Your search for "Is" did not find any bible verses that matched.
Discovery Box| (0.20) | (Neh 4:5) | 1 tn The Hiphil stem of כָּעַס (kaʿas) may mean: (1) “to provoke to anger”; (2) “to bitterly offend”; or (3) “to grieve” (BDB 495 s.v. Hiph.; HALOT 491 s.v. כעס hif). The Hebrew lexicons suggest that “bitterly offend” is the most appropriate nuance here. |
| (0.20) | (Neh 3:8) | 1 tc Assuming that the MT reading וַיַּעַזְבוּ (vayyaʿazevu) is related to the root עָזַב I (“to abandon”)—which makes little sense contextually—some interpreters emend the MT to וַיַּעַזְרוּ (vayyaʿazeru, “they aided”), as suggested by the editors of BHS. However, it is better to relate this term to the root II עָזַב meaning “to restore; to repair” (BDB 738 s.v. II עָזַב) or “to plaster” (HALOT 807 s.v. II עזב qal.1). This homonymic root is rare, appearing elsewhere only in Exod 23:5 and Job 9:27, where it means “to restore; to put in order” (HALOT 807-8 s.v. II עזב qal.2). The related Mishnaic Hebrew noun מעזיבה refers to a “plastered floor.” This Hebrew root is probably related to the cognate Ugaritic, Old South Arabic and Sabean verbs that mean “to restore” and “to prepare; to lay” (see BDB 738 s.v.; HALOT 807 s.v.). Some scholars in the nineteenth century suggested that this term be nuanced “paved.” However, most modern English versions have “restored” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV) or “rebuilt” (so NCV, CEV). |
| (0.20) | (Neh 3:5) | 3 tn The plural form אֲדֹנֵיהֶם (ʾadonehem, “lords”) is probably a plural of majesty referring to Nehemiah (e.g., Isa 19:4; see GKC 399 §124.i). However, some English versions take the plural to refer to the “supervisors” (NIV, NCV, TEV) and others to “their Lord” (KJV, NRSV). |
| (0.20) | (Neh 1:5) | 1 tn Heb “the covenant and loyal love.” The phrase is a hendiadys: the first noun retains its full nominal sense, while the second noun functions adjectivally (“loyal love” = loving). Alternately, the first might function adjectivally and the second noun function as the noun: “covenant and loyal love” = covenant fidelity (see Neh 9:32). |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 6:20) | 1 tn Heb “as one.” The expression is best understood as referring to the unity shown by the religious leaders in preparing themselves for the observance of Passover. On the meaning of the Hebrew phrase see DCH 1:182 s.v. אֶחָד 3b. See also HALOT 30 s.v. אֶחָד 5. |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 7:1) | 1 sn If the Artaxerxes of Ezra 7:1 is Artaxerxes I Longimanus (ca. 464-423 b.c.), Ezra must have arrived in Jerusalem ca. 458 b.c., since Ezra 7:7-8 connects the time of his arrival to the seventh year of the king. The arrival of Nehemiah is then linked to the twentieth year of the king (Neh 1:1), or ca. 445 b.c. Some scholars, however, have suggested that Ezra 7:7 should be read as “the thirty-seventh year” rather than “the seventh year.” This would have Ezra coming to Jerusalem after, rather than before, the arrival of Nehemiah. Others have taken the seventh year of Ezra 7:7-8 to refer not to Artaxerxes I but to Artaxerxes II, who ruled ca. 404-358 b.c. In this understanding Ezra would have returned to Jerusalem ca. 398 b.c., a good many years after the return of Nehemiah. Neither of these views is certain, however, and it seems better to retain the traditional understanding of the chronological sequence of returns by Ezra and Nehemiah. With this understanding there is a gap of about fifty-eight years between chapter six, which describes the dedication of the temple in 516 b.c., and chapter seven, which opens with Ezra’s coming to Jerusalem in 458 b.c. |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 6:4) | 2 tc The translation follows the LXX reading חַד (khad, “one”) rather than the MT חֲדַת (khadat, “new”). If the MT reading “new” is understood to mean freshly cut timber that has not yet been seasoned it would seem to be an odd choice for construction material. |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 5:13) | 1 sn Cyrus was actually a Persian king, but when he conquered Babylon in 539 b.c. he apparently appropriated to himself the additional title “king of Babylon.” The Syriac Peshitta substitutes “Persia” for “Babylon” here, but this is probably a hyper-correction. |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 4:9) | 1 tn Aram “then.” What follows in v. 9 seems to be the preface of the letter, serving to identify the senders of the letter. The word “from” is not in the Aramaic text but has been supplied in the translation for clarity. |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 4:5) | 3 sn The purpose of the opening verses of this chapter is to summarize why the Jews returning from the exile were unable to complete the rebuilding of the temple more quickly than they did. The delay was due not to disinterest on their part but to the repeated obstacles that had been placed in their path by determined foes. |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 2:69) | 3 sn The מָנִים (manim, cf. Neh 7:71, 72) is a measuring weight for valuable metals, equal to 1/60 of a talent or 60 shekels (BDB 584 s.v. מָנֶה; HALOT 599 s.v. מָנֶה). For further study, see R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, 203-6. |
