Bilangan 1:1-54
Konteks1:1 1 Now the Lord 2 spoke 3 to Moses in the tent of meeting 4 in the wilderness 5 of Sinai 6 on the first day of the second month of the second year after 7 the Israelites 8 departed from the land of Egypt. 9 He said: 10 1:2 “Take a census 11 of the entire 12 Israelite community 13 by their clans and families, 14 counting the name of every individual male. 15 1:3 You and Aaron are to number 16 all in Israel who can serve in the army, 17 those who are 18 twenty years old or older, 19 by their divisions. 20 1:4 And to help you 21 there is to be a man from each 22 tribe, each man 23 the head 24 of his family. 25 1:5 Now these are the names of the men who are to help 26 you:
from 27 Reuben, Elizur son of Shedeur;
1:6 from Simeon, Shelumiel son of Zurishaddai; 28
1:7 from Judah, Nahshon 29 son of Amminadab;
1:8 from Issachar, Nethanel son of Zuar;
1:9 from Zebulun, Eliab son of Helon;
1:10 from the sons of Joseph:
from Ephraim, Elishama son of Ammihud;
from Manasseh, Gamaliel son of Pedahzur;
1:11 from Benjamin, Abidan son of Gideoni;
1:12 from Dan, Ahiezer son of Ammishaddai;
1:13 from Asher, Pagiel son of Ocran;
1:14 from Gad, Eliasaph son of Deuel; 30
1:15 from Naphtali, Ahira son of Enan.”
1:16 These were the ones chosen 31 from the community, leaders 32 of their ancestral tribes. 33 They were the heads of the thousands 34 of Israel.
1:17 So Moses and Aaron took these men who had been mentioned specifically by name, 1:18 and they assembled 35 the entire community together on the first day of the second month. 36 Then the people recorded their ancestry 37 by their clans and families, and the men who were twenty years old or older were listed 38 by name individually, 1:19 just as the Lord had commanded Moses. And so he numbered them in the wilderness of Sinai.
1:20 And they were as follows:
The descendants of Reuben, the firstborn son of Israel: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name individually. 1:21 Those of them who were numbered 39 from the tribe of Reuben were 46,500. 40
1:22 From the descendants of Simeon: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males numbered of them 41 twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name individually. 1:23 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Simeon were 59,300.
1:24 42 From the descendants of Gad: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:25 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Gad were 45,650.
1:26 From the descendants of Judah: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:27 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Judah were 74,600.
1:28 From the descendants of Issachar: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:29 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Issachar were 54,400.
1:30 From the descendants of Zebulun: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:31 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Zebulun were 57,400.
1:32 From the sons of Joseph:
From the descendants of Ephraim: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:33 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Ephraim were 40,500. 1:34 From the descendants of Manasseh: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:35 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Manasseh were 32,200.
1:36 From the descendants of Benjamin: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:37 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Benjamin were 35,400.
1:38 From the descendants of Dan: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:39 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Dan were 62,700.
1:40 From the descendants of Asher: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:41 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Asher were 41,500.
1:42 From 43 the descendants of Naphtali: According to the records of their clans and families, all the males twenty years old or older who could serve in the army were listed by name. 1:43 Those of them who were numbered from the tribe of Naphtali were 53,400.
1:44 These were the men whom Moses and Aaron numbered 44 along with the twelve leaders of Israel, each of whom 45 was from his own family. 1:45 All the Israelites who were twenty years old or older, who could serve in Israel’s army, were numbered 46 according to their families. 1:46 And all those numbered totaled 603,550.
1:47 But 47 the Levites, according to the tribe of their fathers, 48 were not numbered 49 among them. 1:48 The Lord had said to Moses, 50 1:49 “Only the tribe of Levi 51 you must not number 52 or count 53 with 54 the other Israelites. 1:50 But appoint 55 the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, 56 over all its furnishings and over everything in it. They must carry 57 the tabernacle and all its furnishings; and they 58 must attend to it and camp around it. 59 1:51 Whenever the tabernacle is to move, 60 the Levites must take it down, and whenever the tabernacle is to be reassembled, 61 the Levites must set it up. 62 Any unauthorized person 63 who approaches it must be killed.
1:52 “The Israelites will camp according to their divisions, each man in his camp, and each man by his standard. 1:53 But the Levites must camp around the tabernacle of the testimony, so that the Lord’s anger 64 will not fall on the Israelite community. The Levites are responsible for the care 65 of the tabernacle of the testimony.”
1:54 The Israelites did according to all that the Lord commanded Moses 66 – that is what they did.
Yakobus 1:1-27
Konteks1:1 From James, 67 a slave 68 of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes dispersed abroad. 69 Greetings!
1:2 My brothers and sisters, 70 consider it nothing but joy 71 when you fall into all sorts of trials, 1:3 because you know that the testing of your faith produces endurance. 1:4 And let endurance have its perfect effect, so that you will be perfect and complete, not deficient in anything. 1:5 But if anyone is deficient in wisdom, he should ask God, who gives to all generously and without reprimand, and it will be given to him. 1:6 But he must ask in faith without doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed around by the wind. 1:7 For that person must not suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord, 1:8 since he is a double-minded individual, 72 unstable in all his ways.
