Kejadian 26:1-35
Konteks26:1 There was a famine in the land, subsequent to the earlier famine that occurred 1 in the days of Abraham. 2 Isaac went to Abimelech king of the Philistines at Gerar. 26:2 The Lord appeared to Isaac and said, “Do not go down to Egypt; 3 settle down in the land that I will point out to you. 4 26:3 Stay 5 in this land. Then I will be with you and will bless you, 6 for I will give all these lands to you and to your descendants, 7 and I will fulfill 8 the solemn promise I made 9 to your father Abraham. 26:4 I will multiply your descendants so they will be as numerous as the stars in the sky, and I will give them 10 all these lands. All the nations of the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using the name of your descendants. 11 26:5 All this will come to pass 12 because Abraham obeyed me 13 and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” 14 26:6 So Isaac settled in Gerar.
26:7 When the men of that place asked him about his wife, he replied, “She is my sister.” 15 He was afraid to say, “She is my wife,” for he thought to himself, 16 “The men of this place will kill me to get 17 Rebekah because she is very beautiful.”
26:8 After Isaac 18 had been there a long time, 19 Abimelech king of the Philistines happened to look out a window and observed 20 Isaac caressing 21 his wife Rebekah. 26:9 So Abimelech summoned Isaac and said, “She is really 22 your wife! Why did you say, ‘She is my sister’?” Isaac replied, “Because I thought someone might kill me to get her.” 23
26:10 Then Abimelech exclaimed, “What in the world have you done to us? 24 One of the men 25 might easily have had sexual relations with 26 your wife, and you would have brought guilt on us!” 26:11 So Abimelech commanded all the people, “Whoever touches 27 this man or his wife will surely be put to death.” 28
26:12 When Isaac planted in that land, he reaped in the same year a hundred times what he had sown, 29 because the Lord blessed him. 30 26:13 The man became wealthy. 31 His influence continued to grow 32 until he became very prominent. 26:14 He had 33 so many sheep 34 and cattle 35 and such a great household of servants that the Philistines became jealous 36 of him. 26:15 So the Philistines took dirt and filled up 37 all the wells that his father’s servants had dug back in the days of his father Abraham.
26:16 Then Abimelech said to Isaac, “Leave us and go elsewhere, 38 for you have become much more powerful 39 than we are.” 26:17 So Isaac left there and settled in the Gerar Valley. 40 26:18 Isaac reopened 41 the wells that had been dug 42 back in the days of his father Abraham, for the Philistines had stopped them up 43 after Abraham died. Isaac 44 gave these wells 45 the same names his father had given them. 46
26:19 When Isaac’s servants dug in the valley and discovered a well with fresh flowing 47 water there, 26:20 the herdsmen of Gerar quarreled 48 with Isaac’s herdsmen, saying, “The water belongs to us!” So Isaac 49 named the well 50 Esek 51 because they argued with him about it. 52 26:21 His servants 53 dug another well, but they quarreled over it too, so Isaac named it 54 Sitnah. 55 26:22 Then he moved away from there and dug another well. They did not quarrel over it, so Isaac 56 named it 57 Rehoboth, 58 saying, “For now the Lord has made room for us, and we will prosper in the land.”
26:23 From there Isaac 59 went up to Beer Sheba. 26:24 The Lord appeared to him that night and said, “I am the God of your father Abraham. Do not be afraid, for I am with you. I will bless you and multiply your descendants for the sake of my servant Abraham.” 26:25 Then Isaac built an altar there and worshiped 60 the Lord. He pitched his tent there, and his servants dug a well. 61
26:26 Now Abimelech had come 62 to him from Gerar along with 63 Ahuzzah his friend 64 and Phicol the commander of his army. 26:27 Isaac asked them, “Why have you come to me? You hate me 65 and sent me away from you.” 26:28 They replied, “We could plainly see 66 that the Lord is with you. So we decided there should be 67 a pact between us 68 – between us 69 and you. Allow us to make 70 a treaty with you 26:29 so that 71 you will not do us any harm, just as we have not harmed 72 you, but have always treated you well 73 before sending you away 74 in peace. Now you are blessed by the Lord.” 75
26:30 So Isaac 76 held a feast for them and they celebrated. 77 26:31 Early in the morning the men made a treaty with each other. 78 Isaac sent them off; they separated on good terms. 79
26:32 That day Isaac’s servants came and told him about the well they had dug. “We’ve found water,” they reported. 80 26:33 So he named it Shibah; 81 that is why the name of the city has been Beer Sheba 82 to this day.
26:34 When 83 Esau was forty years old, 84 he married 85 Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, as well as Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite. 26:35 They caused Isaac and Rebekah great anxiety. 86
Kejadian 1:1
Konteks1:1 In the beginning 87 God 88 created 89 the heavens and the earth. 90
Kejadian 20:1
Konteks20:1 Abraham journeyed from there to the Negev 91 region and settled between Kadesh and Shur. While he lived as a temporary resident 92 in Gerar,
Kejadian 20:1
Konteks20:1 Abraham journeyed from there to the Negev 93 region and settled between Kadesh and Shur. While he lived as a temporary resident 94 in Gerar,
Kejadian 3:15
Konteks3:15 And I will put hostility 95 between you and the woman
and between your offspring and her offspring; 96
her offspring will attack 97 your head,
and 98 you 99 will attack her offspring’s heel.” 100
Kejadian 49:10
Konteks49:10 The scepter will not depart from Judah,
nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, 101
until he comes to whom it belongs; 102
the nations will obey him. 103
Mazmur 2:2
Konteks2:2 The kings of the earth 104 form a united front; 105
the rulers collaborate 106
against the Lord and his anointed king. 107
Daniel 9:24-26
Konteks9:24 “Seventy weeks 108 have been determined
concerning your people and your holy city
to put an end to 109 rebellion,
to bring sin 110 to completion, 111
to atone for iniquity,
to bring in perpetual 112 righteousness,
to seal up 113 the prophetic vision, 114
and to anoint a most holy place. 115
9:25 So know and understand:
From the issuing of the command 116 to restore and rebuild
Jerusalem 117 until an anointed one, a prince arrives, 118
there will be a period of seven weeks 119 and sixty-two weeks.
