Results 101 - 116 of 116 for distress (0.000 seconds)
(0.13)(Psa 34:1)

sn In this song of thanksgiving the psalmist praises God for delivering him from distress. He encourages others to be loyal to the Lord, tells them how to please God, and assures them that the Lord protects his servants. The psalm is an acrostic; vv. 1-21 begin with successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. (Verse 6 begins with the letter <span class="translit">hespan> (<span class="hebrew">הspan>) and v. 7 with the letter <span class="translit">zayinspan> (<span class="hebrew">זspan>). The letter <span class="translit">vavspan> (<span class="hebrew">וspan>), which comes between <span class="hebrew">הspan> and <span class="hebrew">זspan>, seems to be omitted, although it does appear at the beginning of v. 6b. The final verse of the psalm, which begins with the letter <span class="translit">pespan> (<span class="hebrew">פspan>), is outside the acrostic scheme.

(0.13)(Psa 4:1)

tn <i>Hebi> “in distress (ora narrow place”) you make (a place) large for me.” The function of the Hebrew perfect verbal form here is uncertain. The translation above assumes that the psalmist is expressing his certitude and confidence that God will intervene. The psalmist is so confident of Gods positive response to his prayer, he can describe Gods deliverance as if it had already happened. Such confidence is consistent with the mood of the psalm (vv. <data ref="Bible:Ps 4:3">3data>, <data ref="Bible:Ps 4:8">8data>). Another option is to take the perfects as precative, expressing a wish or request (“lead me”). See <i>IBHSi> 494-95 §30.5.4c, d. However, not all grammarians are convinced that the perfect is used as a precative in biblical Hebrew.

(0.13)(Job 6:25)

tn The word <span class="hebrew">נִּמְרְצוּspan> (<span class="translit">nimr<sup>esup>tsuspan>, “[they] painful are”) may be connected to <span class="hebrew">מָרַץspan> (<span class="translit">maratsspan>, “to be ill”). This would give the idea ofhow distressing,” orpainfulin this stem. G. R. Driver (<i>JTSi> 29 [1927/28]: 390-96) connected it to an Akkadian cognateto be illand rendered itbitter.” It has also been linked with <span class="hebrew">מָרַסspan> (<span class="translit">marasspan>), meaningto be hard, strong,” giving the idea ofhow persuasive” (see N. S. Doniach and W. E. Barnes, “Job vi 25. √<span class="hebrew">מרץspan>,” <i>JTSi> [1929/30]: 291-92). There seems more support for the meaningto be ill” (cf. <data ref="Bible:Mal 2:10">Mal 2:10data>). Others follow Targum Jobhow pleasant [to my palate are your words]”; E. Dhorme (<i>Jobi>, 92) follows this without changing the text but noting that the word has an interchange of letter with <span class="hebrew">מָלַץspan> (<span class="translit">malatsspan>) for <span class="hebrew">מָרַץspan> (<span class="translit">maratsspan>).

(0.11)(Nah 1:7)

