... Notes 1:15 Her king will go into exile: The Hb. text has been read, “And Milcom will go into exile,” referring to Molech, the god of the Ammonites. The LXX reads “her kings,” followed by “her priests” in place of “he.” The Tg. and Vg. support the MT, which is properly translated in the NIV. 2:1 The Tg. reads, “Because he burned the bones . . . and used them for plaster on his house,” inferring that the body of the human king was treated like basic building material (cf. Deut. 27:2, 4 ...
... the Deuteronomic editors. However, it contributes greatly in its present setting, and thus the argument is not very significant to our interpretation. 3:9 The LXX reads “Assyria” instead of Ashdod, but Amos nowhere else mentions Assyria, and the MT is supported by the Tg. and Vg. The LXX presupposes that the MT reads “Mount Samaria” instead of the “mountains of Samaria.” Samaria was located on a plain, with mountains some miles distance surrounding it, but there is no compelling reason to change ...
... the enemy is exhibited by Beth-ha-Ezel (Beth Ezel), verse 11e–f, whose inhabitants are so engrossed in lamentation rites and mourning that they fail to join in the battle. Verse 12a–b, concerning Maroth, has often been emended, with some manuscript support, to read, “The inhabitants of Maroth waited for good.” Considering the name of the town sounds like mārōr or mar, meaning “bitter,” Micah may be creating a word play: “How can the inhabitants of Evilton hope for good?” (so Wolff). Good ...
... historical empire of the eighth and seventh centuries BC. Rather, the word is used in the OT and here in a different sense to stand for any nation that would threaten Israel in the future (cf. Ezra 6:22; Zech. 10:10–11). Such a meaning is supported by the fact that Nimrod here is made the poetic parallel to “Assyria.” Nimrod is mentioned in Genesis 10:8–12 (cf. 1 Chron. 1:10) as a somewhat legendary figure and “mighty warrior” who was the hero-founder of the great eastern empires that threatened ...
Jerusalem Mourns Its Sin: Chapters 6 and 7 in Micah form a dialogue between God and the people, and specifically between God and Jerusalem. In the court case of 6:1–8, we saw an exasperated and impatient Israel indicted by God. In support of that indictment, the sins of Jerusalem were specified by the Lord, in 6:9–16. Now, in 7:1–7, a repentant Jerusalem recognizes its sinfulness, mourns the anarchic state of its society, and turns to its one source of hope, its Lord. Some commentators maintain that ...
... this complaint takes up another aspect of the fact that in addressing Yahweh he does not speak for himself but for his people. It is their questioning that he has been passing on to Yahweh and to which he seeks a reply. This, too, could support the idea that the questioning and answering is a piece of narrative theology. But there are no parallels for the idea that tokakhat means “complaint”; it means rebuke, correction, or chastisement (hence NIV margin). It is related to the verb “punish” in 1:12 ...
... against Israel itself, as in Isaiah (e.g., Isa. 5:25). “Cutting off” humanity as a whole (v. 3b) will lead to or include “cutting off” the unfaithful ministers and people in the temple. The fact that 2:4–3:7 has a parallel movement supports the idea that the sequence is from world devastation to the devastation of Judah. Here, part of the background may be that people were familiar with the idea that Yahweh might bring about another calamity that would envelop the whole world but assumed that ...
... the (mere) remnant has become the (real) people (cf. Floyd, Minor Prophets, Part 2, p. 281). See further the additional note below, and the comment on 1:2. Yahweh’s subsequent reminder (v. 5), “This is what I covenanted with you when you came out of Egypt,” supports the general application of the phrase “the people of the land.” That piece of history is one that is open to being claimed by people who never went into exile as well as by people who did, and even by people in Samaria as well as by ...
... the Lord’s blessings and the exiles’ enduring hope and faith. First, these men have testimony names, indicating their parents’ faith. Tobijah means “the Lord is good” and Jedaiah means “the Lord knows.” Second, these men represent returned exiles who support the restoration of worship at the temple. Furthermore, they returned with gold and silver. The Persian authorities permitted the Jews to bring gold, silver, and other valuables to help to build the temple (Ezra 1:4–6). In fact, their non ...
... Lord will save them from their humiliation and do so much good to them that they will be a blessing. The nations will want to be like them (cf. 8:23). Do not be afraid usually begins a salvation oracle. Here it comes almost at the end, to support the final encouraging word, but let your hands be strong. Because the Lord has promised to save you, do not be afraid to continue building the temple. 8:14–17 The fulfillment of judgment prophecies in the past confirms the reliability of God’s word about the ...
... (v. 3) who did not fill the leadership vacuum of verse 2. In these verses, both a hymnic description of divine provision (v. 1; cf. Job 38:25–27) as well as a critique of false intermediaries who do not give God’s word (v. 2) support the admonition to rely on the Lord alone. Seeking rain from the right deity in the right way, and seeking divine guidance from the right intermediary by the right method, had been closely related core issues in Israel’s relationship with God. The northern kingdom had ...
... rather than prophets. Genesis 2:5 and 15 imply that God created human beings to till the ground. In an economy where almost everyone was a farmer, the prophet’s denial in verse 5 will mean, “I am an ordinary person, just like you. I’ve been supporting myself by working the ground since I was a child.” People will question the wounds on their torsos, suspecting that they have beaten themselves to achieve an ecstatic state, as false prophets of both types did (the prophets of Baal in 1 Kgs. 18:28, and ...