It will again be built, 120 with plaza and moat,
but in distressful times.
9:26 Now after the sixty-two weeks,
an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing. 121
As for the city and the sanctuary,
the people of the coming prince will destroy 122 them.
But his end will come speedily 123 like a flood. 124
Until the end of the war that has been decreed
there will be destruction.
Matius 1:16
Konteks1:16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, by whom 125 Jesus was born, who is called Christ. 126
Matius 16:16
Konteks16:16 Simon Peter answered, 127 “You are the Christ, 128 the Son of the living God.”
Yohanes 1:41
Konteks1:41 He first 129 found his own brother Simon and told him, “We have found the Messiah!” 130 (which is translated Christ). 131
Yohanes 1:45
Konteks1:45 Philip found Nathanael 132 and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the prophets also 133 wrote about – Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”
Yohanes 6:69
Konteks6:69 We 134 have come to believe and to know 135 that you are the Holy One of God!” 136
Yohanes 7:25-27
Konteks7:25 Then some of the residents of Jerusalem 137 began to say, “Isn’t this the man 138 they are trying 139 to kill? 7:26 Yet here he is, speaking publicly, 140 and they are saying nothing to him. 141 Do the rulers really know that this man 142 is the Christ? 143 7:27 But we know where this man 144 comes from. 145 Whenever the Christ 146 comes, no one will know where he comes from.” 147
Yohanes 7:41
Konteks7:41 Others said, “This is the Christ!” 148 But still others said, “No, 149 for the Christ doesn’t come from Galilee, does he? 150
Yohanes 20:31
Konteks20:31 But these 151 are recorded 152 so that you may believe 153 that Jesus is the Christ, 154 the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. 155
Kisah Para Rasul 2:36
Konteks2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know beyond a doubt 156 that God has made this Jesus whom you crucified 157 both Lord 158 and Christ.” 159
Kisah Para Rasul 17:3
Konteks17:3 explaining and demonstrating 160 that the Christ 161 had to suffer and to rise from the dead, 162 saying, 163 “This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.” 164
Kisah Para Rasul 17:1
Konteks17:1 After they traveled through 165 Amphipolis 166 and Apollonia, 167 they came to Thessalonica, 168 where there was a Jewish synagogue. 169
Yohanes 5:1
Konteks5:1 After this 170 there was a Jewish feast, 171 and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 172
[26:1] 1 tn Heb “in addition to the first famine which was.”
[26:1] 2 sn This account is parallel to two similar stories about Abraham (see Gen 12:10-20; 20:1-18). Many scholars do not believe there were three similar incidents, only one that got borrowed and duplicated. Many regard the account about Isaac as the original, which then was attached to the more important person, Abraham, with supernatural elements being added. For a critique of such an approach, see R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 47-62. It is more likely that the story illustrates the proverb “like father, like son” (see T. W. Mann, The Book of the Torah, 53). In typical human fashion the son follows his father’s example of lying to avoid problems. The appearance of similar events reported in a similar way underscores the fact that the blessing has now passed to Isaac, even if he fails as his father did.
[26:2] 3 sn Do not go down to Egypt. The words echo Gen 12:10, which reports that “Abram went down to Egypt,” but state the opposite.
[26:3] 5 tn The Hebrew verb גּוּר (gur) means “to live temporarily without ownership of land.” Abraham’s family will not actually possess the land of Canaan until the Israelite conquest hundreds of years later.
[26:3] 6 tn After the imperative “stay” the two prefixed verb forms with prefixed conjunction here indicate consequence.
[26:3] sn I will be with you and I will bless you. The promise of divine presence is a promise to intervene to protect and to bless.
[26:3] 7 tn The Hebrew term זֶרַע (zera’) occurring here and in v. 18 may mean “seed” (for planting), “offspring” (occasionally of animals, but usually of people), or “descendants” depending on the context.
[26:3] sn To you and to your descendants. The Abrahamic blessing will pass to Isaac. Everything included in that blessing will now belong to the son, and in turn will be passed on to his sons. But there is a contingency involved: If they are to enjoy the full blessings, they will have to obey the word of the
[26:3] 8 tn The Hiphil stem of the verb קוּם (qum) here means “to fulfill, to bring to realization.” For other examples of this use of this verb form, see Lev 26:9; Num 23:19; Deut 8:18; 9:5; 1 Sam 1:23; 1 Kgs 6:12; Jer 11:5.
[26:3] 9 tn Heb “the oath which I swore.”
[26:3] sn The solemn promise I made. See Gen 15:18-20; 22:16-18.
[26:4] 10 tn Heb “your descendants.”
[26:4] 11 tn Traditionally the verb is taken as passive (“will be blessed”) here, as if Abraham’s descendants were going to be a channel or source of blessing to the nations. But the Hitpael is better understood here as reflexive/reciprocal, “will bless [i.e., pronounce blessings on] themselves/one another” (see also Gen 22:18). Elsewhere the Hitpael of the verb “to bless” is used with a reflexive/reciprocal sense in Deut 29:18; Ps 72:17; Isa 65:16; Jer 4:2. Gen 12:2 predicts that Abram will be held up as a paradigm of divine blessing and that people will use his name in their blessing formulae. For examples of blessing formulae utilizing an individual as an example of blessing see Gen 48:20 and Ruth 4:11. Earlier formulations of this promise (see Gen 12:2; 18:18) use the Niphal stem. (See also Gen 28:14.)
[26:5] 12 tn The words “All this will come to pass” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied for stylistic reasons.