tc Some ancient versions read, “The <span class="smcaps">Lordspan> is good to those who trust him.” The MT reads <span class="hebrew">לְמָעוֹזspan> (<span class="translit">l<sup>esup>maʿozspan>, “a fortress”): the noun <span class="hebrew">מָעוֹזspan> (<span class="translit">maʿozspan>, “fortress”) with the preposition <span class="hebrew">לְspan> (<span class="translit">l<sup>esup>span>, see below). However, the LXX reflects the reading <span class="hebrew">לְמֵעִיזspan> (<span class="translit">l<sup>esup>meʿizspan>, “to those who trust [him]”): the Hiphil participle from <span class="hebrew">עוּזspan> (<span class="translit">ʿuzspan>, “seek refuge”) with the preposition <span class="hebrew">לְspan>. The variants involve only different vocalizations and the common confusion of <span class="translit">vavspan> (<span class="hebrew">וspan>) with <span class="translit">yodspan> (<span class="hebrew">יspan>). Most English versions follow the traditional Hebrew reading (KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NKJV); however, several others follow the alternate Greek reading (NEB, NJPS). The <i>BHSi> editors and several other scholars favor the LXX tradition; however, the Masoretic tradition has been defended by others. The Masoretic tradition is supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QpNah). The problem with the LXX reading is the absence of the direct object in the Hebrew text; the LXX is forced to supply the direct object <span class="greek">αὐτόνspan> (<span class="translit">autonspan>, “him”; for a similar addition of the direct object <span class="greek">αὐτόνspan> by the LXX, see <data ref="Bible:Am 9:12">Amos 9:12data>). The main objection to the MT reading <span class="hebrew">לְמָעוֹזspan> (“a fortress”) is that <span class="hebrew">לְspan> is hard to explain. However, <span class="hebrew">לְspan> may be taken in a comparative sense (Cathcart: “Yahweh is better than a fortress in time of distress”) or an asseverative sense (Christensen: “Yahweh is good; indeed, a fortress in time of distress”). See K. J. Cathcart, <i>Nahum in the Light of Northwest Semitici> (BibOr), 55; idem, “More Philological Studies in Nahum,” <i>JNSLi> 7 (1979): 4; D. L. Christensen, “The Acrostic of Nahum Reconsidered,” <i>ZAWi> 87 (1975): 22. Elsewhere, the <span class="smcaps">Lordspan> is commonly portrayed as afortress” (<span class="hebrew">מָעוֹזspan>) protecting his people (<data ref="Bible:Ps 27:1">Pss 27:1data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 28:8">28:8data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 31:3">31:3data>, <data ref="Bible:Ps 31:5">5data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 37:39">37:39data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 43:2">43:2data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 52:9">52:9data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 17:10">Isa 17:10data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 25:4">25:4data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 27:5">27:5data>; <data ref="BibleBHS:Joe 4:16">Joel 4:16data> HT [<data ref="Bible:Joe 3:16">3:16data> ET]; <data ref="Bible:Je 16:19">Jer 16:19data>; <data ref="Bible:Ne 8:10">Neh 8:10data>; <data ref="Bible:Pr 10:29">Prov 10:29data>).

(0.10)(Nah 2:1)

tc The <i>BHSi> editors suggest revocalizing the Masoretic noun <span class="hebrew">מְצֻרָהspan> (<span class="translit">m<sup>esup>tsurahspan>, “rampart”) to the noun <span class="hebrew">מַצָּרָהspan> (<span class="translit">matsarahspan>, “the watchtower”) from the root <span class="hebrew">נָצַרspan> (<span class="translit">natsarspan>, “to watch, guard”). This would create a repetition of the root <span class="hebrew">נָצַרspan> which immediately precedes it: <span class="hebrew">מַצָּרָהspan> <span class="hebrew">נָצוֹרspan> (<span class="translit">natsor matsarahspan>, “Watch the watchtower!”). However, the proposed noun <span class="hebrew">מַצָּרָהspan> (“the watchtower”) appears nowhere in the Hebrew Bible. On the other hand, the Masoretic reading <span class="hebrew">מְצֻרָהspan> (“rampart”) and the related noun <span class="hebrew">מָצוֹרspan> (<span class="translit">matsorspan>, “rampart”) appear often (<data ref="Bible:Ps 31:22">Pss 31:22data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 60:11">60:11data>; <data ref="Bible:Hab 2:1">Hab 2:1data>; <data ref="Bible:Zec 9:3">Zech 9:3data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 8:5">2 Chr 8:5data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 11:5">11:5data>, <data ref="Bible:2Ch 11:10">10data>, <data ref="Bible:2Ch 11:11">11data>, <data ref="Bible:2Ch 11:23">23data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 12:4">12:4data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 14:5">14:5data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 21:3">21:3data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 32:10">32:10data>). Thus, the Masoretic vocalization should be preserved. The LXX completely misunderstood this line. The LXX reading (“one who delivers out of tribulation”) has probably arisen from a confusion of the MT noun <span class="hebrew">נָצוֹרspan> (“guard”) with the common verb <span class="hebrew">נָצַרspan> (“deliver”). It also reflects a confusion of MT <span class="hebrew">מְצֻרָהspan> (“road, rampart”) with <span class="hebrew">מִצְּרָהspan> (<span class="translit">mits<sup>esup>rahspan>, “from distress”).