| (0.20) | (Ezr 1:9) | 3 tn Heb “knives.” The Hebrew noun מַחֲלָפִים (makhalafim, “knives”) is found only here in the OT. While the basic meaning of the term is fairly clear, what it refers to here is unclear. The verb II חָלַף (khalaf) means “to pass through” (BDB 322 s.v. חָלַף) or “to cut through” (HALOT 321 s.v. II חלף; see also Judg 5:26; Job 20:24); thus, the lexicons suggest מַחֲלָפִים means “knives” (BDB 322 s.v. מַחֲלָף; HALOT 569 s.v. *מַחֲלָף). The related noun חֲלָפוֹת (khalafot, “knife”) is used in Mishnaic Hebrew (HALOT 321 s.v. II חלף), and חֲלִיפוֹת (khalifot, “knives”) appears in the Talmud. The noun appears in the cognate languages: Ugaritic khlpnm “(“knives”; UT 19) and Syriac khalofta (“shearing knife”; HALOT 321 s.v. II חלף). The Vulgate translated it as “knives,” while the LXX understood it as referring to replacement pieces for the offering basins. The English translations render it variously; some following the Vulgate and others adopting the approach of the LXX: “knives” (KJV, NKJV, NRSV), “censers” (RSV), “duplicates” (NASB), “silver pans” (NIV), “bowls” (TEV), “other dishes” (CEV). Verse 11 lists these twenty-nine objects among the “gold and silver vessels” brought back to Jerusalem for temple worship. The translation above offers the intentionally ambiguous “silver utensils” (the term מַחֲלָפִים [“knives”] would hardly refer to “gold” items, but could refer to “silver items”). |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 35:12) | 1 tn Heb “and they put aside the burnt offering[s] to give them to the divisions of the house of the fathers for the sons of the people to bring near to the Lord as it is written in the scroll of Moses—and the same with the cattle.” |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 30:27) | 1 tn Heb “and it was heard with their voice.” BDB 1034 s.v. שָׁמַע Niph.4 interprets this to mean “hearing was granted to their voice.” It is possible that the name יְהוָה (yehvah, “the Lord”) has been accidentally omitted. |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 30:24) | 1 tn The Hebrew term צֹאן (tsoʾn, translated “sheep” twice in this verse) denotes smaller livestock in general; depending on context it can refer to sheep only or goats only, but there is nothing in the immediate context here to specify one or the other. |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 30:22) | 3 tn Heb “and they ate [during] the appointed time [for] seven days.” מוֹעֵד (moʿed, “appointed time”) is probably an adverbial accusative of time referring to the festival. However, some understand it as metonymically referring to the food eaten during the festival. See BDB 417 s.v. |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 26:21) | 1 tn The precise meaning of בֵּית הַחָפְשִׁית (bet hakhofshit, “house of [?]”) is uncertain. NASB, NIV, NRSV all have “in a separate house”; NEB has “in his own house…relieved of all duties.” For a discussion of various proposals, see M. Cogan and H. Tadmor, II Kings (AB), 166-67. |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 25:18) | 1 sn The thorn bush in the allegory is Judah. Amaziah’s success had deceived him into thinking he was on the same level as the major powers in the area (symbolized by the cedar). In reality he was not capable of withstanding an attack by a real military power such as Israel (symbolized by the wild animal). |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 25:16) | 3 tn The verb יָעַץ (yaʿats, “has decided”) is from the same root as יוֹעֵץ (yoʿets, “counselor”) in v. 16 and עֵצָה (ʿetsah, “advice”) later in v. 16. The wordplay highlights the appropriate nature of the divine punishment. Amaziah rejected the counsel of God’s prophet; now he would be the victim of God’s “counsel.” |
| (0.20) | (2Ch 22:10) | 1 tn Heb “she arose and she destroyed all the royal offspring.” The verb קוּם (qum, “arise”) is here used in an auxiliary sense to indicate that she embarked on a campaign to destroy the royal offspring. See M. Cogan and H. Tadmor, II Kings (AB), 125. |