[26:5] 13 tn Heb “listened to my voice.”
[26:5] 14 sn My charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. The language of this verse is clearly interpretive, for Abraham did not have all these laws. The terms are legal designations for sections of the Mosaic law and presuppose the existence of the law. Some Rabbinic views actually conclude that Abraham had fulfilled the whole law before it was given (see m. Qiddushin 4:14). Some scholars argue that this story could only have been written after the law was given (C. Westermann, Genesis, 2:424-25). But the simplest explanation is that the narrator (traditionally taken to be Moses the Lawgiver) elaborated on the simple report of Abraham’s obedience by using terms with which the Israelites were familiar. In this way he depicts Abraham as the model of obedience to God’s commands, whose example Israel should follow.
[26:7] 15 sn Rebekah, unlike Sarah, was not actually her husband’s sister.
[26:7] 16 tn Heb “lest.” The words “for he thought to himself” are supplied because the next clause is written with a first person pronoun, showing that Isaac was saying or thinking this.
[26:7] 17 tn Heb “kill me on account of.”
[26:8] 18 tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:8] 19 tn Heb “and it happened when the days were long to him there.”
[26:8] 20 tn Heb “look, Isaac.” By the use of the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “look”), the narrator invites the audience to view the scene through Abimelech’s eyes.
[26:8] sn The Hebrew word מְצַחֵק (mÿtsakheq), from the root צָחַק (tsakhaq, “laugh”), forms a sound play with the name “Isaac” right before it. Here it depicts an action, probably caressing or fondling, that indicated immediately that Rebekah was Isaac’s wife, not his sister. Isaac’s deception made a mockery of God’s covenantal promise. Ignoring God’s promise to protect and bless him, Isaac lied to protect himself and acted in bad faith to the men of Gerar.
[26:9] 22 tn Heb “Surely, look!” See N. H. Snaith, “The meaning of Hebrew ‘ak,” VT 14 (1964): 221-25.
[26:9] 23 tn Heb “Because I said, ‘Lest I die on account of her.’” Since the verb “said” probably means “said to myself” (i.e., “thought”) here, the direct discourse in the Hebrew statement has been converted to indirect discourse in the translation. In addition the simple prepositional phrase “on account of her” has been clarified in the translation as “to get her” (cf. v. 7).
[26:10] 24 tn Heb “What is this you have done to us?” The Hebrew demonstrative pronoun “this” adds emphasis: “What in the world have you done to us?” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 24, §118).
[26:10] 26 tn The Hebrew verb means “to lie down.” Here the expression “lie with” or “sleep with” is euphemistic for “have sexual relations with.”
[26:11] 27 tn Heb “strikes.” Here the verb has the nuance “to harm in any way.” It would include assaulting the woman or killing the man.
[26:11] 28 tn The use of the infinitive absolute before the imperfect makes the construction emphatic.
[26:12] 29 tn Heb “a hundredfold.”
[26:12] 30 tn This final clause explains why Isaac had such a bountiful harvest.
[26:13] 31 tn Heb “great.” In this context the statement refers primarily to Isaac’s material wealth, although reputation and influence are included.
[26:13] 32 tn Heb “and he went, going and becoming great.” The construction stresses that his growth in possessions and power continued steadily.
[26:14] 33 tn Heb “and there was to him.”
[26:14] 34 tn Heb “possessions of sheep.”
[26:14] 35 tn Heb “possessions of cattle.”
[26:14] 36 tn The Hebrew verb translated “became jealous” refers here to intense jealousy or envy that leads to hostile action (see v. 15).
[26:15] 37 tn Heb “and the Philistines stopped them up and filled them with dirt.”
[26:16] 38 tn Heb “Go away from us.”
[26:16] 39 sn You have become much more powerful. This explanation for the expulsion of Isaac from Philistine territory foreshadows the words used later by the Egyptians to justify their oppression of Israel (see Exod 1:9).
[26:17] 40 tn Heb “and he camped in the valley of Gerar and he lived there.”
[26:17] sn This valley was actually a wadi (a dry river bed where the water would flow in the rainy season, but this would have been rare in the Negev). The water table under it would have been higher than in the desert because of water soaking in during the torrents, making it easier to find water when digging wells. However, this does not minimize the blessing of the
[26:18] 41 tn Heb “he returned and dug,” meaning “he dug again” or “he reopened.”
[26:18] 42 tn Heb “that they dug.” Since the subject is indefinite, the verb is translated as passive.
[26:18] 43 tn Heb “and the Philistines had stopped them up.” This clause explains why Isaac had to reopen them.
[26:18] 44 tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:18] 45 tn Heb “them”; the referent (the wells) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:18] 46 tn Heb “called names to them according to the names that his father called them.”
[26:19] 47 tn Heb “living.” This expression refers to a well supplied by subterranean streams (see Song 4:15).
[26:20] 48 tn The Hebrew verb translated “quarreled” describes a conflict that often has legal ramifications.
[26:20] 49 tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:20] 50 tn Heb “and he called the name of the well.”
[26:20] 51 sn The name Esek means “argument” in Hebrew. The following causal clause explains that Isaac gave the well this name as a reminder of the conflict its discovery had created. In the Hebrew text there is a wordplay, for the name is derived from the verb translated “argued.”
[26:20] 52 tn The words “about it” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[26:21] 53 tn Heb “they”; the referent (Isaac’s servants) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:21] 54 tn Heb “and he called its name.” The referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:21] 55 sn The name Sitnah (שִׂטְנָה, sitnah) is derived from a Hebrew verbal root meaning “to oppose; to be an adversary” (cf. Job 1:6). The name was a reminder that the digging of this well caused “opposition” from the Philistines.
[26:22] 56 tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:22] 57 tn Heb “and he called its name.”
