... successively in 5:5–6. The author’s observation that this oath-confirmed word came after the law reflects a Jewish conclusion that new revelation is more authoritative than the older revelation (although by no means is this conclusion always accepted!). The notion of having been made perfect is again best understood as the state of having accomplished God’s saving purposes (cf. 5:9) and being raised to God’s right hand. As we have seen, “perfection” in Hebrews generally has this teleological ...
... about to be stipulated. The expression after that time (lit., “those days”) is language referring to an eschatological era (cf. the opening words of Acts 15:16; quoting the LXX of Amos 9:11). The possibility of an internalizing of the law (cf. the notion of “circumcision of the heart,” Deut. 10:16; Jer. 4:4), although intimated in the OT (cf. Deut. 30:11–14), was never achieved. The affirmation I will be their God, and they will be my people is common OT language describing the basic aspect ...
... of the Abraham legend. In the midrash Genesis Rabba 98:3, for example, the Shema is traced back to Abraham. Josephus has his version in Antiquities 1.154–157 (1.7.1 in Whiston’s division): “[Abraham] was the first that ventured to publish this notion that there was but one God, the Creator of the universe.” Philo also refers to the legend (Legum Allegoriae 3.228; De Virtue 216). Thus all Jews in the New Testament period thought of Abraham as the first to discover monotheistic faith. 2:23 The ...
... other believers, since clearly we cannot speak of “God’s conscience,” which is what the Greek appears at first sight to suggest. 2:20 Credit, kleos, occurs only here in the NT. The Greek word can mean good report, fame, glory: the general notion is praiseworthiness. Beating: The Greek verb basically means “to strike with the fist” but is applied to physical violence in general. Used of Jesus during his trial (Mark 14:65), the word provides an apt link with Peter’s following commentary on Christ ...
... unusual vocabulary of 2 Peter. Precious (timia) also occurs in 1 Pet. 1:19, where it is applied to the blood of Christ; the related noun timē, preciousness, is found in 1 Pet. 1:7 (NIV, “honor”) and 2 Pet. 1:17 (NIV, “honor”). Participate in the divine nature: Parallel notions of intimate fellowship with God are variously expressed in many NT passages: e.g., Rom. 5:5; 8:14–17; Gal. 4:6; 1 John 1:3; 2:29–3:1; Heb. 3:14. The verb used for escape, apopheugein, is confined to 2 Peter in the NT (1:4 ...
... suggest intimate personal action: para, from the side of; hypo, by (agent). The words of the voice, as recorded here by Peter, are almost the same as those in Matt. 17:5. Peter omits Matthew’s “Listen to him!” but in v. 19 he inserts a similar notion with his “pay attention” to the word of prophecy. Mark and Luke do not read with him I am well pleased. It is likely that, had 2 Peter been the work not of the apostle but of a later pseudonymous writer, the divine words would have been reported ...
... is repeated in Acts 20:29; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1–5; Didache 16.3. Jesus himself had alerted disciples to the certain rise of those who could lead others astray (Mark 13:5–6, 21–22). In the last times (ep’ eschatou tou chronou): The same notion is rendered in several ways in the LXX and in early Christian literature, often using hēmerai (days), but sometimes reading kairos (season), as in 1 Tim. 4:1; 1 Pet. 1:5; Didache 16.2); chronos (time) occurs in the phrase only here in v. 18 and in 1 ...
... s activity was counterpart to the Holy Spirit’s coming upon David (cf. 1 Sam. 16:13–14). A similar phenomenon is recorded in 1 Kgs. 22:19–23, where God dispatched a spirit, presumably evil, which orchestrated the downfall of King Ahab. The notion that an evil spirit could come from God may present theological difficulties for us, but for the ancient Hebrews, it expressed God’s absolute sovereignty over all forces and all events. The text states that the evil spirit came “between Abimelech and the ...
... essential nature. As he revealed his name (Yahweh, Lord) to Moses, he also revealed his nature, which was to show hesed (covenant love and faithfulness) to those to whom he was committed “to the thousandth generation” (Exod. 20:6; 33:19; 34:5–7). The notion that the God of the OT was only wrathful and vengeful is challenged by numerous passages, this one included. 10:17–18 God acted by setting in motion the process of deliverance, beginning with the raising up of a deliverer. These two verses serve ...
... whole Jerusalemite cult—with all its officials and institutions—was based on Levitical descent. The prominence of this genealogy, therefore, from the start signals the reader that the Chronicler is working from a cultic perspective. The cult forms a central notion in the identity construction he is negotiating here. Whoever wants to understand himself or herself as part of All-Israel should also be embedded in the cultic community. The Levitical genealogy is closely related in the literary structure to ...
... 3:3–7. The redemption of Israelite slaves from foreigners is advocated in Lev. 25:47–48. Only for them to be sold back to us: Nehemiah’s complaint that another, internal program to free Judean slaves would need to be instituted objects to the notion of Judean enslavement. We may compare the tone of Lev. 25:39–43, itself based on the concept of brotherhood (“your brother,” Lev. 25:39, NJB), to which Nehemiah might implicitly have been appealing. 5:11 The precise sense of the Heb. term for the ...
... saying and the next illustrate the ambiguity of silence. It can be a sign of the wise who measure their words (cf. 10:19), or of fools who have nothing to say (v. 28). The even-tempered of the NIV is, literally, “cool of spirit” (reading the Kethib). This notion may be derived from the Egyptian (cf. L. H. Grollenberg, “A propos de Prov 8:6 et Prov 17:27,” RB 59 [1952], pp. 40–43). Such a person coolly and calmly considers a situation and weighs what is to be said. The phrase is akin to “slow to ...