1:9 Now the believer 73 of humble means 74 should take pride 75 in his high position. 76 1:10 But the rich person’s pride should be in his humiliation, because he will pass away like a wildflower in the meadow. 77 1:11 For the sun rises with its heat and dries up the meadow; the petal of the flower falls off and its beauty is lost forever. 78 So also the rich person in the midst of his pursuits will wither away. 1:12 Happy is the one 79 who endures testing, because when he has proven to be genuine, he will receive the crown of life that God 80 promised to those who love him. 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted by evil, 81 and he himself tempts no one. 1:14 But each one is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desires. 1:15 Then when desire conceives, it gives birth to sin, and when sin is full grown, it gives birth to death. 1:16 Do not be led astray, my dear brothers and sisters. 82 1:17 All generous giving and every perfect gift 83 is from above, coming down 84 from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or the slightest hint of change. 85 1:18 By his sovereign plan he gave us birth 86 through the message of truth, that we would be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.
1:19 Understand this, my dear brothers and sisters! 87 Let every person be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to anger. 1:20 For human 88 anger does not accomplish God’s righteousness. 89 1:21 So put away all filth and evil excess and humbly 90 welcome the message implanted within you, which is able to save your souls. 1:22 But be sure you live out the message and do not merely listen to it and so deceive yourselves. 1:23 For if someone merely listens to the message and does not live it out, he is like someone 91 who gazes at his own face 92 in a mirror. 1:24 For he gazes at himself and then goes out and immediately forgets 93 what sort of person he was. 1:25 But the one who peers into the perfect law of liberty and fixes his attention there, 94 and does not become a forgetful listener but one who lives it out – he 95 will be blessed in what he does. 96 1:26 If someone thinks he is religious yet does not bridle his tongue, and so deceives his heart, his religion is futile. 1:27 Pure and undefiled religion before 97 God the Father 98 is this: to care for orphans and widows in their misfortune and to keep oneself unstained by the world.
Markus 6:1-29
Konteks6:1 Now 99 Jesus left that place and came to his hometown, 100 and his disciples followed him. 6:2 When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue. 101 Many who heard him were astonished, saying, “Where did he get these ideas? 102 And what is this wisdom that has been given to him? What are these miracles that are done through his hands? 6:3 Isn’t this the carpenter, the son 103 of Mary 104 and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And aren’t his sisters here with us?” And so they took offense at him. 6:4 Then 105 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown, and among his relatives, and in his own house.” 6:5 He was not able to do a miracle there, except to lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6:6 And he was amazed because of their unbelief. Then 106 he went around among the villages and taught.
6:7 Jesus 107 called the twelve and began to send them out two by two. He gave them authority over the unclean spirits. 108 6:8 He instructed them to take nothing for the journey except a staff 109 – no bread, no bag, 110 no money in their belts – 6:9 and to put on sandals but not to wear two tunics. 111 6:10 He said to them, “Wherever you enter a house, stay there 112 until you leave the area. 6:11 If a place will not welcome you or listen to you, as you go out from there, shake the dust off 113 your feet as a testimony against them.” 6:12 So 114 they went out and preached that all should repent. 6:13 They cast out many demons and anointed many sick people with oil and healed them.
6:14 Now 115 King Herod 116 heard this, for Jesus’ 117 name had become known. Some 118 were saying, “John the baptizer 119 has been raised from the dead, and because of this, miraculous powers are at work in him.” 6:15 Others said, “He is Elijah.” Others said, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets from the past.” 6:16 But when Herod heard this, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, has been raised!” 6:17 For Herod himself had sent men, arrested John, and bound him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, because Herod 120 had married her. 6:18 For John had repeatedly told 121 Herod, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” 122 6:19 So Herodias nursed a grudge against him and wanted to kill him. But 123 she could not 6:20 because Herod stood in awe of 124 John and protected him, since he knew that John 125 was a righteous and holy man. When Herod 126 heard him, he was thoroughly baffled, 127 and yet 128 he liked to listen to John. 129
6:21 But 130 a suitable day 131 came, when Herod gave a banquet on his birthday for his court officials, military commanders, and leaders of Galilee. 6:22 When his daughter Herodias 132 came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his dinner guests. The king said to the girl, “Ask me for whatever you want and I will give it to you.” 6:23 He swore to her, 133 “Whatever you ask I will give you, up to half my kingdom.” 134 6:24 So 135 she went out and said to her mother, “What should I ask for?” Her mother 136 said, “The head of John the baptizer.” 137 6:25 Immediately she hurried back to the king and made her request: 138 “I want the head of John the Baptist on a platter immediately.” 6:26 Although it grieved the king deeply, 139 he did not want to reject her request because of his oath and his guests. 6:27 So 140 the king sent an executioner at once to bring John’s 141 head, and he went and beheaded John in prison. 6:28 He brought his head on a platter and gave it to the girl, and the girl gave it to her mother. 6:29 When John’s 142 disciples heard this, they came and took his body and placed it in a tomb.