[26:22] 58 sn The name Rehoboth (רְהֹבוֹת, rehovot) is derived from a verbal root meaning “to make room.” The name was a reminder that God had made room for them. The story shows Isaac’s patience with the opposition; it also shows how God’s blessing outdistanced the men of Gerar. They could not stop it or seize it any longer.
[26:23] 59 tn Heb “and he went up from there”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:25] 60 tn Heb “called in the name of.” The expression refers to worshiping the
[26:25] 61 tn Heb “and they dug there, the servants of Isaac, a well.”
[26:26] 62 tn The disjunctive clause supplies pertinent supplemental information. The past perfect is used because the following narrative records the treaty at Beer Sheba. Prior to this we are told that Isaac settled in Beer Sheba; presumably this treaty would have allowed him to do that. However, it may be that he settled there and then made the treaty by which he renamed the place Beer Sheba. In this case one may translate “Now Abimelech came to him.”
[26:26] 64 tn Many modern translations render the Hebrew term מֵרֵעַ (merea’) as “councillor” or “adviser,” but the term may not designate an official position but simply a close personal friend.
[26:27] 65 tn The disjunctive clause is circumstantial, expressing the reason for his question.
[26:28] 66 tn The infinitive absolute before the verb emphasizes the clarity of their perception.
[26:28] 67 tn Heb “And we said, ‘Let there be.’” The direct discourse in the Hebrew text has been rendered as indirect discourse in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[26:28] 68 tn The pronoun “us” here is inclusive – it refers to the Philistine contingent on the one hand and Isaac on the other.
[26:28] 69 tn The pronoun “us” here is exclusive – it refers to just the Philistine contingent (the following “you” refers to Isaac).
[26:28] 70 tn The translation assumes that the cohortative expresses their request. Another option is to understand the cohortative as indicating resolve: “We want to make.’”
[26:29] 71 tn The oath formula is used: “if you do us harm” means “so that you will not do.”
[26:29] 73 tn Heb “and just as we have done only good with you.”
[26:29] 74 tn Heb “and we sent you away.”
[26:29] 75 tn The Philistine leaders are making an observation, not pronouncing a blessing, so the translation reads “you are blessed” rather than “may you be blessed” (cf. NAB).
[26:30] 76 tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[26:30] 77 tn Heb “and they ate and drank.”
[26:31] 78 tn Heb “and they got up early and they swore an oath, a man to his brother.”
[26:31] 79 tn Heb “and they went from him in peace.”
[26:32] 80 tn Heb “and they said to him, ‘We have found water.’” The order of the introductory clause and the direct discourse has been rearranged in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[26:33] 81 sn The name Shibah (שִׁבְעָה, shiv’ah) means (or at least sounds like) the word meaning “oath.” The name was a reminder of the oath sworn by Isaac and the Philistines to solidify their treaty.
[26:33] 82 sn The name Beer Sheba (בְּאֵר שָׁבַע, bÿ’er shava’) means “well of an oath” or “well of seven.” According to Gen 21:31 Abraham gave Beer Sheba its name when he made a treaty with the Philistines. Because of the parallels between this earlier story and the account in 26:26-33, some scholars see chaps. 21 and 26 as two versions (or doublets) of one original story. However, if one takes the text as it stands, it appears that Isaac made a later treaty agreement with the people of the land that was similar to his father’s. Abraham dug a well at the site and named the place Beer Sheba; Isaac dug another well there and named the well Shibah. Later generations then associated the name Beer Sheba with Isaac, even though Abraham gave the place its name at an earlier time.
[26:34] 83 tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator (“and it happened”), making this clause subordinate to the next.
[26:34] 84 tn Heb “the son of forty years.”
[26:34] 85 tn Heb “took as a wife.”
[26:35] 86 tn Heb “And they were [a source of ] bitterness in spirit to Isaac and to Rebekah.”
[1:1] 87 tn The translation assumes that the form translated “beginning” is in the absolute state rather than the construct (“in the beginning of,” or “when God created”). In other words, the clause in v. 1 is a main clause, v. 2 has three clauses that are descriptive and supply background information, and v. 3 begins the narrative sequence proper. The referent of the word “beginning” has to be defined from the context since there is no beginning or ending with God.
[1:1] sn In the beginning. The verse refers to the beginning of the world as we know it; it affirms that it is entirely the product of the creation of God. But there are two ways that this verse can be interpreted: (1) It may be taken to refer to the original act of creation with the rest of the events on the days of creation completing it. This would mean that the disjunctive clauses of v. 2 break the sequence of the creative work of the first day. (2) It may be taken as a summary statement of what the chapter will record, that is, vv. 3-31 are about God’s creating the world as we know it. If the first view is adopted, then we have a reference here to original creation; if the second view is taken, then Genesis itself does not account for the original creation of matter. To follow this view does not deny that the Bible teaches that God created everything out of nothing (cf. John 1:3) – it simply says that Genesis is not making that affirmation. This second view presupposes the existence of pre-existent matter, when God said, “Let there be light.” The first view includes the description of the primordial state as part of the events of day one. The following narrative strongly favors the second view, for the “heavens/sky” did not exist prior to the second day of creation (see v. 8) and “earth/dry land” did not exist, at least as we know it, prior to the third day of creation (see v. 10).
[1:1] 88 sn God. This frequently used Hebrew name for God (אֱלֹהִים,’elohim ) is a plural form. When it refers to the one true God, the singular verb is normally used, as here. The plural form indicates majesty; the name stresses God’s sovereignty and incomparability – he is the “God of gods.”
[1:1] 89 tn The English verb “create” captures well the meaning of the Hebrew term in this context. The verb בָּרָא (bara’) always describes the divine activity of fashioning something new, fresh, and perfect. The verb does not necessarily describe creation out of nothing (see, for example, v. 27, where it refers to the creation of man); it often stresses forming anew, reforming, renewing (see Ps 51:10; Isa 43:15, 65:17).