(0.10)(Jon 4:6)

tn Orevil attitude.” The meaning of the noun <span class="hebrew">רָעָהspan> (<span class="translit">raʿahspan>) is intentionally ambiguous; the author puns on its broad range of meanings to create a polysemantic wordplay. It can signify (1) “distress, misery, discomfort,” (2) “misfortune, injury,” (3) “calamity, disaster,” (4) “moral evil,” and (5) “ill-disposed, evil attitude” (see BDB 949 s.v. <span class="hebrew">רָעָהspan>; <i>HALOTi> 1262-63 s.v. <span class="hebrew">רָעָהspan>). The narrator has used several meanings of <span class="hebrew">רָעָהspan> in <data ref="Bible:Jon 3:8-4:2">3:8-4:2data>, namely, “moral evil” (<data ref="Bible:Jon 3:8">3:8data>, <data ref="Bible:Jon 3:10">10data>) andcalamity, disaster” (<data ref="Bible:Jon 3:9">3:9data>, <data ref="Bible:Jon 3:10">10data>; <data ref="Bible:Jon 4:2">4:2data>), as well as the related verb <span class="hebrew">רָעַעspan> (<span class="translit">raʿaʿspan>, “to be displeasing”; see <data ref="Bible:Jon 4:1">4:1data>). Here the narrator puns on the meaningdiscomfortcreated by the scorching desert heat, but Gods primary motivation is todeliverJonah, not from something as trivial as physical discomfort from heat, but from his sinful attitude about Gods willingness to spare Nineveh. This gives the term an especially ironic twist: Jonah is only concerned about being delivered from his physicaldiscomfort,” while God wants to deliver him from hisevil attitude.”

(0.10)(Jer 10:18)

tn The meaning of this last line is somewhat uncertain: <i>Hebi> “I will cause them distress in order that [or with the result that] they will find.” The absence of an object for the verbfindhas led to conjecture that the text is wrong. Some commentators follow the lead of the Greek and Latin versions which read the verb as a passive: “they will be found,” i.e., be caught and captured. Others follow a suggestion by G. R. Driver (“Linguistic and Textual Problems: Jeremiah,” <i>JQRi> 28 [1937-38]: 107) that the verb be read not asthey will find” (<span class="hebrew">יִמְצָאוּspan> [<span class="translit">yimtsaʾuspan>] from <span class="hebrew">מָצָאspan> [<span class="translit">matsaʾspan>]) butthey will be squeezed/ drained” (<span class="hebrew">יִמְצוּspan> [<span class="translit">yimtsuspan>] from <span class="hebrew">מָצָהspan> [<span class="translit">matsahspan>]). The translation adopted assumes that this is an example of the ellipsis of the object supplied from the context (cf. E. W. Bullinger, <i>Figures of Speechi>, 8-12). For a similar nuance for the verbfind” = “feel/experiencesee BDB 592 s.v. <span class="hebrew">מָצָאspan> Qal.1.f and compare the usage in <data ref="Bible:Ps 116:3">Ps 116:3data>.

(0.10)(Psa 42:5)

tn According to HALOT the term <span class="hebrew">יָחַלspan> (<span class="translit">yakhalspan>) meansto waitin both the Piel and the Hiphil stems. The many contexts where the subjects are biding their time (e.g. <data ref="Bible:Ge 8:10">Gen 8:10data>; <data ref="Bible:Job 29:21">Job 29:21data>; <data ref="Bible:1Sa 10:8">1 Sam 10:8data>; <data ref="Bible:1Sa 13:8">13:8data>; <data ref="Bible:2Sa 18:14">2 Sam 18:14data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ki 6:33">2 Kgs 6:33data>) suggest that simple waiting is its base meaning. In some contexts the person waiting is hopeful or expectant (<data ref="Bible:Is 42:4">Isa 42:4data>; <data ref="Bible:Eze 13:6">Ezek 13:6data>). A number of translations usehopein <data ref="Bible:Ps 42:5">Psalm 42:5data>, <data ref="Bible:Ps 42:11">11data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 43:5">43:5data> (NASB, NIV, NRSV, ESV). This makes assumptions about what the Psalmist says to himself. The Psalmist presents a mixture of emotions and is at odds within himself. Given his level of distress, it is very possible that he is telling himself (his soul) to just hang on and not give up, while another part of him is confident that he will have reason to praise God in the future. The translationwait for Godinvites more consideration of the possible emotional state of the Psalmist. The nuance may be tohope against hope,” togut it outin faith despite not feeling hopeful, to trust, or to have hope.

