Texts Notes Verse List Exact Search
Results 1381 - 1400 of 2425 for Other (0.000 seconds)
Jump to page: First Prev 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 Next Last
  Discovery Box
(0.15) (Act 7:43)

tc ‡ Most mss, including several significant ones (P74 א A C E Ψ 33 1739 M h p vg syh mae bo Cyr), have ὑμῶν (humōn, “your”) here, in conformity with the LXX of Amos 5:26. But other significant and diverse witnesses lack the pronoun: The lack of ὑμῶν in B D 36 453 gig syp sa Irlat Or is difficult to explain if it is not the autographic wording here. NA28 has the word in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

(0.15) (Joh 19:23)

tn Or “shirt” (a long garment worn under the cloak next to the skin). The name for this garment (χιτών, chitōn) presents some difficulty in translation. Most modern readers would not understand what a ‘tunic’ was any more than they would be familiar with a ‘chiton.’ On the other hand, attempts to find a modern equivalent are also a problem: “Shirt” conveys the idea of a much shorter garment that covers only the upper body, and “undergarment” (given the styles of modern underwear) is more misleading still. “Tunic” was therefore employed, but with a note to explain its nature.

(0.15) (Joh 18:40)

tn Or “robber.” It is possible that Barabbas was merely a robber or highwayman, but more likely, given the use of the term ληστής (lēstēs) in Josephus and other early sources, that he was a guerrilla warrior or revolutionary leader. See both R. E. Brown (John [AB], 2:857) and K. H. Rengstorf (TDNT 4:258) for more information. The word λῃστής was used a number of times by Josephus (J. W. 2.13.2-3 [2.253-254]) to describe the revolutionaries or guerrilla fighters who, from mixed motives of nationalism and greed, kept the rural districts of Judea in constant turmoil.

(0.15) (Joh 19:5)

sn Look, here is the man! Pilate may have meant no more than something like “Here is the accused!” or in a contemptuous way, “Here is your king!” Others have taken Pilate’s statement as intended to evoke pity from Jesus’ accusers: “Look at this poor fellow!” (Jesus would certainly not have looked very impressive after the scourging). For the author, however, Pilate’s words constituted an unconscious allusion to Zech 6:12, “Look, here is the man whose name is the Branch.” In this case Pilate (unknowingly and ironically) presented Jesus to the nation under a messianic title.

(0.15) (Joh 18:5)

sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. Before he states the response to Jesus’ identification of himself, the author inserts a parenthetical note that Judas, again identified as the one who betrayed him (cf. 18:2), was standing with the group of soldiers and officers of the chief priests. Many commentators have considered this to be an awkward insertion, but in fact it heightens considerably the dramatic effect of the response to Jesus’ self-identification in the following verse, and has the added effect of informing the reader that along with the others the betrayer himself ironically falls down at Jesus’ feet (18:6).

(0.15) (Joh 16:27)

tc A number of early mss (א1 B C* D L co) read πατρός (patros, “Father”) here instead of θεοῦ (theou, “God”; found in P5 א*,2 A C3 W Θ Ψ 33 ƒ1,13 M). Although externally πατρός has relatively strong support, it is evidently an assimilation to “I came from the Father” at the beginning of v. 28, or more generally to the consistent mention of God as Father throughout this chapter (πατήρ [patēr, “Father”] occurs eleven times in this chapter, while θεός [theos, “God”] occurs only two other times [16:2, 30]).

(0.15) (Joh 13:24)

sn It is not clear where Simon Peter was seated. If he were on Jesus’ other side, it is difficult to see why he would not have asked the question himself. It would also have been difficult to beckon to the beloved disciple, on Jesus’ right, from such a position. So apparently Peter was seated somewhere else. It is entirely possible that Judas was seated to Jesus’ left. Matt 26:25 seems to indicate that Jesus could speak to him without being overheard by the rest of the group. Judas is evidently in a position where Jesus can hand him the morsel of food (13:26).

(0.15) (Joh 10:3)

sn He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. Some interpreters have suggested that there was more than one flock in the fold, and there would be a process of separation where each shepherd called out his own flock. This may also be suggested by the mention of a doorkeeper in v. 3 since only the larger sheepfolds would have such a guard. But the Gospel of John never mentions a distinction among the sheep in this fold; in fact (10:16) there are other sheep which are to be brought in, but they are to be one flock and one shepherd.

(0.15) (Joh 8:39)

tc Some significant mss (P66 B* [700]) have the present imperative ποιεῖτε (poieite) here: “If you are Abraham’s children, then do,” while many others (א2 C K L N Δ Ψ ƒ1,13 33 565 579 892 pm) add the contingent particle ἄν (an) to ἐποιεῖτε (epoieite) making it a more proper second class condition by Attic standards. The simple ἐποιεῖτε without the ἄν is the hardest reading, and is found in some excellent witnesses (P75 א* B2 D W Γ Θ 070 0250 1424 pm).

(0.15) (Joh 6:69)

sn You have the words of eternal life…you are the Holy One of God! In contrast to the response of some of his disciples, here is the response of the Twelve, whom Jesus then questioned concerning their loyalty to him. This was the big test, and the Twelve, with Peter as spokesman, passed with flying colors. The confession here differs considerably from the synoptic accounts (Matt 16:16, Mark 8:29, and Luke 9:20) and concerns directly the disciples’ personal loyalty to Jesus, in contrast to those other disciples who had deserted him (John 6:66).

