Kejadian 23:4

23:4 “I am a temporary settler ¹  among you. Grant ²  me ownership ³  of a burial site among you so that I may ⁴  bury my dead.” ⁵ 

Ayub 17:13-16

17:13 If ⁶  I hope for the grave to be my home,

if I spread out my bed in darkness,

17:14 If I cry ⁷  to corruption, ⁸  ‘You are my father,’

and to the worm, ‘My Mother,’ or ‘My sister,’

17:15 where then ⁹  is my hope?

And my hope, ¹⁰  who sees it?

17:16 Will ¹¹  it ¹²  go down to the barred gates ¹³  of death?

Will ¹⁴  we descend ¹⁵  together into the dust?”

Ayub 19:26

19:26 And after my skin has been destroyed, ¹⁶ 

yet in my flesh ¹⁷  I will see God, ¹⁸ 

Ayub 21:26

21:26 Together they lie down in the dust,

and worms cover over them both.

Ayub 34:15

34:15 all flesh would perish together

and human beings would return to dust.

Mazmur 22:15

22:15 The roof of my mouth ¹⁹  is as dry as a piece of pottery;

my tongue sticks to my gums. ²⁰ 

You ²¹  set me in the dust of death. ²² 

Mazmur 22:29

22:29 All of the thriving people ²³  of the earth will join the celebration and worship; ²⁴ 

all those who are descending into the grave ²⁵  will bow before him,

including those who cannot preserve their lives. ²⁶ 

Mazmur 104:29

104:29 When you ignore them, they panic. ²⁷ 

When you take away their life’s breath, they die

and return to dust.

Amsal 21:16

21:16 The one who wanders ²⁸  from the way of wisdom ²⁹ 

will end up ³⁰  in the company of the departed. ³¹ 

Pengkhotbah 3:20

3:20 Both go to the same place,

both come from the dust,

and to dust both return.

Pengkhotbah 12:7

12:7 and the dust returns to the earth as it was,

and the life’s breath ³²  returns to God who gave it.

Daniel 12:2

12:2 Many of those who sleep

in the dusty ground will awake –

some to everlasting life,

and others to shame and everlasting abhorrence. ³³ 

Roma 5:12-21

The Amplification of Justification

5:12 So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all people ³⁴  because ³⁵  all sinned – 5:13 for before the law was given, ³⁶  sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin ³⁷  when there is no law. 5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who did not sin in the same way that Adam (who is a type ³⁸  of the coming one) transgressed. ³⁹  5:15 But the gracious gift is not like the transgression. ⁴⁰  For if the many died through the transgression of the one man, ⁴¹  how much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ multiply to the many! 5:16 And the gift is not like the one who sinned. ⁴²  For judgment, resulting from the one transgression, ⁴³  led to condemnation, but ⁴⁴  the gracious gift from the many failures ⁴⁵  led to justification. 5:17 For if, by the transgression of the one man, ⁴⁶  death reigned through the one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ!

5:18 Consequently, ⁴⁷  just as condemnation ⁴⁸  for all people ⁴⁹  came ⁵⁰  through one transgression, ⁵¹  so too through the one righteous act ⁵²  came righteousness leading to life ⁵³  for all people. 5:19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man ⁵⁴  many ⁵⁵  were made sinners, so also through the obedience of one man ⁵⁶  many ⁵⁷  will be made righteous. 5:20 Now the law came in ⁵⁸  so that the transgression ⁵⁹  may increase, but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more, 5:21 so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace will reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Roma 5:1

The Expectation of Justification

5:1 ⁶⁰ Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have ⁶¹  peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,

Kolose 1:21-22

Paul’s Goal in Ministry

1:21 And you were at one time strangers and enemies in your ⁶²  minds ⁶³  as expressed through ⁶⁴  your evil deeds, 1:22 but now he has reconciled you ⁶⁵  by his physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him –

[23:4]  ¹ tn Heb “a resident alien and a settler.”

[23:4]  ² tn Heb “give,” which is used here as an idiom for “sell” (see v. 9). The idiom reflects the polite bartering that was done in the culture at the time.

[23:4]  ³ tn Or “possession.”

[23:4]  ⁴ tn Following the imperative, the cohortative with the prefixed conjunction expresses purpose.

[23:4]  ⁵ tn Heb “bury my dead out of my sight.” The last phrase “out of my sight” has not been included in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[17:13]  ⁶ tn The clause begins with אִם (’im) which here has more of the sense of “since.” E. Dhorme (Job, 253) takes a rather rare use of the word to get “Can I hope again” (see also GKC 475 §150.f for the caveat).

[17:14]  ⁷ tn This is understood because the conditional clauses seem to run to the apodosis in v. 15.

