to the question. A literal translation seems to contradict the following statement, in which Joseph affirms that he is able to divine such matters. Thus here the emotive force of the question has been reflected in the translation, “What did you think you were doing?” |
(0.24) | (Mar 9:23) | 1 tc Most mss (A C3 Ψ 33 M) have τὸ εἰ δύνασαι πιστεῦσαι (to ei dunasai pisteusai, “if you are able to believe”), instead of τὸ εἰ δύνῃ (to ei dunē, “if you are able”; supported by א B C* L N* Δ ƒ1 579 892). Others have εἰ δύνῃ (or δυνάσαι) πιστεῦσαι (“if you are able to believe”; so D K Θ ƒ13 28 565 al), while still others have τοῦτο εἰ δύνῃ (touto ei dunē, “if you can [do] this”; so [P45] W). The reading that best explains the rise of the others is τὸ εἰ δύνῃ. The neuter article indicates that the Lord is now quoting the boy’s father who, in v. 22, says εἴ τι δύνῃ (ei ti dunē, “if you are able to do anything”). The article is thus used anaphorically (see ExSyn 238). However, scribes could easily have overlooked this idiom and would consequently read τὸ εἰ δύνῃ as the protasis of a conditional clause of the Lord’s statement. As such, it would almost demand the infinitive πιστεῦσαι, producing the reading τὸ εἰ δύνασαι πιστεῦσαι (“if you are able to believe, all things are possible…”). But the article here seems to be meaningless, prompting other scribes to modify the text still further. Some dropped the nonsensical article, while others turned it into the demonstrative τοῦτο and dropped the infinitive. It is clear that scribes had difficulty with the initial text here, and made adjustments in various directions. What might not be so clear is the exact genealogy of the descent of all the readings. However, τὸ εἰ δύνῃ is both a hard saying, best explains the rise of the other readings, and is supported by the best witnesses. It thus rightly deserves to be considered authentic. |
(0.22) | (Luk 19:12) | 3 sn The background to this story about the nobleman who went…to receive for himself a kingdom had some parallels in the area’s recent history: Archelaus was appointed ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea in 4 b.c., but the people did not like him. Herod the Great also made a similar journey to Rome where he was crowned King of Judea in 40 b.c., although he was not able to claim his kingdom until 37 b.c. |
(0.22) | (Amo 8:5) | 6 tn Heb “to make small the ephah and to make great the shekel.” The “ephah” was a unit of dry measure used to determine the quantity purchased, while the “shekel” was a standard weight used to determine the purchase price. By using a smaller than standard ephah and a heavier than standard shekel, these merchants were able to increase their profit (“sell less for a higher price”) by cheating the buyer. |
(0.22) | (Hos 13:9) | 1 tc The MT reads שִׁחֶתְךָ (shikhetekha, “he destroyed you”; Piel perfect third person masculine singular from שָׁחַת, shakhat, “to destroy” + second person masculine singular suffix). The BHS editors suggest שׁחתיךָ (“I will destroy you”; Piel perfect first person common singular + second person masculine singular suffix). Contextually, this fits: If the Lord is intent on destroying Israel, there is no one who will be able to rescue her from him. This reading is also followed by NCV, NRSV, and TEV. |
(0.22) | (Dan 5:10) | 2 tn Aram “the queen” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). In the following discourse this woman is able to recall things about Daniel that go back to the days of Nebuchadnezzar, things that Belshazzar does not seem to recollect. It is likely that she was the wife not of Belshazzar but of Nabonidus or perhaps even Nebuchadnezzar. In that case, “queen” here means “queen mother” (cf. NCV “the king’s mother”). |
(0.22) | (Jer 46:17) | 2 tn Heb “he has let the appointed time pass him by.” It is unclear what is meant by the reference to “appointed time” other than the fact that Pharaoh has missed his opportunity to do what he claimed to be able to do. The Greek text is again different here. It reads, “Call the name of Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt Saon esbeie moed,” reading קִרְאוּ שֵׁם (qirʾu shem) for קָרְאוּ שָׁם (qareʾu sham) and transliterating the last line. |
(0.22) | (Isa 7:1) | 3 tn Or perhaps, “but they were unable to attack it.” This statement sounds like a summary of the whole campaign. The following context explains why they were unable to defeat the southern kingdom. The parallel passage (2 Kgs 16:5; cf. Num 22:11; 1 Sam 17:9 for a similar construction) affirms that Syria and Israel besieged Ahaz. Consequently, the statement that “they were not able to battle against them” must refer to the inability to conquer Ahaz. |