Texts Notes Verse List Exact Search
Results 161 - 180 of 422 for expect (0.001 seconds)
Jump to page: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next Last
  Discovery Box
(0.25) (Amo 3:8)

sn The roar of the lion is here a metaphor for impending judgment (see 1:2; cf. 3:4, 12). Verses 7-8 justify Amos’ prophetic ministry and message of warning and judgment. The people should expect a prophetic message prior to divine action.

(0.25) (Amo 3:1)

tn One might expect a third person verb form (“he brought up”), since the Lord apparently refers to himself in the third person in the preceding sentence. This first person form, however, serves to connect this message to the earlier indictment (2:10) and anticipates the words of the following verse.

(0.25) (Joe 2:16)

sn Mosaic law allowed men recently married, or about to be married, to be exempt for a year from certain duties that were normally mandatory, such as military obligation (cf. Deut 20:7; 24:5). However, Joel pictures a time of such urgency that normal expectations must give way to higher requirements.

(0.25) (Lam 1:15)

tn Heb “bulls.” Metaphorically, bulls may refer to mighty ones, leaders, or warriors. F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp (Lamentations [IBC], 69) insightfully suggests that the Samek stanza presents an overarching dissonance by using terms associated with a celebratory feast (bulls, assembly, and a winepress) in sentences where God is abusing the normally expected celebrants, i.e., the “leaders” are the sacrifice.

(0.25) (Lam 1:8)

tn The verb הִזִּילוּהָ (hizziluha) is generally understood as a rare form of Hiphil perfect third person common plural + third person feminine singular suffix from I זָלַל (zalal, “to despise”): “they despise her.” This follows the I nun (ן) pattern with daghesh (dot) in zayin (ז) rather than the expected geminate pattern הִזִילּוּהָ (hizilluha) with daghesh in lamed (ל) (GKC 178-79 §67.l).

(0.25) (Jer 49:19)

tn The interrogative מִי (mi) is rendered “there is no one” in each of the last three occurrences in this verse because it is used in a rhetorical question that expects the answer “no one” or “none.” It is, according to BDB 566 s.v. מִי f(c), equivalent to a rhetorical negative.

(0.25) (Jer 26:19)

tn The interrogative he (הַ) with the negative governs all three of the verbs, the perfect and the two vav (ו) consecutive imperfects that follow it. The next clause has disjunctive word order and introduces a contrast. The question expects a positive answer.

(0.25) (Jer 23:29)

tn Heb “Is not my message like a fire?” The rhetorical question expects a positive answer that is made explicit in the translation. The words “that purges dross” are not in the text but are implicit to the metaphor. They are supplied in the translation for clarity.

(0.25) (Jer 23:24)

tn The words “Do you not know” are not in the text. They are a way of conveying the idea that the question, which reads literally, “Do I not fill heaven and earth?” expects a positive answer. They follow the pattern used at the beginning of the previous two questions and continue that thought. The words are supplied in the translation for clarity.

(0.25) (Jer 13:12)

tn This is an attempt to render a construction that involves an infinitive of a verb being added before the same verb in a question that expects a positive answer. There may, by the way, be a pun being passed back and forth here involving the sound play been “fool” (נָבָל, naval) and “wine bottle” (נֶבֶל, nevel).

(0.25) (Jer 8:20)

sn This appears to be a proverbial statement for “time marches on.” The people seem to be expressing their frustration that the Lord has not gone about his business of rescuing them as they expected. For a similar misguided feeling based on the offering of shallow repentance, see Hos 6:1-3 (and note the Lord’s reply in 6:4-6).

(0.25) (Jer 3:2)

sn The rhetorical question expects the answer “nowhere,” which asserts the widespread nature of the nation’s idolatry. The prophets often compare Judah’s religious infidelity, idolatry, to adultery or prostitution. Jeremiah goes a step further in exposing their folly by portraying their willing acts of idolatry as being sexually violated.

(0.25) (Isa 5:7)

tn Heb “but, look, disobedience.” The precise meaning of מִשְׂפָּח (mispakh), which occurs only here in the OT, is uncertain. Some have suggested a meaning “bloodshed.” The term is obviously chosen for its wordplay value; it sounds very much like מִשְׁפָּט (mishpat, “justice”). The sound play draws attention to the point being made; the people have not met the Lord’s expectations.

(0.25) (Isa 5:7)

tn Heb “but, look, a cry for help.” The verb (“he waited”) does double duty in the parallelism. צְעָקָה (tseaʿqah) refers to the cries for help made by the oppressed. It sounds very much like צְדָקָה (tsedaqah, “fairness”). The sound play draws attention to the point being made; the people have not met the Lord’s expectations.

(0.25) (Isa 4:5)

tn Heb “a cloud by day, and smoke, and brightness of fire, a flame by night.” Though the accents in the Hebrew text suggest otherwise, it might be preferable to take “smoke” with what follows, since one would expect smoke to accompany fire.

(0.25) (Ecc 6:12)

tn Heb “Who can tell the man what shall be after him under the sun?” The rhetorical question (“For who can tell him…?”) is a negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “For no one can tell him…!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51). The translation renders this rhetorical device as a positive affirmation.

(0.25) (Ecc 6:12)

tn Heb “For who knows what is good for a man in life?” The rhetorical question (“For who knows…?”) is a negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “For no one knows…!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51). The translation renders this rhetorical device as a positive affirmation.

(0.25) (Ecc 3:9)

sn This rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “Man gains nothing from his toil!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51). Any advantage that man might gain from his toil is nullified by his ignorance of divine providence.

(0.25) (Ecc 1:3)

sn This rhetorical question expects a negative answer: “Man has no gain in all his toil.” Ecclesiastes often uses rhetorical questions in this manner (e.g., 2:2; 3:9; 6:8, 11, 12; see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949).

(0.25) (Pro 28:2)

tn This last line is difficult. The MT has כֵּן יַאֲרִיךְ (ken yaʾarikh). The verb means “to prolong,” but כֵּן (ken) is open to several possibilities for meaning. J. H. Greenstone’s interpretation of it as a noun from the Hollow root כּוּן (kun) with a meaning of “established order” is what is expected here (Proverbs, 293).



TIP #19: Use the Study Dictionary to learn and to research all aspects of 20,000+ terms/words. [ALL]
created in 0.05 seconds
powered by bible.org