... Gospel, and there are hints, as we have seen, that the exposition of scripture may have played a larger part in the temple discourse than first appears (cf. vv. 15, 22–23). Verse 39 is a comment of the narrator in any case, and such a comment makes good sense on the assumption that Jesus himself is still the speaker in verse 38. If, on the other hand (as in version 3), the narrator is already responsible for most of verse 38, then in verse 39 he is commenting on his own appended words (i.e., the scripture ...
... the man born blind (cf. v. 34) that perhaps another explanation should be sought. If the controlling word is seen to be Christ (with the political associations that this title had in Jesus’ time), then such an agreement as is mentioned in this verse makes good sense in its literary context, and (though it cannot be verified) may reflect the actual situation near the end of Jesus’ ministry. 9:24 Give glory to God. The expression is used as an idiom to reinforce truthfulness (as, e.g., in Josh. 7:19); cf ...
... all, but to rest on the Aramaic expressions ar nāšb (indefinite, “a son of man” or “a man”) or bar nāšā’ (definite, “the son of man” or “that man”), used virtually as pronouns (e.g., “someone” or “a certain one”). The present narrative makes perfect sense in light of this background. Jesus asks, “Do you believe in that man [i.e., the man who restored your sight]?” The reply is, Who is he, sir?… Tell me so that I may believe in him (v. 36). As far as we know, the man born ...
... began with the witness of John the Baptist (5:33–36) and then moved on to the more decisive witness of Jesus’ own words and deeds, whereas the later passage begins with Jesus’ deeds and then reflects on John’s testimony in postscript. In this sense, verses 40–42 are a postscript to verses 22–39, but their principal function is to introduce chapter 11. The length of Jesus’ stay east of the Jordan is not told, but here, as elsewhere, time spent outside Jerusalem serves as an interlude or period ...
... it” (11:4). The last wry comment belongs to the Pharisees (v. 19). To them it must have seemed that Caiaphas’ dire prediction was coming true. Everyone was acting as if they believed in Jesus (cf. 11:48); the whole world was following in his train. The narrator senses the irony of their remark and uses it to full advantage. Jesus himself had once asked, “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36). Now he stood, with the world at his feet, about to lose his ...
... it was these soldiers who had actually nailed Jesus to the cross (in v. 18). Verses 16b–22 are, in an important sense, an extension—the conclusion, in fact—of the running battle of wills between Pilate and the Jewish authorities from 18:28 to ... Father who had sent him (10:18; cf. also Luke 23:46). The clear reference to Jesus’ death in verse 30 means that, in one sense, all that is described in verses 31–33 is beside the point as far as Jesus is concerned. The purpose of breaking the victim’s ...
... Jesus’ resurrection. She, not Peter (cf. 1 Cor. 15:5; Luke 24:34), was the first to see the risen Jesus. The disciples are never called “the apostles” in John’s Gospel. The Greek word apostolos, “apostle,” occurs only in 13:16, in the sense of “messenger.” But Mary was a kind of “apostle to the apostles,” a messenger sent to Jesus’ gathered disciples with the good news that he was rejoining his Father—and theirs (vv. 17–18). The Lord himself was close behind his messenger and would ...
... cf. the “one flock” of 10:16), and second, as one element in a fellowship meal by means of which Jesus and his disciples were reunited. This distinction does not help very much until it is recognized that bread functioned on occasion in the same two senses. In the second century church manual known as the Didache, “bread” is both an element in the Lord’s Supper (Didache 9.3) and a metaphor for the church (9.4): “As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains, but was brought together and ...
... no one in the Johannine community of the author’s day had physically seen or known Jesus during his life on earth, neither the Elder and his followers nor his opponents. Like 3:6, 3 John 11 claims that “no one who practices evil has seen God.” In what sense, then, did Johannine Christians claim to have seen God/Christ, a claim which they deny to their adversaries? To see Jesus is to discern his real identity and to believe in him (Smalley, 1, 2, 3 John, p. 164). This is a common theme in the Gospel of ...
... strong. Should Cain act wrongfully, it would be because he yielded to the desire of sin, not because God had rejected his offering. 4:8 Some time later Cain made an appointment with Abel to meet him in a field, a remote place that offered the sense of privacy. In the field Cain spoke with Abel, but the MT records none of that conversation. So various sources, including some of the versions, have supplied a speech. On the basis of the Septuagint (or LXX, the earliest Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, ca ...
... the terrors of the deluge. In contrast to other gods of the ancient Near East, Yahweh was not dependent on sacrifices for sustenance; God’s acceptance of a sacrifice is therefore noted by God’s smelling a pleasant aroma. Smell is a powerful sense, being crucial to enjoying and discerning different tastes in foods and being a great stimulator of the memory. The smoke of this sacrifice stirred God’s compassion, moving him to be favorably disposed to humanity. God then declared that he never again would ...
... Although they were confident that Benjamin had not taken the cup, they were very worried because of all the strange things they had been experiencing in dealings with the Egyptians. The cup was found in Benjamin’s sack. Filled with terror and driven by a sense of urgency, the brothers tore their clothes, loaded their donkeys and returned to the city. 44:14–17 The brothers went straight to Joseph’s house and found him still there. With Judah at their head, they threw themselves to the ground before him ...
... Jacob’s death marked the end of the patriarchal age, the preparation for it is given much attention and is treated three times (also 48:21–22; 49:29–32). Jacob lived in Egypt seventeen years, reaching the age of a hundred and forty-seven. Sensing that his death was approaching, he called for his son Joseph. The right of attending to the burial of the father normally belonged to the oldest son, but Israel entrusted Joseph with this responsibility because of his love for this son and because of Joseph ...
