² sn This is a typical form of rabbinic argumentation, from the lesser to the greater: If God cares about the lesser thing (sparrows) how much more does he care about the greater thing (people).

² sn This is a typical form of rabbinic argumentation, from the lesser to the greater: If God cares about the lesser thing (sparrows) how much more does he care about the greater thing (people).

² tn Grk “which is passing away but is tested by fire,” describing gold in a lesser-to-greater comparison with faith’s proven character.

² sn This rhetorical device shows that if the act is abomination, the wicked heart is an even greater sin. It argues from the lesser to the greater.

¹ tn The Hebrew term שֵׁדִים (shedim, “demons”) occurs only here and in Deut 32:17. Some type of lesser deity is probably in view.

² tn The Greek has “scribes” for this word, perhaps thinking of those lesser officials as keeping records of the slaves and the bricks.

⁵ sn The phrase how much more is a typical form of rabbinic argumentation, from the lesser to the greater. If God cares for the little things, surely he will care for the more important things.

³ sn The phrase even more is a typical form of rabbinic argumentation, from the lesser to the greater. If God cares for the little things, surely he will care for the more important things.

¹ tn Heb “the sons of man.” The phrase is intended in this polemic to portray the builders as mere mortals, not the lesser deities that the Babylonians claimed built the city.

² 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.

³ sn The Greek-speaking Jews were the Hellenists, Jews who to a greater or lesser extent had adopted Greek thought, customs, and lifestyle, as well as the Greek language. The city of Alexandria in Egypt was a focal point for them, but they were scattered throughout the Roman Empire.

³ sn Jesus warns that excessive concern for family ties (looks back) will make the kingdom a lesser priority, which is not appropriate for discipleship. The image is graphic, for who can plow straight ahead toward a goal while looking back? Discipleship cannot be double-minded.

² tn The construction אַף כִּי (ʾaf ki, “how much more!”) introduces an argument from the lesser to the greater: If all this is open before the Lord, how much more so human hearts. “Hearts” here is a metonymy of subject, meaning the motives and thoughts (cf. NCV “the thoughts of the living”).

² tn This construction is one of the “how much more” arguments—if this be true, how much more this (arguing from the lesser to the greater). The point is that if the righteous suffer for their sins, certainly the wicked will as well.

¹ sn This represents the second call by Jesus not to be afraid in the section (previously in v. 4). Since the previous reference was related to fear of persecution, it is probable that this one does as well. Once again the sparrows are mentioned and the argument is from lesser to greater (if God cares about individual hairs on the head and about sparrows, how much more does he care about people).

¹ sn This represents the third call by Jesus not to be afraid in the section (previously in vv. 26, 28). Since these two previous references were related to fear of persecution, it is probable that this one does as well. Once again the sparrows are mentioned and the argument is from lesser to greater (if God cares about individual hairs on the head and about sparrows, how much more does he care about people).

³ tn Or “assassins.” This refers to the oppressive rich and/or their henchmen. R. Ortlund (Whoredom, 78) posits that it serves as a synecdoche for all varieties of criminals, the worst being mentioned to imply all lesser ones. Since Isaiah often addressed his strongest rebuke to the rulers and leaders of Israel, he may have in mind the officials who bore the responsibility to uphold justice and righteousness.

⁵ sn This “ruler” (KJV, NASB “prince”; NAB “noble”) is a gentleman with a code of honor, to whom truthfulness is second nature (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 507). The word describes one as “inclined, generous, noble” (BDB 622 s.v. נָדִיב). It is cognate to the word for the “free will offering.” So for such a noble person lies are not suited. The argument is from the lesser to the greater—if fools shouldn’t speak lofty things, then honorable people should not lie (or, lofty people should not speak base things).

¹ tn Or “seen God.” Some take the Hebrew term אֱלֹהִים (ʾelohim) as the divine name (“God”) here, but this seems unlikely since v. 21 informs us that Manoah realized this was the Lord’s messenger, not God himself. Of course, he may be exaggerating for the sake of emphasis. Another option, the one followed in the translation, understands Manoah to be referring to a lesser deity. The term אֱלֹהִים (ʾelohim) is sometimes used of an individual deity other than the Lord (see BDB 43 s.v. 2.a). One cannot assume that Manoah was a theologically sophisticated monotheist.

² sn The wife is omitted in the list, not that she was considered unimportant, nor that she was excluded from the rest, but rather in reflecting her high status. She was not man’s servant, not lesser than the man, but included with the man as an equal before God. The “you” of the commandments is addressed to the Israelites individually, male and female, just as God in the Garden of Eden held both the man and the woman responsible for their individual sins (see B. Jacob, Exodus, 567-68).