... ideal. 21:18 Synonymous. Ransom is the restitution (usually monetary) one makes for wrongdoing. It is used here metaphorically, as is also “in the place of” (rendered simply by for in the NIV). But this statement seems to be in conflict with the sages’ notion of justice: the righteous should have no need of ransom; it is the wicked who need it. Perhaps this should be understood in the light of Proverbs 11:8 (see comment there). The medieval Jewish scholar Rashi cited Haman (Esth. 7:10) as an example ...
... . Eccl. 4:8). 27:21 See 17:3, where the Lord does the testing. Here one’s praise does the testing (hapax legomenon), that is, the praise that one receives. Public reputation is a barometer of one’s worthiness. 27:22 The fool is simply incorrigible. This notion is exemplified by the metaphor of grinding to bits; folly remains as it was. It is remarkable that the possibility of the conversion of a fool is never really envisioned. Wisdom speaks to the simple or naive (1:22; 8:5; 9:4), for whom there seems ...
... military conflicts along the way. This forty-year period was occasioned by a mass rebellion (Num. 14), hence casting a necessarily dark cloud over that entire period, and no doubt firming up subsequent negative connotations of “wilderness.” Similarly, “wilderness” connotes notions of exile from Israel, as seen in the ritual of the scapegoat (lit., “goat of removal” [see Lev. 16]). On the Day of Atonement, one goat was sacrificed to atone for the people’s sin, and another was sent off, likewise ...
... to emend the text here to emphasize that Micah received the word of the Lord in a vision. We do not know how the prophets were addressed by God; when Isaiah says, for example, “The LORD of hosts has revealed himself in my ears” (22:14 RSV), we have no notion of what that means. What we do know is that the word of the Lord came to the prophets as an objective, effective reality and power (cf. Gen. 1; Ps. 147:15; Jer. 20:9; 23:29). Once the prophets released that word into history by proclaiming it, the ...
... ; cf. John 2:17). The further good news is that Yahweh is a God who takes redress (naqam). The NIV has avenging, which might be misleading. The context indicates that Yahweh indeed has the strong feelings associated with vengeance, but in the OT the notion of vengeance belongs in the context of law. It suggests exacting the appropriate redress from someone who has wronged a member of your family, so as to put things right between people. It is not merely the expression of private feelings of vindictiveness ...
... that likely amplifies the point. The earlier references to trading and specifically to silver, and to wealth (vv. 11–13), would suggest that it is their economic success that has made them confident that they can withstand any crisis; they will be disabused of this notion. But the reference to sinning against Yahweh may mean the silver and gold is the material out of which their images are made. Isaiah 2:7, 20 and Hosea 2:8 might suggest there is a link between the two. A distinctive emphasis of this ...
... to make the trek (Ezra 1:1, 5; NIV has “moved the heart,” but the Heb. expression is the same). But there is evidently some more stirring (ʿur in the hipʿil) that needs to be done, and Yahweh has now done it. The notion of stirring the spirit or heart is the opposite of hardening it. Whereas hardening the heart involves presenting negative images and ideas, softening or moving it involves presenting positive images and ideas. Yahweh has now done that by picturing the prospect of Yahweh taking ...
... is a necessary part of a believer’s spiritual growth? One of the myths nurtured by many immature believers is that following Christ should see us move from victory to victory--that failure means that God is not blessing our lives. What an absurd notion! Ask anybody who’s ever accomplished anything significant where they learned their greatest lessons. From their victories? Of course not! To a person, they will say it was from their defeats. There was an article in Fast Company magazine several years ago ...
... because of her, Jesus and his disciples were invited as well. The Gospel writer assumes that she attributes to Jesus supernatural power, for when the wine gives out she speaks to him as if he can do something about it (v. 3). His answer confirms the notion that her remark was actually an implied request: “Why do you involve me?,” Jesus replied. “My time has not yet come” (v. 4). Undeterred by his apparent refusal, Mary takes him at his word and leaves the matter in his hands (v. 5). Jesus proceeds ...
... The meaning of the imperative is “if you tear down this temple, I will rebuild it in three days.” As the authorities’ response indicates, the emphasis is on the rebuilding rather than on the tearing down. Nevertheless, the form of the verb probably reflects the notion that the Jewish authorities are the ones who will destroy this temple (i.e., will execute Jesus; cf. 8:28; 19:16). The effect of the imperative is to challenge the authorities right at the outset to do their worst and see what happens. I ...
... were his disciples. The intent is to assure the reader that the Pharisees’ perception was incorrect. Jesus and John were not rivals and could not have been, for their roles were different and they moved in different spheres (cf. 3:27–36). Theologically, the notion that Jesus, who was supposed to baptize in the Holy Spirit (1:33), also baptized in water as John did is surprising and without parallel in the other Gospels. To the writer of this Gospel, it appears to have been a firmly fixed tradition ...
... , of course, was not that the son still held on to life as to a slender thread, but that he would recover—and was even then recovering—from his illness. Death, which had seemed inevitable (v. 47), was now turned away. The present tense also conveys the notion that Jesus gives eternal life now, and not just at the last day (cf. 5:24–25). 4:52 Yesterday at the seventh hour. See note on 1:39. The official may have begun the seventeen-mile trip from Cana to Capernaum immediately and stopped overnight on ...
... while the more familiar Galilee has been retained alongside it from an oral or written source similar to the synoptic accounts. 6:5 Where shall we buy: Philip’s answer indicates that Jesus’ meaning is “How can we buy enough food? Where would we get the money?” The notion that they were in the desert, with no markets nearby, seems not to be an issue here, and there is no evidence in the text that this was the case. 6:6 To test him: Test is not used here in an ethical sense but means simply to elicit ...