... Sparky Anderson did while he was manager of the Detroit Tigers was to found a charitable organization which helped provide care for seriously ill children whose parents did not have health insurance or the means to otherwise pay for the care. He continued to support and participate in the charity well into his retirement. He said founding that charity was the best thing he did while he was in Detroit. Showing love for other people and particularly those who cannot repay you is its own reward. A faithful ...
... . You may be familiar with that literary giant of another generation, Samuel Johnson. Johnson’s father was a book seller--selling books from town to town--during Johnson’s boyhood. Once when his father was very ill, tired and worn down by his constant struggle to support his family, he asked young Samuel to go to a certain market to take his place. Young Samuel--like many of us in our youth, too self-involved--smugly refused to do so. His father dressed and made the arduous trip himself--never saying a ...
... the identification of the One and Only as God (monogenēs theos in Greek), using monogenēs instead with hyios, the more common Greek word for “son” (i.e., ho monogenēs hyios, “the unique Son,” cf. 3:16; 1 John 4:9). But the reading presupposed by NIV is supported by better manuscripts and in all likelihood is correct. It is very improbable that scribes would have changed such a familiar Johannine expression as “the unique Son” to something so unusual and unfamiliar as God the One and Only.
... until v. 41. It is therefore likely that God is the only Father being referred to in this verse: “I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence. Therefore do what you have heard from the Father” (NIV margin). This translation is supported by the word oun (“therefore”) in the Greek text. It assumes that the last verb do (Gr.: poieite) should be taken as an imperative rather than as an indicative. Jesus is making one last appeal to his opponents to accept his words as words from God ...
... : One ancient papyrus and some ancient versions omit the negative, so as to read, “I told you … and you heard.” This reading prepares logically for what follows (Why do you want to hear it again?), but the reading in the NIV has better manuscript support and echoes Jesus’ own words in similar situations in this Gospel (cf. 8:43, 47). Do you, … too: The too is interesting because it could be taken as a tacit admission by the former blind man that he himself has become Jesus’ disciple, something ...
... to know how the Pharisees who heard Jesus would have understood it. Moreover, the most natural interpretation of the gate for the sheep is, as that translation suggests, the gate used by the sheep to go in and out, not the gate of access to the sheep. This is supported by verse 9: I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture. The metaphor of the gate presents Jesus as the way to salvation (cf. 14:6), not as the validator of ministries. He has come in ...
... Passover “that” (Gr.: hoti) Jesus had raised up Lazarus. In this case it is more plausible to identify the former crowd as the crowd that had gone to Bethany to see Jesus and Lazarus (v. 9) and then, presumably, returned to Jerusalem again. Although the manuscript support is not as strong for this reading as for the other, it provides continuity between the triumphal entry and what precedes it. If the crowd mentioned in verse 9 is not the same crowd that brings back its testimony in verse 17, it is hard ...
... of it in Romans 10:16. Here the Gospel writer finds the same rejection and frustration already in the experience of Jesus (cf. 15:18–21). The second stage of his argument is that the people did not believe because they could not do so (v. 39). In support of this stark judgment, he appeals to Isaiah 6:10 (v. 40). Jesus himself is represented in the synoptic Gospels as quoting this verse from Isaiah in connection with his practice of teaching in parables (Mark 4:12; Matt. 13:13–15; Luke 8:10). There are ...
... you really have known me, you will know” (cf. GNB). Jesus’ immediate positive statement that from now on, you do know him and have seen him (i.e., the Father, v. 7b) and his surprised question, “Don’t you know me, Philip?” (v. 9), further support the notion that Jesus is assuming knowledge—not the lack of it—on the part of his disciples. In this respect their situation stands in contrast to that of the Pharisees in 8:19. 14:11 Believe on the evidence of the miracles (lit., “believe because ...
... If Jesus had not come, there would have been no sin (cf. 9:41), for sin is defined solely as hatred of Jesus and, consequently, as hatred of the Father who sent him. Drawing once more on the experience of the psalmists of Israel, Jesus adds a supporting Scripture quotation: “They hated me without reason” (Pss. 35:19; 69:5; cf. Ps. Sol. 7.1). If the one great commandment is love, the one great transgression is hatred. Now that the precedent of hatred has been set, the disciples can be under no illusions ...
... you gave me: Some ancient manuscripts read in v. 11, “By the power of your name protect those you gave me,” and in v. 12, “By the power of your name I protected those you gave me”—in both cases referring to the disciples, as in v. 6. The better-supported text, used by the NIV, however, clearly states that the Father has given to Jesus his own name. The giving of the Father’s name to Jesus is perhaps analogous to the giving of his glory (cf. v. 24), and is surely included in the all of v. 10. But ...
... judge him by your own law (18:31). It also makes clear that, as far as Pilate was concerned, they had the power to carry out the death penalty if they so decided. Though they were unwilling or unable to do so, probably out of a lack of broad-based support, they remained firmly convinced that We have a law, and according to that law he must die [i.e., the law of blasphemy, Lev. 24:16] because he claimed to be the Son of God (v. 7). The mention of the title Son of God for the first time in ...
... vinegar has no discernible ritual significance. This is more likely a case of narrative imprecision than a conscious attempt to make a theological statement (What would the statement be?). The famous conjecture that it was a “javelin” (Gr.: hyssos instead of hyssōpos), supported by one very late manuscript, is more ingenious than convincing. 19:30 He bowed his head and gave up his spirit: lit., “handed over the spirit.” Some have seen in this expression a conferring of the Holy Spirit on the church ...