[1:1] 1 sn The book of Numbers is the fourth book of the Pentateuch, traditionally called the Law of Moses. It provides a record of the experience of the Israelites during the wilderness wanderings, and records the laws for the camp as they traveled from place to place. The book focuses on the difficulties of the Israelites due to their lack of faith, rebellion, and apostasy. It also records God’s protection of his people from opposition from without. The book makes a fitting contribution to the collection of holy writings as it shows the spiritual and physical progression of the company of the redeemed toward the promised land. The book has to be studied in conjunction with the other books of the Pentateuch. It builds on the promises made to Abraham in Genesis and the redemption from bondage in Exodus; it completes the cultic instructions for Israel that were laid down in Leviticus, and it concerns the worship in and the movement of the tabernacle that was built in Exodus. But the information here, both legal and historical, was not the major concern in those books. The book gets its title in English (following the Greek tradition) from the two censuses taken of the people, one at the beginning of the wanderings and the other at the end (although the Hebrew title is taken from the beginning of the book, בַּמִּדְבַּר [bammidbar], “in the wilderness”). In these lists particular emphasis is given to the leaders of the clans, a theme that will continue in the book as the focus is on how the leaders function in all the trials and temptations of the journey. The material in this book is essentially a theological interpretation of historical events, and as such it stands as an integral part of the revelation of God. In the study of the book of Numbers, when these issues of the nature of the text are significant to the interpretation and acceptance of the text, the notes will comment on them briefly. The indication at the outset of the book is that Moses had a good number of people who were able to help him compile the statistics and the facts of the wandering community. In Num 11:16-18 there is a group of leaders known as שֹׁטְּרִים(shottÿrim). This term was used in Exod 5:16-19 to describe the officers or foremen of the Israelites. They were appointed supervisors of the clans by Moses, and by the time of Joshua (Josh 1:10) they were a literary guild. The Hebrew word, cognate with Akkadian sataru, means “to write.” These people were to Israel what the scribes and chroniclers were to the pagan nations. They assisted Moses and the priests in their keeping of records. So no matter what they were called from time to time, there was a group of literate people who could keep the records and preserve the information from the very beginning. Their work matches the activities of scribes in the ancient world who used all the literary devices to preserve the material. There is no reason to doubt that the events recorded were attested to and preserved by such eyewitnesses. But their work would have been essentially to serve the leader, Moses. The book essentially follows the order of the events chronologically, more or less. Where it departs from that order it does so for literary or theological reasons. At the center of the theological concern is the tabernacle, its significance to the faith, and therefore the care in using it and in moving it. Its importance explains the presence and the arrangement of the ritual laws. With the records and statistics provided for him, Moses could then introduce into the record the great events in the wilderness experience of Israel, which were to become warnings and encouragements for all time. Most of this material comes from the two years at the beginning of the experience and the two years at the end. But this itself may be a literary device (merism) to show the nature of the wanderings throughout. The Hebrew text of the book of Numbers has been preserved fairly well. It has not been preserved as well as Leviticus, which was most important to the ministry of the priests and Levites. But in comparison with some of the prophetic writings, Numbers represents a well-preserved text. The problems will be discussed in the relevant passages. So Numbers is essentially a part of the unfolding revelation of the Torah, the Law. It shows God’s faithfulness to his covenant plan and to his covenant people, but it also shows the problems incurred by the people’s lack of faith and obedience. The book focuses frequently on the nature of the holy
[1:1] 2 sn The holy name is “Yahweh.” This is the ancient name for the God of the covenant community. The name was explained or interpreted by Moses for the Israelites by the etymological connection to the verb “to be.” God said that its significance was “
[1:1] 3 tn The book begins with the vav (ו) consecutive and the preterite, “and he spoke.” This does not indicate that the book is a continuation of the previous material, for in that case certain other books in the canon would have to be linked with the writings of other people just because they followed them. This form is simply the narrative verb; the conjunction need not be translated. The verb should not be limited to a literary formula, but does indicate the divine source of the command for Moses. God was speaking to Moses throughout the wilderness wanderings from the tent, and so the ideas are from him, and not from the “will of man.”
[1:1] 4 sn This was one of several names by which the tabernacle was known. This was the tent with its furnishings that the Israelites built according to the book of Exodus. While that tabernacle was being built, the
[1:1] 5 sn The English word “wilderness” is workable for the Hebrew term, because it describes land that is wild. The term “desert” works if one thinks of land deserted by people. But to many modern readers “desert” suggests the idea of an arid land without growth. The word must not be pressed to mean only sand dunes; it describes land that has rocks, canyons, oases, shrubs and trees occasionally, some animal life, and of course sand.
[1:1] 6 sn The exact location of Mount Sinai has been debated for some time. The traditional view from very early times is that it is located in the south, Jebel Musa, south of the monastery of St. Catherine. The other plausible suggestion is Ras es-Safsafeh, which is on the other end of the valley near the monastery. The mountain is also called Horeb in the Bible. The wilderness of Sinai would refer to the large plain that is at the base of the mountain. See further G. E. Wright, IDB 4:376-78; and G. I. Davies, The Way of the Wilderness.
[1:1] 7 tn The construction uses the infinitive construct of יָצַא (yatsa’, “to go out”), with a suffix serving as the subjective genitive, and the lamed preposition providing the temporal indication: “according to the going out of them.” The Israelites are clearly intended as the subject.
[1:1] 8 tn Heb “they”; the referent (the Israelites) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:1] 9 sn This means that the Israelites had spent nine months at Sinai, because they had arrived there in the third month following the exodus. This account does not follow a strict chronology (see Num 9:1). The difference of one month in the narrative is not a critical difference, but a literary general reference. Here begins a new section of major importance to the future of the nation – the numbering for war and for settlement.
[1:1] 10 tn Heb “saying.” A new sentence was started here in the English translation for stylistic reasons.