[1:1] 90 tn Or “the entire universe”; or “the sky and the dry land.” This phrase is often interpreted as a merism, referring to the entire ordered universe, including the heavens and the earth and everything in them. The “heavens and the earth” were completed in seven days (see Gen 2:1) and are characterized by fixed laws (see Jer 33:25). “Heavens” refers specifically to the sky, created on the second day (see v. 8), while “earth” refers specifically to the dry land, created on the third day (see v. 10). Both are distinct from the sea/seas (see v. 10 and Exod 20:11).
[20:1] 91 tn Or “the South [country]”; Heb “the land of the Negev.”
[20:1] sn Negev is the name for the southern desert region in the land of Canaan.
[20:1] 92 tn Heb “and he sojourned.”
[20:1] 93 tn Or “the South [country]”; Heb “the land of the Negev.”
[20:1] sn Negev is the name for the southern desert region in the land of Canaan.
[20:1] 94 tn Heb “and he sojourned.”
[3:15] 95 tn The Hebrew word translated “hostility” is derived from the root אֵיב (’ev, “to be hostile, to be an adversary [or enemy]”). The curse announces that there will be continuing hostility between the serpent and the woman. The serpent will now live in a “battle zone,” as it were.
[3:15] 96 sn The Hebrew word translated “offspring” is a collective singular. The text anticipates the ongoing struggle between human beings (the woman’s offspring) and deadly poisonous snakes (the serpent’s offspring). An ancient Jewish interpretation of the passage states: “He made the serpent, cause of the deceit, press the earth with belly and flank, having bitterly driven him out. He aroused a dire enmity between them. The one guards his head to save it, the other his heel, for death is at hand in the proximity of men and malignant poisonous snakes.” See Sib. Or. 1:59-64. For a similar interpretation see Josephus, Ant. 1.1.4 (1.50-51).
[3:15] 97 tn Heb “he will attack [or “bruise”] you [on] the head.” The singular pronoun and verb agree grammatically with the collective singular noun “offspring.” For other examples of singular verb and pronominal forms being used with the collective singular “offspring,” see Gen 16:10; 22:17; 24:60. The word “head” is an adverbial accusative, locating the blow. A crushing blow to the head would be potentially fatal.
[3:15] 98 tn Or “but you will…”; or “as they attack your head, you will attack their heel.” The disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + verb) is understood as contrastive. Both clauses place the subject before the verb, a construction that is sometimes used to indicate synchronic action (see Judg 15:14).
[3:15] 99 sn You will attack her offspring’s heel. Though the conflict will actually involve the serpent’s offspring (snakes) and the woman’s offspring (human beings), v. 15b for rhetorical effect depicts the conflict as being between the serpent and the woman’s offspring, as if the serpent will outlive the woman. The statement is personalized for the sake of the addressee (the serpent) and reflects the ancient Semitic concept of corporate solidarity, which emphasizes the close relationship between a progenitor and his offspring. Note Gen 28:14, where the
[3:15] 100 tn Heb “you will attack him [on] the heel.” The verb (translated “attack”) is repeated here, a fact that is obscured by some translations (e.g., NIV “crush…strike”). The singular pronoun agrees grammatically with the collective singular noun “offspring.” For other examples of singular verb and pronominal forms being used with the collective singular “offspring,” see Gen 16:10; 22:17; 24:60. The word “heel” is an adverbial accusative, locating the blow. A bite on the heel from a poisonous serpent is potentially fatal.
[3:15] sn The etiological nature of v. 15 is apparent, though its relevance for modern western man is perhaps lost because we rarely come face to face with poisonous snakes. Ancient Israelites, who often encountered snakes in their daily activities (see, for example, Eccl 10:8; Amos 5:19), would find the statement quite meaningful as an explanation for the hostility between snakes and humans. (In the broader ancient Near Eastern context, compare the Mesopotamian serpent omens. See H. W. F. Saggs, The Greatness That Was Babylon, 309.) This ongoing struggle, when interpreted in light of v. 15, is a tangible reminder of the conflict introduced into the world by the first humans’ rebellion against God. Many Christian theologians (going back to Irenaeus) understand v. 15 as the so-called protevangelium, supposedly prophesying Christ’s victory over Satan (see W. Witfall, “Genesis 3:15 – a Protevangelium?” CBQ 36 [1974]: 361-65; and R. A. Martin, “The Earliest Messianic Interpretation of Genesis 3:15,” JBL 84 [1965]: 425-27). In this allegorical approach, the woman’s offspring is initially Cain, then the whole human race, and ultimately Jesus Christ, the offspring (Heb “seed”) of the woman (see Gal 4:4). The offspring of the serpent includes the evil powers and demons of the spirit world, as well as those humans who are in the kingdom of darkness (see John 8:44). According to this view, the passage gives the first hint of the gospel. Satan delivers a crippling blow to the Seed of the woman (Jesus), who in turn delivers a fatal blow to the Serpent (first defeating him through the death and resurrection [1 Cor 15:55-57] and then destroying him in the judgment [Rev 12:7-9; 20:7-10]). However, the grammatical structure of Gen 3:15b does not suggest this view. The repetition of the verb “attack,” as well as the word order, suggests mutual hostility is being depicted, not the defeat of the serpent. If the serpent’s defeat were being portrayed, it is odd that the alleged description of his death comes first in the sentence. If he has already been crushed by the woman’s “Seed,” how can he bruise his heel? To sustain the allegorical view, v. 15b must be translated in one of the following ways: “he will crush your head, even though you attack his heel” (in which case the second clause is concessive) or “he will crush your head as you attack his heel” (the clauses, both of which place the subject before the verb, may indicate synchronic action).
[49:10] 101 tn Or perhaps “from his descendants,” taking the expression “from between his feet” as a euphemism referring to the genitals. In this case the phrase refers by metonymy to those who come forth from his genitals, i.e., his descendants.