(0.15) (Joh 5:17)

tc ‡ Most witnesses (P66 A D L Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 33 M latt co) have ᾿Ιησοῦς (Iēsous, “Jesus”) here, while generally better witnesses (P75 א B W {0141} 892 1241 pbo) lack the name. Although it is possible that Alexandrian scribes deleted the name due to proclivities to prune, this is not as likely as other witnesses adding it for clarification, especially since multiple strands of the Alexandrian text are represented in the shorter reading. NA27 places the word in brackets, indicating some doubts as to authenticity.

(0.15) (Joh 5:2)

sn On the location of the pool called Bethzatha, the double-pool of St. Anne is the probable site, and has been excavated; the pools were trapezoidal in shape, 165 ft (49.5 m) wide at one end, 220 ft (66 m) wide at the other, and 315 ft (94.5 m) long, divided by a central partition. There were colonnades (rows of columns) on all 4 sides and on the partition, thus forming the five covered walkways mentioned in John 5:2. Stairways at the corners permitted descent to the pool.

(0.15) (Joh 1:45)

sn Nathanael is traditionally identified with Bartholomew (although John never describes him as such). He appears here after Philip; in all lists of the twelve except in Acts 1:13, Bartholomew follows Philip. Also, the Aramaic Bar-tolmai means “son of Tolmai,” the surname; the man almost certainly had another name. Other alternatives than Bartholomew have also been suggested, e.g. James the son of Alphaeus; see C. E. Hill, “The Identity of John’s Nathanael,” JSNT 20 (1998): 45-61.

(0.15) (Luk 24:32)

tc ‡ Most mss have the phrase ἐν ἡμῖν (en hēmin, “within us”) after οὐχὶ ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν καιομένη ἦν (ouchi hē kardia hēmōn kaiomenē ēn, “Didn’t our hearts burn”). The phrase “within us” is lacking in some early mss (P75 B D c e sys,c). These early witnesses could have overlooked the words, since there are several occurrences of ἡμῖν in the context. But it seems likely that other scribes wanted to clarify the abrupt expression “Didn’t our hearts burn,” even as the translation has done here. NA28 includes the words in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity.

(0.15) (Luk 22:31)

tc The majority of mss (א A D W Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 M as well as several versional witnesses) begin this verse with an introductory comment, “and the Lord said,” indicating a change in the subject of discussion. But this is apparently a reading motivated by the need for clarity. Some of the best witnesses, along with a few others (P75 B L T 1241 2542c sys co), do not contain these words. The abrupt shift is the more difficult reading and thus more likely to be autographic.

(0.15) (Luk 20:10)

tc Instead of the future indicative δώσουσιν (dōsousin, “they will give”), most witnesses (C D W Θ Ψ ƒ1 M) have the aorist subjunctive δῶσιν (dōsin, “they might give”). The aorist subjunctive is expected following ἵνα (hina, “so that”), so it is almost surely a motivated reading. Further, early and excellent witnesses, as well as a few others (א A B ƒ13 33 579 1241 2542 al), have δώσουσιν. It is thus more likely that the future indicative is authentic. For a discussion of this construction, see BDF §369.2.

(0.15) (Luk 19:2)

sn This is the one place in the NT the office of chief tax collector is noted. If the term refers to a managerial rank, this individual would organize and oversee the other tax collectors and collect significant commissions (see also the note on the word tax collector in 3:12). It is possible, however, that in this context the term simply means “major tax collector” and is a comment on the individual’s importance or wealth rather than his rank (see D. L. Bock, Luke [BECNT] 1:1516).

(0.15) (Luk 17:34)

sn There is debate among commentators and scholars over the phrase one will be taken and the other left about whether one is taken for judgment or for salvation. If the imagery is patterned after the rescue of Noah from the flood and Lot from Sodom, as some suggest, the ones taken are the saved (as Noah and Lot were) and those left behind are judged. The imagery, however, is not directly tied to the identification of the two groups. Its primary purpose in context is to picture the sudden, surprising separation of the righteous and the judged (i.e., condemned) at the return of the Son of Man.

(0.15) (Luk 12:39)

tc Most mss (א1 A B L Q W Θ Ψ 070 ƒ1,13 33 M lat syp,h sams bo) read “he would have watched and not let” here, but this looks like an assimilation to Matt 24:43. The alliance of two significant and early mss along with a few others (P75 א* [D] e i sys,c samss), coupled with much stronger internal evidence, suggests that the shorter reading is authentic.

(0.15) (Luk 10:42)

tc Or, with some mss (P3 [א] B C2 L 070vid ƒ1 33 [579]), “few things are needed—or only one” (as well as other variants). The textual problem here is a difficult one to decide. The shorter reading is normally preferred, but it is not altogether clear how the variants would arise from it. However, the reading followed in the translation has good support (with some internal variations) from a number of witnesses (P45,75 A C* W Θ Ψ ƒ13 M lat sa).



TIP #04: Try using range (OT and NT) to better focus your searches. [ALL]
created in 0.06 seconds
powered by bible.org