[1:2] 11 tn The construction is literally “lift up the head[s],” (שְׂאוּ אֶת־רֹאשׁ, sÿ’u ’et-ro’sh). This idiom for taking a census occurs elsewhere (Exod 30:12; Lev 5:24; Num 1:24; etc.). The idea is simply that of counting heads to arrive at the base for the standing army. This is a different event than the one recorded in Exod 30:11-16, which was taken for a different purpose altogether. The verb is plural, indicating that Moses had help in taking the census.
[1:2] 12 tc Smr lacks the Hebrew word “all” here.
[1:2] 13 tn Heb “the congregation of Israel.”
[1:2] 14 tn The tribe (מַטֶּה, matteh or שֵׁבֶט, shevet) is the main category. The family groups or clans (מִשְׁפְּחֹת, mishpÿkhot) and the households or families (בֵּית אֲבֹת, bet ’avot) were sub-divisions of the tribe.
[1:2] 15 tn This clause simply has “in/with the number of the names of every male with respect to their skulls [individually].” Counting heads, or every skull, simply meant that each person was to be numbered in the census. Except for the Levites, no male was exempt from the count.
[1:3] 16 tn The verb (פָּקַד, paqad) means “to visit, appoint, muster, number.” The word is a common one in scripture. It has as its basic meaning the idea of “determining the destiny” of someone, by appointing, mustering, or visiting. When God “visits,” it is a divine intervention for either blessing or cursing. Here it is the taking of a census for war (see G. André, Determining the Destiny [ConBOT], 16).
[1:3] 17 tn The construction uses the participle “going out” followed by the noun “army.” It describes everyone “going out in a military group,” meaning serving in the army. It was the duty of every able-bodied Israelite to serve in this “peoples” army. There were probably exemptions for the infirm or the crippled, but every male over twenty was chosen. For a discussion of warfare, see P. C. Craigie, The Problem of War in the Old Testament, and P. D. Miller, “The Divine Council and the Prophetic Call to War,” VT 18 (1968): 100-107.
[1:3] 18 tn The text simply has “from twenty years old and higher.”
[1:3] 20 tn The noun (צָבָא, tsava’) means “army” or “military group.” But the word can also be used for nonmilitary divisions of labor (Num 4:3).
[1:4] 21 tn Heb “and with you.”
[1:4] 22 tn The construction uses the noun in a distributive sense: “a man, a man for a tribe,” meaning a man for each tribe.
[1:4] 23 tn The clause expresses a distributive function, “a man” means “each man.”
[1:4] 24 sn See J. R. Bartlett, “The Use of the Word ראשׁ as a Title in the Old Testament,” VT 19 (1969): 1-10.
[1:4] 25 tn Heb “the house of his fathers.”
[1:5] 26 tn The verb is עָמַד (’amad, “to stand”). It literally then is, “who will stand with you.” They will help in the count, but they will also serve as leaders as the camp moves from place to place.
[1:5] 27 tn The preposition lamed (ל) prefixed to the name could be taken in the sense of “from,” but could also be “with regard to” (specification).
[1:6] 28 sn This name and the name Ammishaddai below have the theophoric element (שַׁדַּי, shadday, “the Almighty”). It would mean “the Almighty is my rock”; the later name means “the Almighty is my kinsman.” Other theophoric elements in the passage are “father,” “brother,” and “God.”
[1:7] 29 sn Nahshon was an ancestor of Boaz and David, and therefore of Christ (Luke 3:32-33).
[1:14] 30 tc There is a textual difficulty with this verb. The Greek form uses r and not d, giving the name Ra‘oul. There is even some variation in the Hebrew traditions, but BHS (following the Leningrad codex of
[1:16] 31 tc The form has a Kethib-Qere problem, but the sentence calls for the Qere, the passive participle in the construct – “the called of….” These men were God’s choice, and not Moses’, or their own choice. He announced who they would be, and then named them. So they were truly “called” (קָרָא, qara’). The other reading is probably due to a copyist’s error.
[1:16] 32 tn The word is נָשִׂיא (nasi’, “exalted one, prince, leader”). Cf. KJV, ASV, NAB “princes.” These were men apparently revered or respected in their tribes, and so the clear choice to assist Moses with the leadership. See further, E. A. Speiser, “Background and Function of the Biblical na„sÃþá,” CBQ 25 (1963): 111-17.
[1:16] 33 tn Heb “exalted ones of the tribes of their fathers.” The earlier group of elders was chosen by Moses at the advice of his father-in-law. This group represents the few leaders of the tribes that were chosen by God, a more literate group apparently, who were the forerunners of the שֹׁטְּרִים (shottÿrim).
[1:16] 34 tc The Hebrew text has אַלְפֵי (’alfey, “thousands of”). There is some question over this reading in the MT, however. The community groups that have these leaders were larger tribes, but there is little certainty about the size of the divisions.
[1:18] 35 tn The verb is the Hiphil of the root קָהַל (qahal), meaning “to call, assemble”; the related noun is an “assembly.”
[1:18] 36 tc The LXX adds “of the second year.”
[1:18] 37 tn The verb is the Hitpael preterite form וַיִּתְיַלְדוּ (vayyityaldu). The cognate noun תּוֹלְדוֹת (tolÿdot) is the word that means “genealogies, family records, records of ancestry.” The root is יָלַד (yalad, “to bear, give birth to”). Here they were recording their family connections, and not, of course, producing children. The verbal stem seems to be both declarative and reflexive.
[1:18] 38 tn The verb is supplied. The Hebrew text simply has “in/with the number of names of those who are twenty years old and higher according to their skulls.”