[49:10] 102 tn The Hebrew form שִׁילֹה (shiloh) is a major interpretive problem. There are at least four major options (with many variations and less likely alternatives): (1) Some prefer to leave the text as it is, reading “Shiloh” and understanding it as the place where the ark rested for a while in the time of the Judges. (2) By repointing the text others arrive at the translation “until the [or “his”] ruler comes,” a reference to a Davidic ruler or the Messiah. (3) Another possibility that does not require emendation of the consonantal text, but only repointing, is “until tribute is brought to him” (so NEB, JPS, NRSV), which has the advantage of providing good parallelism with the following line, “the nations will obey him.” (4) The interpretation followed in the present translation, “to whom it [belongs]” (so RSV, NIV, REB), is based on the ancient versions. Again, this would refer to the Davidic dynasty or, ultimately, to the Messiah.
[49:10] 103 tn “and to him [will be] the obedience of the nations.” For discussion of this verse see J. Blenkinsopp, “The Oracle of Judah and the Messianic Entry,” JBL 80 (1961): 55-64; and E. M. Good, “The ‘Blessing’ on Judah,” JBL 82 (1963): 427-32.
[2:2] 104 sn The expression kings of the earth refers somewhat hyperbolically to the kings who had been conquered by and were subject to the Davidic king.
[2:2] 105 tn Or “take their stand.” The Hebrew imperfect verbal form describes their action as underway.
[2:2] 106 tn Or “conspire together.” The verbal form is a Niphal from יָסַד (yasad). BDB 413-14 s.v. יָסַד defines the verb as “establish, found,” but HALOT 417 s.v. II יסד proposes a homonym meaning “get together, conspire” (an alternate form of סוּד, sud).
[2:2] 107 tn Heb “and against his anointed one.” The Davidic king is the referent (see vv. 6-7).
[9:24] 108 tn Heb “sevens.” Elsewhere the term is used of a literal week (a period of seven days), cf. Gen 29:27-28; Exod 34:22; Lev 12:5; Num 28:26; Deut 16:9-10; 2 Chr 8:13; Jer 5:24; Dan 10:2-3. Gabriel unfolds the future as if it were a calendar of successive weeks. Most understand the reference here as periods of seventy “sevens” of years, or a total of 490 years.
[9:24] 109 tc Or “to finish.” The present translation reads the Qere (from the root תָּמַם, tamam) with many witnesses. The Kethib has “to seal up” (from the root הָתַם, hatam), a confusion with a reference later in the verse to sealing up the vision.
[9:24] 110 tc The present translation reads the Qere (singular), rather than the Kethib (plural).
[9:24] 111 tn The Hebrew phrase לְכַלֵּא (lÿkhalle’) is apparently an alternative (metaplastic) spelling of the root כָּלָה (kalah, “to complete, finish”), rather than a form of כָּלָא (kala’, “to shut up, restrain”), as has sometimes been supposed.
[9:24] 112 tn Or “everlasting.”
[9:24] 113 sn The act of sealing in the OT is a sign of authentication. Cf. 1 Kgs 21:8; Jer 32:10, 11, 44.
[9:24] 114 tn Heb “vision and prophecy.” The expression is a hendiadys.
[9:24] 115 tn Or “the most holy place” (NASB, NLT); or “a most holy one”; or “the most holy one,” though the expression is used of places or objects elsewhere, not people.
[9:25] 116 tn Or “decree” (NASB, NIV); or “word” (NAB, NRSV).
[9:25] 117 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[9:25] 118 tn The word “arrives” is added in the translation for clarification.
[9:25] 119 tn Heb “sevens” (also later in this line and in v. 26).
[9:25] sn The accents in the MT indicate disjunction at this point, which would make it difficult, if not impossible, to identify the “anointed one/prince” of this verse as messianic. The reference in v. 26 to the sixty-two weeks as a unit favors the MT accentuation, not the traditional translation. If one follows the MT accentuation, one may translate “From the going forth of the message to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one, a prince arrives, there will be a period of seven weeks. During a period of sixty-two weeks it will again be built, with plaza and moat, but in distressful times.” The present translation follows a traditional reading of the passage that deviates from the MT accentuation.
[9:25] 120 tn Heb “it will return and be built.” The expression is a verbal hendiadys.
[9:26] 121 sn The expression have nothing is difficult. Presumably it refers to an absence of support or assistance for the anointed one at the time of his “cutting off.” The KJV rendering “but not for himself,” apparently suggesting a vicarious death, cannot be defended.
[9:26] 122 tc Some witnesses (e.g., the Syriac) understand a passive verb and the preposition עִם (’im, “with) rather than the noun עַם (’am, “people”), thus reading “the city and the sanctuary will be destroyed with the coming prince.”
[9:26] 123 tn The words “will come speedily” are not in the Hebrew text but have been added in the translation for clarity.
[9:26] 124 sn Flood here is a metaphor for sudden destruction.
[1:16] 125 tc There are three significant variant readings at this point in the text. Some
[1:16] sn The pronoun whom is feminine gender in the Greek text, referring to Mary.
[1:16] 126 tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”
[1:16] sn The term χριστός (cristos) was originally an adjective (“anointed”), developing in LXX into a substantive (“an anointed one”), then developing still further into a technical generic term (“the anointed one”). In the intertestamental period it developed further into a technical term referring to the hoped-for anointed one, that is, a specific individual. In the NT the development starts there (technical-specific), is so used in the gospels, and then develops in Paul to mean virtually Jesus’ last name.
[16:16] 127 tn Grk “And answering, Simon Peter said.”
[16:16] 128 tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”
[16:16] sn See the note on Christ in 1:16.
