... to combat (Gal. 5:13; cf. 2 Pet. 3:16). True Christian liberty, on the contrary, involves moral restraint (Acts 15:29; 1 Pet. 2:16). The liberty these men vaunt is not true liberty at all. In their mouths “liberty” can be said to be a catchword in a quite literal sense, and they themselves are the living proof, since they are slaves of depravity in their own lives, slaves of their own passions—for a man is a slave to whatever has mastered him (John 8:34; Rom. 6:16). True liberty from the death grip of ...
... easy to understand, for that matter.) But it is one thing to come across fish bones on the plate. It is quite another to try to swallow them. Yet such commonsense wisdom is not shared by all. Some ignorant and unstable people distort ... 5; Gal. 1:18; 2:7–9; cf. Acts 15:7, 12). Paul also wrote you. Copies of Pauline letters were sent early on to other churches, quite apart from occasions when the apostle himself gave instructions to that end (Col. 4:16). Peter could be referring to our letter to the Romans (2: ...
... end of the tabernacle was ten cubits wide (15 ft.), and was made of eight frames: six regular frames plus two special corner frames that would have been half a cubit (9 in.) wide each. Scholars are divided about the construction of the corner and translate it quite differently. The NIV is helpful here: “At these two corners they must be double from the bottom all the way to the top, and fitted into a single ring.” The corner frames were solid wood made of two boards joined tightly at the top by a gold ...
... tablets of the Testimony, the tablets of stone, were the Ten Commandments (34:28). Often the word “Testimony” is an abbreviation for the Ten Commandments. When the text refers to the “ark of the Testimony” it means the ark that contains the Ten Commandments. The word “testimony” occurs quite often (16:34; 25:16, 21–22; 26:33–34; 27:21; 30:6, 26, 36; 31:7, 18; 32:15; 34:29; 38:21; 39:35; 40:3, 5, 20–21). Exodus 24:12, where God first invited Moses up the mountain to receive them, mentions ...
... the family divisions to serve as confirmation that David’s divisions were in strict continuity with tradition. Although it is quite obvious, one should not overlook that the description of these families in 23:6–24, 27 is not an indication ... ), subordination would have been indicated with the Hebrew expression ʿal yad (instead of leyad, used here), a term that is used in quite a few instances in Chronicles. Dirksen does not agree with this view. He is of the opinion that the expression indeed denotes ...
... but if so the narrator made nothing of a royal connection and the issue is a historical matter rather than a literary one. 1:9 The renderings pans (silver has no counterpart in the Heb. text) and “knives” (NRSV) reflect the uncertainty of the term. A quite different interpretation is to regard it in a revocalized form as an original marginal comment (wrongly inserted into the text between the numerals) relating to the numbers in v. 9, in the light of the total in v. 11. This form means “to be changed ...
... –24). Haman, unable to imagine that the king would consider anyone other than (literally, “more” than) himself, responded in terms of his own fantasies. Had not the line between his own wishes and the king’s command become quite permeable in chapter 3? Wasn’t the king, of late, quite magnanimous when the queen had approached unbidden? Didn’t the exclusive guest list for the queen’s banquets suggest a shared admiration for him by the royal couple? And now he finds the king waiting for him early ...
The title given to chapter 7 in the NIV does not really differ from that which begins both 5:1 and 6:20. The present chapter, by its vivid description of the “adulteress,” makes the admonition very concrete. The structure is quite symmetrical. In verses 1–5, the sage opens with the familiar exhortation to listen and obey (cf. 2:1; 3:1) and resumes this style at the end (v. 24) when he draws his conclusion from the episode related in verses 7–23. This episode is an example story that ...
... eats good (things),” that is, there is profit from his words. This presumes that the speech of a (good) person will be rewarded. The parallelism with verse 2b, where the soul (or “life,” “desire,” or craving) of the deceivers is violence, is quite obscure. There seems to be a contrast between the fruitless greed of the unfaithful and the one who uses speech effectively and profitably. The text is uncertain; see Additional Notes. 13:3 Antithetic and juxtapositional. Control of one’s tongue is a ...
... The seventh chapter of Amenemope (ANET, pp. 422–23) likewise opposes greediness and warns that theft will bring no profit since riches take on wings like geese and fly to the sky. The Egyptian material relates closely to the Hebrew, even if the Hebrew author remained quite independent in using any source. 23:6–8 An admonition not to dine with a miserly host. Stingy translates “evil of eye” (cf. 28:22 and the comment on 22:9). Verse 6b repeats verse 3a. The reason given in verse 7 refers to the host ...
... Notes 28:2 The MT of v. 2b can be translated: in/by/with a man (or men?) intelligent, knowing, right lasts. The rendering of Hb. kēn as “right” (NIV, order) is doubtful and it is not clear what one man (the king?) can achieve. The Gk. has a quite different text. 28:3 The MT has “a poor man”; the NIV proposes rōʾš (head, chief) for Hb. rāš. 28:16 The MT has lit. “A prince lacking in understanding and great in oppressions—those who hate ill-gotten gains will live long.” A verb seems to be ...
... :9d–e as praising her. It may be that the admiring question/ exclamation in 6:10 is the praise described in the preceding verse. The first and last verses of the passage conclude with the same line in Hebrew, although the NIV translates the two lines quite differently: majestic as troops with banners; majestic as the stars in procession. This repetition, like that in 2:10 and 2:13, functions as a framing device which pushes the reader to read the passage as a unity. Thus it is possible that 6:10, although ...