[1:21] 39 tn Heb “those numbered of them.” The form is פְּקֻדֵיהֶם (pÿqudehem), the passive participle with the pronominal suffix. This indicates that the number came to 46,500, but it specifically refers to “those numbered.” This expression occurs frequently throughout the book of Numbers.
[1:21] 40 sn There has been much discussion about the numbers in the Israelite wilderness experience. The immediate difficulty for even the casual reader is the enormous number of the population. If indeed there were 603,550 men twenty years of age and older who could fight, the total population of the exodus community counting women and children would have been well over a million, or even two million as calculated by some. This is not a figure that the Bible ever gives, but given the sizes of families the estimate would not be far off. This is a staggering number to have cross the Sea, drink from the oases, or assemble in the plain by Sinai. It is not a question of whether or not God could provide for such a number; it is rather a problem of logistics for a population of that size in that period of time. The problem is not with the text itself, but with the interpretation of the word אֶלֶף (’elef), traditionally translated “thousand.” The word certainly can be taken as “thousand,” and most often is. But in view of the problem of the large number here, some scholars have chosen one of the other meanings attested in literature for this word, perhaps “troop,” or “family,” or “tent group,” even though a word for “family” has already been used (see A. H. McNeile, Numbers, 7; J. Garstang, Joshua-Judges, 120; J. Bright, History of Israel, 144). Another suggestion is to take the word as a “chief” or “captain” based on Ugaritic usage (see R. E. D. Clarke, “The Large Numbers of the Old Testament,” JTVI 87 [1955]: 82-92; and J. W. Wenham, “Large Numbers in the Old Testament,” TynBul 18 [1967]: 19-53). This interpretation would reduce the size of the Israelite army to about 18,000 men from a population of about 72,000 people. That is a radical change from the traditional reading and may be too arbitrary an estimate. A more unlikely calculation following the idea of a new meaning would attempt to divide the numbers and use the first part to refer to the units and the second the measurement (e.g., 65 thousand and four hundred would become 65 units of four hundred). Another approach has been to study the numbers rhetorically, analyzing the numerical values of letters and words. But this method, known as gematria, came in much later than the biblical period (see for it G. Fohrer, Introduction to the Old Testament, 184; and A. Noordtzij, Numbers [BSC], 24). On this system the numbers for “the sons of Israel” would be 603. But the number of the people in the MT is 603,550. Another rhetorical approach is that which says the text used exaggerations in the numbers on an epic scale to make the point of God’s blessing. R. B. Allen’s view that the numbers have been magnified by a factor of ten (“Numbers,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 2:688-91), which would mean the army was only 60,000 men, seems every bit as arbitrary as Wenham’s view to get down to 18,000. Moreover, such views cannot be harmonized with the instructions in the chapter for them to count every individual skull – that seems very clear. This is not the same kind of general expression one finds in “Saul has killed his thousands, David his ten thousands” (1 Sam 18:7). There one expects the bragging and the exaggerations. But in a text of numbering each male, to argue that the numbers have been inflated ten-fold to form the rhetoric of praise for the way God has blessed the nation demands a much more convincing argument than has typically been given. On the surface it seems satisfactory, but it raises a lot of questions. Everything in Exodus and Numbers attests to the fact that the Israelites were in a population explosion, that their numbers were greater than their Egyptian overlords. Pharaoh had attempted to counter their growth by killing males from the ranks. That only two midwives are named must be taken to mean that they were heads of the guilds, for two could not service a population – even of the smaller estimate given above. But even though the size had to have been great and seen as a threat, we are at a loss to know exactly how to determine it. There is clearly a problem with the word “thousand” here and in many places in the OT, as the literature will show, but the problem cannot really be solved without additional information. The suggestions proposed so far seem to be rather arbitrary attempts to reduce the number to a less-embarrassing total, one that would seem more workable in the light of contemporary populations and armies, as well as space and time for the people’s movement in the wilderness. An army of 10,000 or 20,000 men in those days would have been a large army; an army of 600,000 (albeit a people’s army, which may mean that only a portion of the males would actually fight at any time – as was true at Ai) is large even by today’s standards. But the count appears to have been literal, and the totals calculated accordingly, totals which match other passages in the text. If some formula is used to reduce the thousands in this army, then there is the problem of knowing what to do when a battle has only five thousand, or three thousand men. One can only conclude that on the basis of what we know the word should be left with the translation “thousand,” no matter what difficulties this might suggest to the reader. One should be cautious, though, in speaking of a population of two million, knowing that there are serious problems with the calculation of that number, if not with the word “thousand” itself. It is very doubtful that the population of the wilderness community was in the neighborhood of two million. Nevertheless, until a more convincing explanation of the word “thousand” or the calculation of the numbers is provided, one should retain the reading of the MT but note the difficulty with the large numbers.
[1:22] 41 tc Some witnesses have omitted “those that were numbered of them,” to preserve the literary pattern of the text. The omission is supported by the absence of the expression in the Greek as well as in some MT
[1:24] 42 tc The LXX has vv. 24-35 after v. 37.
[1:42] 43 tc The verse does not have the preposition, only “the descendants of Naphtali.”
[1:44] 44 tn The construction uses both the passive participle הַפְּקֻדִים (happÿqudim) and the verb פָּקַד (paqad), giving a literal translation of “these were the numbered ones, whom Moses and Aaron numbered.”
[1:44] 45 tn Heb “they were one man for the house of his fathers.”