[1:41] 129 tc Most witnesses (א* L Ws Ï) read πρῶτος (prwtos) here instead of πρῶτον (prwton). The former reading would be a predicate adjective and suggest that Andrew “was the first” person to proselytize another regarding Jesus. The reading preferred, however, is the neuter πρῶτον, used as an adverb (BDAG 893 s.v. πρῶτος 1.a.β.), and it suggests that the first thing that Andrew did was to proselytize Peter. The evidence for this reading is early and weighty: Ì66,75 א2 A B Θ Ψ 083 Ë1,13 892 al lat.
[1:41] 130 sn Naturally part of Andrew’s concept of the Messiah would have been learned from John the Baptist (v. 40). However, there were a number of different messianic expectations in 1st century Palestine (see the note on “Who are you?” in v. 19), and it would be wrong to assume that what Andrew meant here is the same thing the author means in the purpose statement at the end of the Fourth Gospel, 20:31. The issue here is not whether the disciples’ initial faith in Jesus as Messiah was genuine or not, but whether their concept of who Jesus was grew and developed progressively as they spent time following him, until finally after his resurrection it is affirmed in the climactic statement of John’s Gospel, the affirmation of Thomas in 20:28.
[1:41] 131 tn Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “the one who has been anointed.”
[1:41] sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. See the note on Christ in 1:20.
[1:45] 132 sn Nathanael is traditionally identified with Bartholomew (although John never describes him as such). He appears here after Philip, while in all lists of the twelve except in Acts 1:13, Bartholomew follows Philip. Also, the Aramaic Bar-tolmai means “son of Tolmai,” the surname; the man almost certainly had another name.
[1:45] 133 tn “Also” is not in the Greek text, but is implied.
[6:69] 135 sn See 1 John 4:16.
[6:69] 136 tc The witnesses display a bewildering array of variants here. Instead of “the Holy One of God” (ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ, Jo {agio" tou qeou), Tertullian has ὁ Χριστός (Jo Cristo", “the Christ”); C3 Θ* Ë1 33 565 lat read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (Jo Cristo" Jo Juio" tou qeou, “the Christ, the Son of God”); two versional witnesses (b syc) have ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Son of God”); the Byzantine text as well as many others (Ψ 0250 Ë13 33 Ï) read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος (Jo Cristo" Jo Juio" tou qeou tou zwnto", “the Christ, the Son of the living God”); and Ì66 as well as a few versions have ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Christ, the Holy One of God”). The reading ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ is, however, well supported by Ì75 א B C* D L W as well as versional witnesses. It appears that Peter’s confession in the Synoptic Gospels (especially Matt 16:16) supplied the motivation for the variations. Although the witnesses in Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; and Luke 9:20 vary considerably, the readings are all intra-synoptic, that is, they do not pull in “the Holy One of God” but reflect various permutations of “Christ”/“Christ of God”/“Christ, the Son of God”/“Christ, the Son of the living God.” The wording “the Holy One of God” (without “Christ”) in important witnesses here is thus unique among Peter’s confessions, and best explains the rise of the other readings.
[6:69] sn You have the words of eternal life…you are the Holy One of God! In contrast to the response of some of his disciples, here is the response of the twelve, whom Jesus then questioned concerning their loyalty to him. This was the big test, and the twelve, with Peter as spokesman, passed with flying colors. The confession here differs considerably from the synoptic accounts (Matt 16:16, Mark 8:29, and Luke 9:20) and concerns directly the disciples’ personal loyalty to Jesus, in contrast to those other disciples who had deserted him (John 6:66).
[7:25] 137 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[7:25] 138 tn Grk “Is it not this one.”
[7:26] 140 tn Or “speaking openly.”
[7:26] 141 sn They are saying nothing to him. Some people who had heard Jesus were so impressed with his teaching that they began to infer from the inactivity of the opposing Jewish leaders a tacit acknowledgment of Jesus’ claims.
[7:26] 143 tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).
[7:26] sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.
[7:27] 145 sn We know where this man comes from. The author apparently did not consider this objection worth answering. The true facts about Jesus’ origins were readily available for any reader who didn’t know already. Here is an instance where the author assumes knowledge about Jesus that is independent from the material he records.
[7:27] 146 tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).
[7:27] sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.
[7:27] 147 sn The view of these people regarding the Messiah that no one will know where he comes from reflects the idea that the origin of the Messiah is a mystery. In the Talmud (b. Sanhedrin 97a) Rabbi Zera taught: “Three come unawares: Messiah, a found article, and a scorpion.” Apparently OT prophetic passages like Mal 3:1 and Dan 9:25 were interpreted by some as indicating a sudden appearance of Messiah. It appears that this was not a universal view: The scribes summoned by Herod at the coming of the Magi in Matt 2 knew that the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem. It is important to remember that Jewish messianic expectations in the early 1st century were not monolithic.
[7:41] 148 tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).
[7:41] sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.
[7:41] 149 tn An initial negative reply (“No”) is suggested by the causal or explanatory γάρ (gar) which begins the clause.
[7:41] 150 tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “does he?”).
[20:31] 151 tn Grk “these things.”
[20:31] 152 tn Grk “are written.”
[20:31] 153 tc ‡ A difficult textual variant is present at this point in the Greek text. Some
[20:31] 154 tn Or “Jesus is the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).
[20:31] sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.