... modern book. The superscription was likely added by an editor or later tradent, and in the case of Jeremiah identifies the genre, author, the author’s priestly status, and the time period in which he ministered. The genre assigned by the superscription is quite general. The books contain words, and indeed the bulk of the book is a collection of sermons. These words are further specified to be those of Jeremiah who is identified as the son of Hilkiah from Anathoth, a priestly village in Benjamin. Anathoth ...
... toward Ephraim. This graciousness will flow from his great compassion. The language describing God’s strong emotions toward Israel is quite striking and belies the false stereotype of the Old Testament God as cold and merciless (see Hos. 11:8–9). ... promise apparently does not intend to assure an untroubled history, since that city has been the center of strife and turmoil quite often in its long history. Additional Notes 30:3 The phrase translated “I will bring back from captivity” in Hebrew is ...
... no mention of Jonah uttering any prayer. There are several notable points to be made in relation to these verses. First, it is quite clear that Yahweh is not in the storm. Yahweh is not some nature god, bound up with or contained in the elements, as a storm- ... god would be. Rather, Yahweh is Lord over nature and able to command the wind and storm. Second, it is quite clear that the pagan gods do not share that lordship over the natural world. The sailors’ prayers have no efficacy in stilling ...
... originally applied to Israel is a first indication that the people of Judah have to listen to Nahum’s message carefully. The theological principles that Nahum expounds can work against them as well as for them. Yahweh takes vengeance on his foes; and it is quite possible for Israel to come to belong to that category. Indeed, Nahum’s language here offers the first of a number of links with Isaiah. In Isaiah 1:24 Yahweh declares, “I will get relief from my foes and avenge myself on my enemies.” And ...
... we are to distinguish between spirit and heart, then the heart refers more to mental operations and the spirit refers more to the dynamism of the will. So Haggai has already urged people to apply their hearts or minds to their ways, and the NIV quite reasonably paraphrases this expression as “consider” (vv. 5, 7); he will do that again in 2:15, 18 (NIV “give careful thought”). The word for “spirit” is also the word for “wind” with its energy and forcefulness, and it is this drive that Yahweh ...
... Vernon, he made no excuses. But he also did not give up. Instead, he learned from the Native Americans how to conduct warfare suited to the terrain. It made him a better soldier and leader. (4) He learned from his mistakes. Nobody’s a failure until they quit trying. Besides, failure is where we learn that God is with us. If you never try anything important in this world, you never learn that there is Someone close by willing to catch you when you fall. Pastor Lloyd John Ogilvie once told about a friend of ...
... it is so valuable. There is not another one like it in the world. Our lesson from the Bible today is about Jesus. Why is Jesus so special? (Let them answer.) One reason Jesus is so special is that there has never been anybody who ever lived who has been quite like him. Nobody ever loved like he loved, nobody ever taught quite like he taught, no one else has given his or her life for the sins of the world. Jesus is one of a kind. That is why he is our Savior, our Master, and our Lord.
... idea that he was sent ahead of the Messiah may be an inference from statements that the Messiah would come “after” him (1:15, 27, 30). The matter is complicated by the assertion in 1:15, 30 that the Messiah is “ahead of” John in quite a different sense, referring to status or dignity rather than time. Alternatively, it is possible that John is quoting verbatim a form of the tradition that did not find its way into chapter 1. He Who Comes from Heaven The Gospel writer adds a theological reflection ...
... the attempt in Galilee to make Jesus a king by force, 6:15). The proposal of Caiaphas the high priest (vv. 49–50) is not quite so obvious as it might first appear. His intent is not merely to do away with Jesus before he brings down on Israel the wrath ... Caiaphas, Jesus must die for the people (v. 50). The narrator seizes on the phrase die for the people and gives it a quite different interpretation in verses 51–52. He gives himself the liberty to do this on the grounds that Caiaphas (as high priest) must ...
... his work in the world. The key to their identity and their mission in the world is somehow represented in the symbolic act of footwashing, but Jesus defers his explanation of how that is so until verses 12–20. For the moment, one obstacle remains. It is not quite true that all of you are clean (v. 10). Jesus had spoken earlier of the ones that “did not believe” and also of one who “would betray him” (6:64). The former had been unmasked and had gone away (6:66), but the latter was still present (6 ...
... them. The Hebrew emphasizes the phrase “male and female” by placing it before the verb. This third and final part of the verse contains four important ideas. (a) It ascribes sexuality to God’s design for humans. Thus, an essential aspect of human nature is quite different from God’s nature. An implication of this is that we need to draw on the outstanding qualities found in each gender to have a full view of God. If we imagine God as predominantly male or female, our picture is partial and distorted ...
... systems of law. Israel knew of the ancient and acclaimed legal traditions of Mesopotamia; as a matter of fact, its own legal traditions intersect with them at many points. Yet this claim for the primacy of OT law is lodged quite possibly with deliberate polemical intent, since the law code of Hammurabi also claimed a divine quality of social righteousness (see M. Weinfeld, Deuteronomic School, pp. 150f.). Old Testament law explicitly invites, even welcomes, public inspection and comparison. But the expected ...
... What is the point of . . . ?” or even, “Why do we keep these laws?” In fact, as it turns out, the father’s answer combines the historical basis of the law, its divine origin, and the beneficial value of keeping it. It would have been quite easy to imagine the text going straight from verse 20 to verse 24, “Why do we keep these laws? Because the LORD commanded us.” Period. (Most parents will have felt the temptation to answer children’s “why’s” in similar fashion.) The moral obligation of ...