[1:45] 46 tn Literally the text has, “and all the numbered of the Israelites were according to their families.” The verb in the sentence is actually without a complement (see v. 46).
[1:47] 47 tn The vav (ו) on this word indicates a disjunction with the previous sequence of reports. It may be taken as a contrastive clause, translated “but” or “however.”
[1:47] 48 tn The construction is unexpected, for Levites would be from the tribe of Levi. The note seems more likely to express that all these people were organized by tribal lineage, and so too the Levites, according to the tribe of their fathers – individual families of Levites.
[1:47] 49 tc The form in the text is הָתְפָּקְדוּ (hotpaqÿdu); if this is correct, then it is an isolated instance of the reflexive of the Qal of פָּקַד (paqad). Some, however, explain the form as the Hitpael without the doubling of the middle letter and with a compensatory lengthening of the vowel before it (G. B. Gray, Numbers [ICC], 10).
[1:48] 50 tn Heb “had spoken to Moses, saying.” The infinitive construct of אָמַר (’amar), sometimes rendered “saying” in older English translations, does not need to be translated, but can be taken simply as the indicator of direct discourse. Most recent English translations, including the present one, leave the form untranslated for stylistic reasons to avoid redundancy.
[1:49] 51 sn From the giving of the Law on the priesthood comes the prerogative of the tribe of Levi. There were, however, members of other tribes who served as priests from time to time (see Judg 17:5).
[1:49] 52 tn The construction has literally, “only the tribe of Levi you shall not number.” The Greek text rendered the particle אַךְ (’akh) forcefully with “see to it that” or “take care that.” For the uses of this form, see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 65, §388-89.
[1:49] 53 tn Heb “lift up their head.”
[1:49] 54 tn Heb “in the midst of the sons of Israel.”
[1:50] 55 tn The same verb translated “number” (פָּקַד, paqad) is now used to mean “appoint” (הַפְקֵד, hafqed), which focuses more on the purpose of the verbal action of numbering people. Here the idea is that the Levites were appointed to take care of the tabernacle. On the use of this verb with the Levites’ appointment, see M. Gertner, “The Masorah and the Levites,” VT 10 (1960): 252.
[1:50] 56 tn The Hebrew name used here is מִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדֻת (mishkan ha’edut). The tabernacle or dwelling place of the
[1:50] 57 tn The imperfect tense here is an obligatory imperfect telling that they are bound to do this since they are appointed for this specific task.
[1:50] 58 tn The addition of the pronoun before the verb is emphatic – they are the ones who are to attend to the tabernacle. The verb used is שָׁרַת (sharat) in the Piel, indicating that they are to serve, minister to, attend to all the details about this shrine.
[1:50] 59 tn Heb “the tabernacle.” The pronoun (“it”) was used in the translation here for stylistic reasons.
[1:51] 60 tn The construction uses the infinitive construct with the temporal preposition; the “tabernacle” is then the following genitive. Literally it is “and in the moving of the tabernacle,” meaning, “when the tabernacle is supposed to be moved,” i.e., when people are supposed to move it. The verb נָסָע (nasa’) means “pull up the tent pegs and move,” or more simply, “journey.”
[1:51] 61 tn Here we have the parallel construction using the infinitive construct in a temporal adverbial clause.
[1:51] 62 tn Heb “raise it up.”
[1:51] 63 tn The word used here is זָר (zar), normally translated “stranger” or “outsider.” It is most often used for a foreigner, an outsider, who does not belong in Israel, or who, although allowed in the land, may be viewed with suspicion. But here it seems to include even Israelites other than the tribe of Levi.
[1:53] 64 tc Instead of “wrath” the Greek text has “sin,” focusing the emphasis on the human error and not on the wrath of God. This may have been a conscious change to explain the divine wrath.
[1:53] tn Heb “so that there be no wrath on.” In context this is clearly the divine anger, so “the
[1:53] 65 tn The main verb of the clause is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive, וְשָׁמְרוּ (vÿshamÿru) meaning they “shall guard, protect, watch over, care for.” It may carry the same obligatory nuance as the preceding verbs because of the sequence. The object used with this is the cognate noun מִשְׁמֶרֶת (mishmeret): “The Levites must care for the care of the tabernacle.” The cognate intensifies the construction to stress that they are responsible for this care.
[1:54] 66 tc The LXX adds “and Aaron.”
[1:1] 67 tn Grk “James.” The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.
[1:1] 68 tn Traditionally, “servant” or “bondservant.” Though δοῦλος (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.
[1:1] sn Undoubtedly the background for the concept of being the Lord’s slave or servant is to be found in the Old Testament scriptures. For a Jew this concept did not connote drudgery, but honor and privilege. It was used of national Israel at times (Isa 43:10), but was especially associated with famous OT personalities, including such great men as Moses (Josh 14:7), David (Ps 89:3; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8) and Elijah (2 Kgs 10:10); all these men were “servants (or slaves) of the Lord.”
[1:1] 69 tn Grk “to the twelve tribes in the Diaspora.” The Greek term διασπορά (diaspora, “dispersion”) refers to Jews not living in Palestine but “dispersed” or scattered among the Gentiles.
[1:2] 70 tn Grk “brothers,” but the Greek word may be used for “brothers and sisters” or “fellow Christians” as here (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 1, where considerable nonbiblical evidence for the plural ἀδελφοί [adelfoi] meaning “brothers and sisters” is cited). Where the plural term is used in direct address, as here, “brothers and sisters” is used; where the term is singular and not direct address (as in v. 9), “believer” is preferred.