... Deuteronomy. Since Moses’ purpose was to exhort the new generation not to go on failing as their parents had done, one can understand why his reference to his own exclusion dwells on the people’s part in it and omits his own. In a sense, then, the phrase because of you is justified. Though not without fault himself, Moses was bearing the punishment of his own generation (that of the exodus) along with them, and bearing the punishment that even the following generation should have had. Nobody deserved to ...
... mean gods Israel knew nothing about, as if the Israelites, like Athenians, were to say “We’ve never heard of that one before, let’s try it.” It means gods they were not committed to in covenant relationship as a result of saving experience. In that sense, Israel knew no other god (cf. Deut. 4:35; Hos. 13:4) and Yahweh knew no other people (Amos 3:2). 13:3 Signs of some kind were an expected part of a prophet’s credibility. The expectation, however, could produce demands that were little more than ...
... they must benefit from it along with their brothers. Deuteronomy’s characteristic concern is for the unity of the nation, the sense of kinship solidarity, and the equality of sharing the blessings of the gift of the land. This concern, as applied ... Hb. takes the law as assuming the right of ministry, but stipulating equal share in the material benefit—primarily food. Thus, the sense is, “If a Levite moves . . . and comes . . . and ministers . . . then he shall eat equal portions” (cf. NEB and REB). Cf ...
... ,” found in some translations, suggests an exorbitant and greedy level of interest in modern English, but its original sense in English (i.e., any interest charged on a loan) matches the Hebrew. For this reason, the NIV’s ... . 26:12). 23:17 The Hb. for shrine prostitute is qedēšâ [MT v. 18], lit. “a holy one.” The person was “holy,” not in the moral sense but in being “set apart,” i.e., dedicated to the god of the shrine for the purposes of ritual sex, often as part of fertility cults. The ...
... , if fragile peace is to become a lasting harmony. Nevertheless, God has ordained that Solomon should be king, as Adonijah himself acknowledges in 2:15. While in one sense, then, these verses concern the consolidation of Solomon’s position, and he can be completely secure only by their end (after the necessary executions have taken place), in another sense his security is never in doubt. He is predestined to succeed by the God who is “sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he ...
... dynasty really conditional upon obedience? Or rather, will the wrongs of David’s successors in the end be punished with measures other than the deprivation of dominion suffered by Saul (cf. 2 Sam. 7:11–16)? First Kings 11:11 only adds to this second reader’s sense of puzzlement, because it so obviously recalls Samuel’s words to Saul in 1 Samuel 15:28, thus correlating Saul with Solomon. First Kings 11:12 does little to help, except for the solace it offers in drawing the first reader now into the ...
... will, however, be delayed until 1 Kings 21:21–24. His first task is to tackle the problem of the Baal-worship that Ahab has introduced into Israel (16:31–32), so as to demonstrate beyond all doubt that Baal is no more a god in any real sense than Jeroboam’s calves are. Chapter 17 provides the context in which the climactic demonstration of this truth will take place (18:16–40): the divinely ordained drought of 17:1. It also prepares us for the demonstration by showing us that it is the LORD, and not ...
... not explicitly associated with God either, but it is clearly God who is speaking. We often find such indirectness of speech in the OT when God is described, lest the outward manifestations of the divine reality should be confused by the reader with its actuality. In one sense, of course, God can no more “have” a voice than be “in” wind, earthquake, and fire. Yet the OT describes God as speaking to mortals with a voice (e.g., qôl in Gen. 3:8) and as appearing in the midst of natural cataclysm (e.g ...
... , for example, it has been rendered as “child/boy” (3:7; 11:17; 14:3, 17), “young man” (11:28), or “servant” (18:43; 19:3). It seems more likely, then, that we are to understand naʿar here as a reference to “servants” in a very generalized sense, taking our lead from 1 Sam. 17:33, where the contrast (in a narrative where the theme is also that “the battle is the LORD’s,” 17:47) is between the young, untrained David (naʿar) and the warrior Goliath. It is remarkable that it is said of ...
... is not clear, but the wording of the verse suggests that it refers to those bringing the money to the temple in v. 4 rather than to some other group not yet mentioned. There is a Hb. verb mḵr, “to sell,” that can be used more generally in the sense of “give over into the power of” (e.g., Deut. 32:30). It may be, then, that we should translate the phrase “each from his donor.” For the view that makkār is priestly income from the sale of portions of the sin and guilt offerings (cf. v. 16) see ...
... , “until this day”). Yet in a context where an everlasting promise is being cited, it seems likely that we are being told about God’s continuing attitude to Israel in the postexilic period in which Kings was coming into its final shape. Such an understanding helps to make sense of the chapter and the book as a whole. Israel is still the people of the exodus (cf. 1 Kgs. 8:22ff.). It may be punished, but it will not be destroyed or “blotted out” now (2 Kgs. 14:27), any more than it was then (Deut. 9 ...
... 24b and 25 suggests this again. The ongoing history of the world reflects its creator’s sovereign activity. As chapter 41 then emphasized, other so-called gods and their aides are therefore in no position to know what is going to happen in that history or to make sense of what has happened. So when they attempt to do so, they fail (v. 25a). Babylon had a vast array of experts in reading the signs of the times as they appeared in the movements of stars and planets and in anomalies in nature. They had a ...