(0.10)(Psa 2:11)

tn Traditionally, “rejoice with trembling” (KJV). The verb <span class="hebrew">גִּילspan> (<span class="translit">gilspan>) normally meansrejoice,” but this meaning does not fit well here in conjunction within trembling.” Some try to understandtrembling” (and the parallel <span class="hebrew">יִרְאָהspan>, <span class="translit">yirʾahspan>, “fear”) in the sense ofreverential aweand then take the verbsserveandrejoicein the sense ofworship” (cf. NASB). But <span class="hebrew">רְעָדָהspan> (<span class="translit">r<sup>esup>ʿadahspan>, “trembling”) and its related terms consistently refer to utter terror and fear (see <data ref="Bible:Ex 15:15">Exod 15:15data>; <data ref="Bible:Job 4:14">Job 4:14data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 48:6">Pss 48:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 55:5">55:5data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 104:32">104:32data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 33:14">Isa 33:14data>; <data ref="Bible:Da 10:11">Dan 10:11data>) or at least great emotional distress (<data ref="Bible:Ezr 10:9">Ezra 10:9data>). It seems more likely here that <span class="hebrew">גִּילspan> carries its polarized meaningmourn, lament,” as in <data ref="Bible:Ho 10:5">Hos 10:5data>. “Mourn, lamentwould then be metonymic in this context forrepent” (referring to ones rebellious ways). On the meaning of the verb in <data ref="Bible:Ho 10:5">Hos 10:5data>, see F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman, <i>Hoseai> (AB), 556-57.

(0.10)(Job 19:25)

tn Ormy Vindicator.” The word is the active participle from <span class="hebrew">גָּאַלspan> (<span class="translit">gaʾalspan>, “to redeem, protect, vindicate”). The word is well-known in the OT because of its identification as the kinsman-redeemer (see the book of Ruth). This is the near kinsman who will pay off ones debts, defend the family, avenge a killing, marry the widow of the deceased. The wordredeemerevokes the wrong connotation for people familiar with the NT alone; a translation ofVindicatorwould capture the idea more. The concept might include the description of the mediator already introduced in <data ref="Bible:Job 16:19">Job 16:19data>, but surely here Job is thinking of God as his vindicator. The interesting point to be stressed here is that Job has said clearly that he sees no vindication in this life, that he is going to die. But he knows he will be vindicated, and even though he will die, his vindicator lives. The dilemma remains though: his distress lay in Gods hiding his face from him, and his vindication lay only in beholding God in peace.

(0.10)(Gen 34:7)

tn The Hebrew verb <span class="hebrew">עָצַבspan> (<span class="translit">ʿatsavspan>) can carry one of three semantic nuances depending on the context: (1) “to be injured” (<data ref="Bible:Ps 56:5">Ps 56:5data>; <data ref="Bible:Ec 10:9">Eccl 10:9data>; <data ref="Bible:1Ch 4:10">1 Chr 4:10data>); (2) “to experience emotional pain; to be depressed emotionally; to be worried” (<data ref="Bible:2Sa 19:2">2 Sam 19:2data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 54:6">Isa 54:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Ne 8:10-11">Neh 8:10-11data>); (3) “to be embarrassed; to be insulted; to be offended” (to the point of anger at another or oneself; <data ref="Bible:Ge 6:6">Gen 6:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Ge 45:5">45:5data>; <data ref="Bible:1Sa 20:3">1 Sam 20:3data>, <data ref="Bible:1Sa 20:34">34data>; <data ref="Bible:1Ki 1:6">1 Kgs 1:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 63:10">Isa 63:10data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 78:40">Ps 78:40data>). This third category develops from the second by metonymy. In certain contexts emotional pain leads to embarrassment and/or anger. In this last use the subject sometimes directs his anger against the source of grief (see especially <data ref="Bible:Ge 6:6">Gen 6:6data>). The third category fits best in <data ref="Bible:Ge 34:7">Gen 34:7data> because Jacobs sons were not merely wounded emotionally. On the contrary, Shechems action prompted them to strike out in judgment against the source of their distress.