[1:2] 71 tn Grk “all joy,” “full joy,” or “greatest joy.”
[1:8] 72 tn Grk “a man of two minds,” continuing the description of the person in v. 7, giving the reason that he cannot expect to receive anything. The word for “man” or “individual” is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” But it sometimes is used generically to mean “anyone,” “a person,” as here (cf. BDAG 79 s.v. 2).
[1:8] sn A double-minded man is one whose devotion to God is less than total. His attention is divided between God and other things, and as a consequence he is unstable and therefore unable to receive from God.
[1:9] 73 tn Grk “brother.” Here the term “brother” means “fellow believer” or “fellow Christian” (cf. TEV, NLT “Christians”; CEV “God’s people”). The term broadly connotes familial relationships within the family of God (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 2.a).
[1:9] 74 tn Grk “the lowly brother,” but “lowly/humble” is clarified in context by the contrast with “wealthy” in v. 10.
[1:9] 75 tn Grk “let him boast.”
[1:9] 76 tn Grk “his height,” “his exaltation.”
[1:10] 77 tn Grk “a flower of grass.”
[1:11] 78 tn Or “perishes,” “is destroyed.”
[1:12] 79 tn The word for “man” or “individual” here is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” However, as BDAG 79 s.v. 2 says, here it is “equivalent to τὶς someone, a person.”
[1:12] 80 tc Most
[1:13] 81 tn Or “God must not be tested by evil people.”
[1:16] 82 tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.
[1:17] 83 tn The first phrase refers to the action of giving and the second to what is given.
[1:17] 84 tn Or “All generous giving and every perfect gift from above is coming down.”
[1:17] 85 tn Grk “variation or shadow of turning” (referring to the motions of heavenly bodies causing variations of light and darkness).
[1:18] 86 tn Grk “Having willed, he gave us birth.”
[1:19] 87 tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.
[1:20] 88 tn The word translated “human” here is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” But it sometimes is used generically to mean “anyone,” “a person” (cf. BDAG 79 s.v. 2), and in this context, contrasted with “God’s righteousness,” the point is “human” anger (not exclusively “male” anger).
[1:20] 89 sn God’s righteousness could refer to (1) God’s righteous standard, (2) the righteousness God gives, (3) righteousness before God, or (4) God’s eschatological righteousness (see P. H. Davids, James [NIGTC], 93, for discussion).
[1:21] 90 tn Or “with meekness.”
[1:23] 91 tn The word for “man” or “individual” is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” However, as BDAG 79 s.v. 2 says, here it is “equivalent to τὶς someone, a person.”
[1:23] 92 tn Grk “the face of his beginning [or origin].”
[1:24] 93 tn Grk “and he has gone out and immediately has forgotten.”
[1:25] 96 tn Grk “in his doing.”
[1:27] 97 tn Or “in the sight of”; Grk “with.”
[1:27] 98 tn Grk “the God and Father.”
[6:1] 99 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.
[6:1] 100 sn Jesus’ hometown (where he spent his childhood years) was Nazareth, about 20 miles (30 km) southwest of Capernaum.
[6:2] 101 sn See the note on synagogue in 1:21. Jesus undoubtedly took the opportunity on this occasion to speak about his person and mission, and the relation of both to OT fulfillment.
[6:2] 102 tn Or “this teaching”; Grk “these things.” The response of the people centers upon the content of Jesus’ teaching, so the phrase “these ideas” was supplied in the text to make this clear.
[6:3] 103 tc Evidently because of the possible offensiveness of designating Jesus a carpenter, several
[6:3] 104 sn The reference to Jesus as the carpenter is probably derogatory, indicating that they knew Jesus only as a common laborer like themselves. The reference to him as the son of Mary (even though Jesus’ father was probably dead by this point) appears to be somewhat derogatory, for a man was not regarded as his mother’s son in Jewish usage unless an insult was intended (cf. Judg 11:1-2; John 6:42; 8:41; 9:29).
[6:4] 105 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.
[6:6] 106 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.
[6:7] 107 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:7] 108 sn The phrase unclean spirits refers to evil spirits.
[6:8] 109 sn Neither Matt 10:9-10 nor Luke 9:3 allow for a staff. It might be that Matthew and Luke mean not taking an extra staff, or that the expression is merely rhetorical for “traveling light,” which has been rendered in two slightly different ways.
[6:8] 110 tn Or “no traveler’s bag”; or possibly “no beggar’s bag” (L&N 6.145; BDAG 811 s.v. πήρα).
[6:9] 111 tn Or “shirts” (a long garment worn under the cloak next to the skin). The name for this garment (χιτών, citwn) presents some difficulty in translation. Most modern readers would not understand what a “tunic” was any more than they would be familiar with a “chiton.” On the other hand, attempts to find a modern equivalent are also a problem: “Shirt” conveys the idea of a much shorter garment that covers only the upper body, and “undergarment” (given the styles of modern underwear) is more misleading still. “Tunic” was therefore employed, but with a note to explain its nature.
[6:10] 112 sn Jesus telling his disciples to stay there in one house contrasts with the practice of religious philosophers in the ancient world who went from house to house begging.
[6:11] 113 sn To shake the dust off represented shaking off the uncleanness from one’s feet; see Luke 10:11; Acts 13:51; 18:6. It was a sign of rejection.
[6:12] 114 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of previous action(s) in the narrative.