[20:31] 155 sn John 20:31. A major question concerning this verse, the purpose statement of the Gospel of John, is whether the author is writing primarily for an audience of unbelievers, with purely evangelistic emphasis, or whether he envisions an audience of believers, whom he wants to strengthen in their faith. Several points are important in this discussion: (1) in the immediate context (20:30), the other signs spoken of by the author were performed in the presence of disciples; (2) in the case of the first of the signs, at Cana, the author makes a point of the effect the miracle had on the disciples (2:11); (3) if the primary thrust of the Gospel is toward unbelievers, it is difficult to see why so much material in chaps. 13-17 (the last meal and Farewell Discourse, concluding with Jesus’ prayer for the disciples), which deals almost exclusively with the disciples, is included; (4) the disciples themselves were repeatedly said to have believed in Jesus throughout the Gospel, beginning with 2:11, yet they still needed to believe after the resurrection (if Thomas’ experience in 20:27-28 is any indication); and (5) the Gospel appears to be written with the assumption that the readers are familiar with the basic story (or perhaps with one or more of the synoptic gospel accounts, although this is less clear). Thus no account of the birth of Jesus is given at all, and although he is identified as being from Nazareth, the words of the Pharisees and chief priests to Nicodemus (7:52) are almost certainly to be taken as ironic, assuming the reader knows where Jesus was really from. Likewise, when Mary is identified in 11:2 as the one who anointed Jesus’ feet with oil, it is apparently assumed that the readers are familiar with the story, since the incident involved is not mentioned in the Fourth Gospel until 12:3. These observations must be set over against the clear statement of purpose in the present verse, 20:31, which seems to have significant evangelistic emphasis. In addition to this there is the repeated emphasis on witness throughout the Fourth Gospel (cf. the witness of John the Baptist in 1:7, 8, 15, 32, and 34, along with 5:33; the Samaritan woman in 4:39; Jesus’ own witness, along with that of the Father who sent him, in 8:14, 18, and 18:37; the disciples themselves in 15:27; and finally the testimony of the author himself in 19:35 and 21:24). In light of all this evidence it seems best to say that the author wrote with a dual purpose: (1) to witness to unbelievers concerning Jesus, in order that they come to believe in him and have eternal life; and (2) to strengthen the faith of believers, by deepening and expanding their understanding of who Jesus is.
[2:36] 156 tn Or “know for certain.” This term is in an emphatic position in the clause.
[2:36] 157 tn Grk “has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” The clause has been simplified in the translation by replacing the pronoun “him” with the explanatory clause “this Jesus whom you crucified” which comes at the end of the sentence.
[2:36] 158 sn Lord. This looks back to the quotation of Ps 110:1 and the mention of “calling on the Lord” in 2:21. Peter’s point is that the Lord on whom one calls for salvation is Jesus, because he is the one mediating God’s blessing of the Spirit as a sign of the presence of salvation and the last days.
[2:36] 159 tn Or “and Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”
[2:36] sn See the note on Christ in 2:31.
[17:3] 160 tn BDAG 772 s.v. παρατίθημι 2.b has “demonstrate, point out” here.
[17:3] 161 tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”
[17:3] sn See the note on Christ in 2:31.
[17:3] 162 sn The Christ had to suffer and to rise from the dead. These two points (suffering and resurrection) would have been among the more controversial aspects of Paul’s messianic preaching. The term translated “had to” (δεῖ, dei) shows how divine design and scripture corresponded here.
[17:3] 163 tn The Greek words used here (καὶ ὅτι, kai {oti, “and that”) mark the switch from indirect to direct discourse. Contemporary English requires the use of an introductory verb of speaking or saying to make this transition.
[17:3] 164 tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”
[17:3] sn See the note on Christ in 2:31. The identification of the Messiah with Jesus indicates Paul was proclaiming the fulfillment of messianic promise.
[17:1] 165 tn BDAG 250 s.v. διοδεύω 1 has “go, travel through” for this verse.
[17:1] 166 sn Amphipolis. The capital city of the southeastern district of Macedonia (BDAG 55 s.v. ᾿Αμφίπολις). It was a military post. From Philippi this was about 33 mi (53 km).
[17:1] 167 sn Apollonia was a city in Macedonia about 27 mi (43 km) west southwest of Amphipolis.
[17:1] 168 sn Thessalonica (modern Salonica) was a city in Macedonia about 33 mi (53 km) west of Apollonia. It was the capital of Macedonia. The road they traveled over was called the Via Egnatia. It is likely they rode horses, given their condition in Philippi. The implication of v. 1 is that the two previously mentioned cities lacked a synagogue.
[17:1] map For location see JP1 C1; JP2 C1; JP3 C1; JP4 C1.
[17:1] 169 sn See the note on synagogue in 6:9.
[5:1] 170 sn The temporal indicator After this is not specific, so it is uncertain how long after the incidents at Cana this occurred.
[5:1] 171 tc The textual variants ἑορτή or ἡ ἑορτή (Jeorth or Jh Jeorth, “a feast” or “the feast”) may not appear significant at first, but to read ἑορτή with the article would almost certainly demand a reference to the Jewish Passover. The article is found in א C L Δ Ψ Ë1 33 892 1424 pm, but is lacking in {Ì66,75 A B D T Ws Θ Ë13 565 579 700 1241 pm}. Overall, the shorter reading has somewhat better support. Internally, the known proclivity of scribes to make the text more explicit argues compellingly for the shorter reading. Thus, the verse refers to a feast other than the Passover. The incidental note in 5:3, that the sick were lying outside in the porticoes of the pool, makes Passover an unlikely time because it fell toward the end of winter and the weather would not have been warm. L. Morris (John [NICNT], 299, n. 6) thinks it impossible to identify the feast with certainty.
[5:1] sn A Jewish feast. Jews were obligated to go up to Jerusalem for 3 major annual feasts: Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. If the first is probably ruled out because of the time of year, the last is not as likely because it forms the central setting for chap. 7 (where there are many indications in the context that Tabernacles is the feast in view.) This leaves the feast of Pentecost, which at some point prior to this time in Jewish tradition (as reflected in Jewish intertestamental literature and later post-Christian rabbinic writings) became identified with the giving of the law to Moses on Mount Sinai. Such an association might explain Jesus’ reference to Moses in 5:45-46. This is uncertain, however. The only really important fact for the author is that the healing was done on a Sabbath. This is what provoked the controversy with the Jewish authorities recorded in 5:16-47.
[5:1] 172 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