(0.10)(Gen 3:16)

tn <i>Hebi> “your pain and your conception,” suggesting to some interpreters that having a lot of children was a result of the judgment (probably to make up for the loss through death). But the next clause shows that the pain is associated with conception and childbirth. The two words form a hendiadys (where two words are joined to express one idea, likegood and angryin English), the second explaining the first. “Conception,” if the correct meaning of the noun, must be figurative here since there is no pain in conception; it is a synecdoche, representing the entire process of childbirth and child rearing from the very start. However, recent etymological research suggests the noun is derived from a root <span class="hebrew">הררspan> (<span class="translit">hrrspan>), not <span class="hebrew">הרהspan> (<span class="translit">hrhspan>), and meanstrembling, pain” (see D. Tsumura, “A Note on <span class="hebrew">הרוֹןspan> (Gen 3, 16),” <i>Bibi> 75 [1994]: 398-400). In this casepain and tremblingrefers to the physical effects of childbirth. The word <span class="hebrew">עִצְּבוֹןspan> (<span class="translit">ʿits<sup>esup>vonspan>, “pain”), an abstract noun related to the verb (<span class="hebrew">עָצַבspan>, <span class="translit">ʿatsavspan>), includes more than physical pain. It is emotional distress as well as physical pain. The same word is used in v. <data ref="Bible:Ge 3:17">17data> for the mans painful toil in the field.

(0.09)(Sos 5:4)

tn <i>Hebi> “my inward parts,” “my intestines,” ormy bowels.” Alternately, “my feelingsormy emotions.” The term <span class="hebrew">מֵעֶהspan> (<span class="translit">meʿehspan>) is used of the internal organs in general (“inward parts”) (e.g., <data ref="Bible:2Sa 20:10">2 Sam 20:10data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 21:15">2 Chr 21:15data>, <data ref="Bible:2Ch 21:18">18data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 22:14">Pss 22:14data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 40:9">40:9data>) or the digestive organs in particular (“intestines, bowels, stomach”) (e.g., <data ref="Bible:Nu 5:22">Num 5:22data>; <data ref="Bible:Job 20:14">Job 20:14data>; <data ref="Bible:Eze 3:3">Ezek 3:3data>; <data ref="Bible:Eze 7:19">7:19data>; <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:1-2">Jonah 2:1-2data>). It is frequently used as a metonymy of adjunct for the emotions which Hebrew psychology associated with these internal organs (see H. W. Wolff, <i>Anthropology of the Old Testamenti>, 63-66). These include pity (<data ref="Bible:Is 16:11">Isa 16:11data>), lamentation (<data ref="Bible:Je 48:36">Jer 48:36data>), distress (<data ref="Bible:Je 4:19">Jer 4:19data>; <data ref="Bible:La 1:20">Lam 1:20data>; <data ref="Bible:La 2:11">2:11data>), and compassion (<data ref="Bible:Is 63:15">Isa 63:15data>; <data ref="Bible:Je 31:20">Jer 31:20data>) (<i>HALOTi> 610-11 s.v. <span class="hebrew">מֵעֶהspan> 3; BDB 589 s.v. <span class="hebrew">מֵעֶהspan> 5). Most scholars suggest that the Beloveds feelings of love were reviveda reversal of her feelings of indifference and apathy in <data ref="Bible:Song 5:3">5:3data>. This is reflected in many translations which use equivalent English idioms: “the core of my being” (JB) andmy heart” (NIV, NJPS) over the woodenly literalmy bowels” (KJV, NEB, AV). On the other hand, the term is also used to refer to the procreative organs, both male (e.g., <data ref="Bible:Ge 15:4">Gen 15:4data>; <data ref="Bible:2Sa 7:12">2 Sam 7:12data>; <data ref="Bible:2Sa 16:11">16:11data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 48:19">Isa 48:19data>; <data ref="Bible:2Ch 32:21">2 Chr 32:21data>) and female (e.g., <data ref="Bible:Ge 25:23">Gen 25:23data>; <data ref="Bible:Ru 1:11">Ruth 1:11data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 71:6">Ps 71:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 49:1">Isa 49:1data>). NASB well renders the line, “my feelings were aroused for him” (NASB).

(0.09)(Ecc 4:1)

