Texts Notes Verse List Exact Search
Results 1201 - 1220 of 1921 for had (0.000 seconds)
Jump to page: First Prev 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 Next Last
  Discovery Box
(0.17) (Luk 6:16)

sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.

(0.17) (Luk 4:18)

sn The essence of Jesus’ messianic work is expressed in the phrase to set free. This line from Isa 58 says that Jesus will do what the nation had failed to do. It makes the proclamation messianic, not merely prophetic, because Jesus doesn’t just proclaim the message—he brings the deliverance. The word translated set free is the same Greek word (ἄφεσις, aphesis) translated release earlier in the verse.

(0.17) (Mar 15:43)

sn Asking for the body of Jesus was indeed a bold move on the part of Joseph of Arimathea, for it clearly and openly identified him with a man who had just been condemned and executed, namely, Jesus. His faith is exemplary, especially for someone who was a member of the council that handed Jesus over for crucifixion (cf. Luke 23:51). He did this because he sought to give Jesus an honorable burial.

(0.17) (Mar 14:72)

tn This occurrence of the word ἀλέκτωρ (alektōr, “rooster”) is anarthrous and consequently may not point back explicitly to the rooster which had crowed previously in v. 68. The reason for the anarthrous construction is most likely to indicate generically that some rooster crowed. Further, the translation of ἀλέκτωρ as an indefinite noun retains the subtlety of the Greek in only hinting at the Lord’s prediction v. 30. See also NAB, TEV, NASB.

(0.17) (Mar 14:12)

sn Generally the Feast of Unleavened Bread would refer to Nisan 15 (Friday), but the following reference to the sacrifice of the Passover lamb indicates that Nisan 14 (Thursday) was what Mark had in mind (Nisan = March 27 to April 25). The celebration of the Feast of Unleavened Bread lasted eight days, beginning with the Passover meal. The celebrations were so close together that at times the names of both were used interchangeably.

(0.17) (Mar 5:13)

sn Many have discussed why Jesus gave them permission, since the animals were destroyed. However, this is another example of a miracle that is a visual lesson. The demons are destructive: They were destroying the man. They destroyed the pigs. They destroy whatever they touch. The point was to take demonic influence seriously, as well as Jesus’ power over it as a picture of the larger battle for human souls. There would be no doubt how the man’s transformation had taken place.

(0.17) (Mar 5:25)

sn This story of the woman who had been suffering from hemorrhages for 12 years is recounted in the middle of the story about Jairus’ daughter. Mark’s account (as is often the case) is longer and more detailed than the parallel accounts in Matt 9:18-26 and Luke 8:40-56. Mark’s fuller account may be intended to show that the healing of the woman was an anticipation of the healing of the little girl.

(0.17) (Mar 4:23)

tn The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mark 4:9; Luke 8:8; 14:35).

(0.17) (Mar 4:9)

tn The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mark 4:23; Luke 8:8; 14:35).

(0.17) (Mar 3:19)

sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.

(0.17) (Mat 27:58)

sn Asking for the body of Jesus was indeed a bold move on the part of Joseph of Arimathea, for it clearly and openly identified him with a man who had just been condemned and executed, namely, Jesus. His faith is exemplary, especially for someone who was a member of the council that handed Jesus over for crucifixion (cf. Mark 15:43, Luke 23:51). He did this because he sought to give Jesus an honorable burial.

(0.17) (Mat 13:43)

tn The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 11:15; 13:9; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 8:8; 14:35).

(0.17) (Mat 13:9)

tn The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 11:15; 13:43; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 8:8; 14:35).

(0.17) (Mat 9:36)

tn Or perhaps “because they had been bewildered and helpless.” The grammatical issue is whether the perfect participles are to be regarded as predicate adjectives or as pluperfect periphrastic constructions (i.e., εἰμί in the indicative plus a perfect participle). Wallace regards these as pluperfect periphrastics, stating: “There may be a hint in Matthew’s use of the pluperfect, esp. in collocation with the shepherd-motif, that this situation would soon disappear” (ExSyn 584).

(0.17) (Mat 5:41)

sn If anyone forces you to go one mile. In NT times Roman soldiers had the authority to press civilians into service to carry loads for them. The Greek verb is a semi-technical term and its only other NT uses are in Matt 27:32 and Mark 15:21, both of which refer to Simon of Cyrene being forced to carry Jesus’ cross.

(0.17) (Zec 11:8)

sn Zechariah is only dramatizing what God had done historically (see the note on the word “cedars” in 11:1). The “one month” probably means just any short period of time in which three kings ruled in succession. Likely candidates are Elah, Zimri, Tibni (1 Kgs 16:8-20); Zechariah, Shallum, Menahem (2 Kgs 15:8-16); or Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah (2 Kgs 24:1-25:7).

(0.17) (Zec 11:5)

sn The expression those who buy them appears to be a reference to the foreign nations to whom Israel’s own kings “sold” their subjects. Far from being good shepherds, then, they were evil and profiteering. The whole section (vv. 4-14) refers to the past when the Lord, the Good Shepherd, had in vain tried to lead his people to salvation and life.

(0.17) (Hag 1:12)

tn Heb “all the remnant of the people.” The Hebrew phrase שְׁאֵרִית הָעָם (sheʾerit haʿam) in this postexilic context is used as a technical term to refer to the returned remnant (see Ezra 9:14; Isa 10:20-22; 11:11, 16; Jer 23:3; 31:7; and many other passages). Cf. TEV “all the people who had returned from the exile in Babylonia.”

(0.17) (Jon 4:11)

tn Heb “You…Should I not spare…?” This is an a fortiori argument from lesser to greater. Since Jonah was “upset” (חוּס, khus) about such a trivial matter as the death of a little plant (the lesser), God had every right to “spare” (חוּס) the enormously populated city of Nineveh (the greater). The phrase “even more” does not appear in Hebrew but is implied by this a fortiori argument.

(0.17) (Jon 4:2)

sn The narrator skillfully withheld Jonah’s motivations from the reader up to this point for rhetorical effect—to build suspense and to create a shocking, surprising effect. Now, for the first time, the narrator reveals why Jonah fled from the commission of God in 1:3—he had not wanted to give God the opportunity to relent from judging Nineveh! Jonah knew that if he preached in Nineveh, the people might repent, and consequently God more than likely would relent from sending judgment. Hoping to seal their fate, Jonah had originally refused to preach so the Ninevites would not have an opportunity to repent. Apparently Jonah hoped that God would therefore judge them without advance warning. Or perhaps he was afraid he would betray his nationalistic self-interests by functioning as the instrument through which the Lord would spare Israel’s main and cruel enemy. Jonah probably wanted God to destroy Nineveh for three reasons: (1) as a loyal nationalist, he despised non-Israelites (cf. 1:9); (2) he believed that idolaters had forfeited any opportunity to be shown mercy (cf. 2:9-10); and (3) the prophets Amos and Hosea had recently announced that God would sovereignly use the Assyrians to judge unrepentant Israel (Hos 9:3; 11:5) and take them into exile (Amos 5:27). If God destroyed Nineveh, the Assyrians would not be able to destroy Israel. The better solution would have been for Jonah to work for the repentance of Nineveh and Israel.



TIP #23: Use the Download Page to copy the NET Bible to your desktop or favorite Bible Software. [ALL]
created in 0.05 seconds
powered by bible.org