[6:14] 115 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.
[6:14] 116 sn Herod was technically not a king, but a tetrarch, a ruler with rank and authority lower than a king. A tetrarch ruled only with the approval of the Roman authorities. This was roughly equivalent to being governor of a region. In the NT, Herod, who ruled over Galilee, is called a king (Matt 14:9, Mark 6:14-29), reflecting popular usage rather than an official title.
[6:14] 117 tn Grk “his”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:14] 118 tn Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.
[6:14] 119 tn While Matthew and Luke consistently use the noun βαπτίστης (baptisths, “the Baptist”) to refer to John, as a kind of a title, Mark prefers the substantival participle ὁ βαπτίζων (Jo baptizwn, “the one who baptizes, the baptizer”) to describe him (only twice does he use the noun [Mark 6:25; 8:28]).
[6:17] 120 tn Grk “he”; here it is necessary to specify the referent as “Herod,” since the nearest previous antecedent in the translation is Philip.
[6:18] 121 tn The imperfect tense verb is here rendered with an iterative force.
[6:18] 122 sn It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife. This was a violation of OT law (Lev 18:16; 20:21). In addition, both Herod Antipas and Herodias had each left marriages to enter into this union.
[6:19] 123 tn Grk “and.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.
[6:20] 124 tn Grk “was fearing,” “was respecting”; the imperfect tense connotes an ongoing fear or respect for John.
[6:20] 125 tn Grk “he”; the referent (John) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:20] 126 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Herod) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:20] 127 tc In place of ἠπόρει (hporei, “he was baffled”) the majority of
[6:20] tn Or “terribly disturbed,” “rather perplexed.” The verb ἀπορέω (aporew) means “to be in perplexity, with the implication of serious anxiety” (L&N 32.9).
[6:20] 128 tn Grk “and.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “and yet” to indicate the concessive nature of the final clause.
[6:20] 129 tn Grk “him”; the referent (John) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:21] 130 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present in this context.
[6:21] 131 tn Grk “a day of opportunity”; cf. BDAG 407 s.v. εὔκαιρος, “in our lit. only pert. to time than is considered a favorable occasion for some event or circumstance, well-timed, suitable.”
[6:22] 132 tc Behind “his daughter Herodias” is a most difficult textual problem. The reading adopted in the translation, τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ ῾Ηρῳδιάδος (th" qugatro" aujtou Jerwdiado"), is supported by א B D L Δ 565 pc; it is also the most difficult reading internally since it describes Herodias as Herod’s daughter. Other readings are less awkward, but they do not have adequate external support. The reading τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς ῾Ηρῳδιάδος (th" qugatro" auth" th" &erwdiado", “the daughter of Herodias herself”) is supported by A C (W) Θ Ë13 33 Ï, but this is also grammatically awkward. The easiest reading, τῆς θυγατρὸς τῆς ῾Ηρῳδιάδος (“the daughter of Herodias”) is supported by Ë1 pc, but this reading probably arose from an accidental omission of αὐτῆς in the previous reading. The reading τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ ῾Ηρῳδιάδος, despite its historical difficulties, is most likely original due to external attestation and the fact that it most likely gave rise to the other readings as scribes sought to correct it.
[6:23] 133 tc ‡ The witnesses here support several different readings: αὐτῇ πολλά (auth polla, “to her insistently”) is found in D Θ 565 700 it; πολλά is the reading of Ì45vid 28; both words are lacking in L pc; and א A B C2vid Ë13 33 2427 Ï lat have just αὐτῇ. The best candidates for authenticity, on external grounds, are αὐτῇ πολλά and αὐτῇ. So the issue revolves around whether πολλά is part of the text. On the one hand, πολλά used adverbially is a distinctive Markanism (10 of the 16 NT instances are found in Mark; of the other Gospels, Matthew alone adds a single example [Matt 9:14]). It could be argued that such an unremarkable term would go unnoticed by the scribes, and consequently would not have been inserted in imitation of Mark’s style observed elsewhere. On the other hand, the largest cluster of instances of an adverbial πολλά are in Mark 5-6, with the most recent example coming just three verses earlier (Mark 5:23, 38, 43; 6:20). Scribes may well have imitated the usage so recently and so frequently seen. Further, the best Alexandrian witnesses, as well as good representatives of the Western and Byzantines texts, lack πολλά. On the whole, though a decision is difficult, it is probably best to read the text without πολλά. NA27 places the word in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.
[6:23] 134 sn The expression up to half my kingdom is a proverbial comment meaning “great wealth.”
[6:24] 135 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of previous action(s) in the narrative.
[6:24] 136 tn Grk “She said”; the referent (the girl’s mother) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:24] 137 tn While Matthew and Luke consistently use the noun βαπτίστης (baptisths, “the Baptist”) to refer to John, as a kind of a title, Mark employs the substantival participle ὁ βαπτίζων (Jo baptizwn, “the one who baptizes, the baptizer”) to describe him (though twice he does use the noun [Mark 6:25; 8:28]).
[6:25] 138 tn Grk “she asked, saying.” The participle λέγουσα (legousa) is redundant and has not been translated.
[6:26] 139 tn Grk “and being deeply grieved, the king did not want.”
[6:27] 140 tn Grk “And.” Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate the implied result of previous action(s) in the narrative.
[6:27] 141 tn Grk “his”; the referent (John the Baptist) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:29] 142 tn Grk “his”; the referent (John the Baptist) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