tn <i>Hebi> “the tear of the oppressed.” Alternately, “the oppressed [were in] tears.” The singular noun <span class="hebrew">דִּמְעָהspan> (<span class="translit">dimʿahspan>, “tear”) is used as a collective fortears” (<data ref="Bible:2Ki 20:5">2 Kgs 20:5data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 16:9">Isa 16:9data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 25:8">25:8data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 38:5">38:5data>; Jer <data ref="BibleBHS:Je 8:23">8:23data> HT [<data ref="Bible:Je 9:1">9:1data> ET]; <data ref="BibleBHS:Je 9:7">9:7data> HT [<data ref="Bible:Je 9:18">9:18data> ET]; <data ref="Bible:Je 13:17">13:17data>; <data ref="Bible:Je 14:17">14:17data>; <data ref="Bible:Je 31:16">31:16data>; <data ref="Bible:Eze 24:16">Ezek 24:16data>; <data ref="Bible:Mal 2:13">Mal 2:13data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 6:7">Pss 6:7data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 39:13">39:13data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 42:4">42:4data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 56:9">56:9data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 80:6">80:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 116:8">116:8data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 126:5">126:5data>; <data ref="Bible:La 1:2">Lam 1:2data>; <data ref="Bible:La 2:18">2:18data>; <data ref="Bible:Ec 4:1">Eccl 4:1data>); see <i>HALOTi> 227 s.v. <span class="hebrew">דִּמְעָהspan>; BDB 199 s.v. <span class="hebrew">דִּמְעָהspan>. It is often used in reference to lamentation over calamity, distress, or oppression (e.g., <data ref="Bible:Ps 6:7">Ps 6:7data>; <data ref="Bible:La 1:2">Lam 1:2data>; <data ref="Bible:La 2:11">2:11data>; <data ref="Bible:Je 9:17">Jer 9:17data>; <data ref="Bible:Je 13:17">13:17data>; <data ref="Bible:Je 14:17">14:17data>). The LXX translated it as singular <span class="greek">δάκρουνspan> (<span class="translit">dakrounspan>, “the tear”); however, the Vulgate treated it as a collective (“the tears”). Apart from the woodenly literal YLT (“the tear”), the major English versions render this as a collective: “the tearsortears” (KJV, ASV, NEB, NAB, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NJPS, MLB, NIV). The term <span class="hebrew">דִּמְעָהspan> functions as a metonymy of association forweeping” (e.g., <data ref="Bible:Is 16:9">Isa 16:9data>; Jer <data ref="BibleBHS:Je 8:23">8:23data> HT [<data ref="Bible:Je 9:1">9:1data> ET]): “the oppressed [were weeping with] tears.” The genitive construct <span class="hebrew">דִּמְעַת הָעֲשֻׁקִיםspan> (<span class="translit">dimʿat haʿashuqimspan>, literally, “tear of the oppressed”) is a subjective genitive construction, that is, the oppressed are weeping. The singular <span class="hebrew">דִּמְעָהspan> (<span class="translit">dimʿahspan>, “tear”) is used as a collective fortears.” This entire phrase, however, is still given a woodenly literal translation by most English versions: “the tears of the oppressed” (NEB, NAB, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, MLB, NIV, NJPS). Some paraphrases attempt to fill out the meaning, e.g., “the oppressed were in tears” (Moffatt).

(0.09)(Gen 6:6)

tn <i>Hebi> “and he was grieved to his heart.” The verb <span class="hebrew">עָצָבspan> (<span class="translit">ʿatsavspan>) can carry one of three semantic senses, depending on the context: (1) “to be injured” (<data ref="Bible:Ps 56:5">Ps 56:5data>; <data ref="Bible:Ec 10:9">Eccl 10:9data>; <data ref="Bible:1Ch 4:10">1 Chr 4:10data>); (2) “to experience emotional pain”; “to be depressed emotionally”; “to be worried” (<data ref="Bible:2Sa 19:2">2 Sam 19:2data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 54:6">Isa 54:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Ne 8:10-11">Neh 8:10-11data>); (3) “to be embarrassed”; “to be offended” (to the point of anger at another or oneself); “to be insulted” (<data ref="Bible:Ge 34:7">Gen 34:7data>; <data ref="Bible:Ge 45:5">45:5data>; <data ref="Bible:1Sa 20:3">1 Sam 20:3data>, <data ref="Bible:1Sa 20:34">34data>; <data ref="Bible:1Ki 1:6">1 Kgs 1:6data>; <data ref="Bible:Is 63:10">Isa 63:10data>; <data ref="Bible:Ps 78:40">Ps 78:40data>). This third category develops from the second by metonymy. In certain contexts emotional pain leads to embarrassment and/or anger. In this last use the subject sometimes directs his anger against the source of grief (see especially <data ref="Bible:Ge 34:7">Gen 34:7data>). The third category fits best in <data ref="Bible:Ge 6:6">Gen 6:6data> because humankinds sin does not merely wound God emotionally. On the contrary, it prompts him to strike out in judgment against the source of his distress (see v. <data ref="Bible:Ge 6:7">7data>). The verb <span class="hebrew">וַיִּתְעַצֵּבspan> (<span class="translit">vayyitʿatsevspan>), a Hitpael from <span class="hebrew">עָצָבspan>, alludes to the judgment oracles in <data ref="Bible:Ge 3:16-19">Gen 3:16-19data>. Because Adam and Eve sinned, their life would be filled with pain, but sin in the human race also brought pain to God. The wording of v. <data ref="Bible:Ge 6:6">6data> is ironic when compared to <data ref="Bible:Ge 5:29">Gen 5:29data>. Lamech anticipated relief (<span class="hebrew">נָחָםspan>, <span class="translit">nakhamspan>) from their work (<span class="hebrew">מַעֲשֶׂהspan>, <span class="translit">maʿasehspan>) and their painful toil (<span class="hebrew">עִצְּבֹןspan>, <span class="translit">ʿits<sup>esup>vonspan>), but now we read that God was sorry (<span class="hebrew">נָחָםspan>) that he had made (<span class="hebrew">עָשָׂהspan>, <span class="translit">ʿasahspan>) humankind for it brought him great pain (<span class="hebrew">עָצָבspan>).

(0.06)(Jon 2:4)

tc OrYet I will look again to your holy temple,” orSurely I will look again to your holy temple.” The MT and the vast majority of ancient textual witnesses vocalize consonantal <span class="hebrew">אךspan> (<span class="translit">ʾkhspan>) as the adverb <span class="hebrew">אַךְspan> (<span class="translit">ʾakhspan>), which functions as an emphatic asseverative likesurely” (BDB 36 s.v. <span class="hebrew">אַךְspan> 1) or an adversative likeyet, nevertheless” (BDB 36 s.v. <span class="hebrew">אַךְspan> 2; so <i>Tgi>. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:4">Jonah 2:4data>: “However, I shall look again upon your holy temple”). These options understand the line as expressing hopeful piety in a positive statement about surviving to worship again in Jerusalem. It may be a way of saying, “I will pray for help, even though I have been banished” (see v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:8">8data>; cf. <data ref="Bible:Da 6:10">Dan 6:10data>). The sole dissenter is the Greek recension of Theodotion. It reads the interrogative <span class="greek">πῶςspan> (<span class="translit">pōsspan>, “how?”), which reflects an alternate vocalization tradition of <span class="hebrew">אֵךְspan> (<span class="translit">ʾekhspan>)—a defectively written form of <span class="hebrew">אֵיךְspan> (<span class="translit">ʾekhspan>, “how?”; BDB 32 s.v. <span class="hebrew">אֵיךְspan> 1). This would be translated, “How shall I again look at your holy temple?” (cf. NRSV). Jonah laments that he will not be able to worship at the temple in Jerusalem againthis is a metonymical statement (effect for cause) that he feels certain he is about to die. It continues the expression of Jonahs distress and separation from the <span class="smcaps">Lordspan>, begun in v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:2">2data> and continued without relief in vv. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:3-7">3-7adata>. The external evidence favors the MT; however, internal evidence seems to favor the alternate vocalization tradition reflected in Theodotion for four reasons. First, the form of the psalm is a declarative praise in which Jonah begins with a summary praise (v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:2">2data>), continues by recounting his past plight (vv. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:3-6">3-6adata>) and the <span class="smcaps">Lordspan>’s intervention (vv. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:6-7">6b-7data>), and concludes with a lesson (v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:8">8data>) and vow to praise (v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:9">9data>). So the statement with <span class="hebrew">אֵךְspan> in v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:4">4data> falls within the plightnot within a declaration of confidence. Second, while the poetic parallelism of v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:4">4data> could be antithetical (“I have been banished from your sight, <i>yeti> I will again look to your holy temple”), synonymous parallelism fits the context of the lament better (“I have been banished from your sight; will I ever again see your holy temple?”). Third, <span class="hebrew">אֵךְspan> is the more difficult vocalization because it is a defectively written form of <span class="hebrew">אֵיךְspan> (“how?”) and therefore easily confused with <span class="hebrew">אַךְspan> (“surelyoryet, nevertheless”). Fourth, nothing in the first half of the psalm reflects any inkling of confidence on the part of Jonah that he would be delivered from imminent death. In fact, Jonah states in v. <data ref="Bible:Jon 2:7">7data> that he did not turn to God in prayer until some time later when he was on the very brink of death.