[17:14]  ⁸ tn The word שַׁחַת (shakhat) may be the word “corruption” from a root שָׁחַת (shakhat, “to destroy”) or a word “pit” from שׁוּחַ (shuakh, “to sink down”). The same problem surfaces in Ps 16:10, where it is parallel to “Sheol.” E. F. Sutcliffe, The Old Testament and the Future Life, 76ff., defends the meaning “corruption.” But many commentators here take it to mean “the grave” in harmony with “Sheol.” But in this verse “worms” would suggest “corruption” is better.

[17:15]  ⁹ tn The adverb אֵפוֹ (’efo, “then”) plays an enclitic role here (see Job 4:7).

[17:15]  ¹⁰ tn The repetition of “my hope” in the verse has thrown the versions off, and their translations have led commentators also to change the second one to something like “goodness,” on the assumption that a word cannot be repeated in the same verse. The word actually carries two different senses here. The first would be the basic meaning “hope,” but the second a metonymy of cause, namely, what hope produces, what will be seen.

[17:16]  ¹¹ sn It is natural to assume that this verse continues the interrogative clause of the preceding verse.

[17:16]  ¹² tn The plural form of the verb probably refers to the two words, or the two senses of the word in the preceding verse. Hope and what it produces will perish with Job.

[17:16]  ¹³ tn The Hebrew word בַּדִּים (baddim) describes the “bars” or “bolts” of Sheol, referring (by synecdoche) to the “gates of Sheol.” The LXX has “with me to Sheol,” and many adopt that as “by my side.”

[17:16]  ¹⁴ tn The conjunction אִם (’im) confirms the interrogative interpretation.

[17:16]  ¹⁵ tn The translation follows the LXX and the Syriac versions with the change of vocalization in the MT. The MT has the noun “rest,” yielding, “will our rest be together in the dust?” The verb נָחַת (nakhat) in Aramaic means “to go down; to descend.” If that is the preferred reading – and it almost is universally accepted here – then it would be spelled נֵחַת (nekhat). In either case the point of the verse is clearly describing death and going to the grave.

[19:26]  ¹⁶ tn This verse on the whole has some serious interpretation problems that have allowed commentators to go in several directions. The verbal clause is “they strike off this,” which is then to be taken as a passive in view of the fact that there is no expressed subject. Some have thought that Job was referring to this life, and that after his disease had done its worst he would see his vindication (see T. J. Meek, “Job 19:25-27,” VT 6 [1956]: 100-103; E. F. Sutcliffe, “Further notes on Job, textual and exegetical,” Bib 31 [1950]: 377; and others). But Job has been clear – he does not expect to live and see his vindication in this life. There are a host of other interpretations that differ greatly from the sense expressed in the MT. Duhm, for example, has “and another shall arise as my witness.” E. Dhorme (Job, 284-85) argues that the vindication comes after death; he emends the verb to get a translation: “and that, behind my skin, I shall stand up.” He explains this to mean that it will be Job in person who will be present at the ultimate drama. But the interpretation is forced, and really unnecessary.

[19:26]  ¹⁷ tn The Hebrew phrase is “and from my flesh.” This could mean “without my flesh,” i.e., separated from my flesh, or “from my flesh,” i.e., in or with my flesh. The former view is taken by those who think Job’s vindication will come in this life, and who find the idea of a resurrection unlikely to be in Job’s mind. The latter view is taken by those who interpret the preceding line as meaning death and the next verse underscoring that it will be his eye that will see. This would indicate that Job’s faith rises to an unparalleled level at this point.

[19:26]  ¹⁸ tn H. H. Rowley (Job [NCBC], 140) says, “The text of this verse is so difficult, and any convincing reconstruction is so unlikely, that it seems best not to attempt it.” His words have gone unheeded, even by himself, and rightly so. There seem to be two general interpretations, the details of some words notwithstanding. An honest assessment of the evidence would have to provide both interpretations, albeit still arguing for one. Here Job says he will see God. This at the least means that he will witness his vindication, which it seems clear from the other complaints of Job will occur after his death (it is his blood that must be vindicated). But in what way, exactly, Job will see God is not clarified. In this verse the verb that is used is often used of prophetic visions; but in the next verse the plain word for seeing – with his eye – is used. The fulfillment will be more precise than Job may have understood. Rowley does conclude: “Though there is no full grasping of a belief in a worthwhile Afterlife with God, this passage is a notable landmark in the program toward such a belief.” The difficulty is that Job expects to die – he would like to be vindicated in this life, but is resolved that he will die. (1) Some commentators think that vv. 25 and 26 follow the wish for vindication now; (2) others (traditionally) see it as in the next life. Some of the other interpretations that take a different line are less impressive, such as Kissane’s, “did I but see God…were I to behold God”; or L. Waterman’s translation in the English present, making it a mystic vision in which Job already sees that God is his vindicator (“Note on Job 19:23-27: Job’s Triumph of Faith,” JBL 69 [1950]: 379-80).

[22:15]  ¹⁹ tc Heb “my strength” (כֹּחִי, kokhiy), but many prefer to emend the text to חִכִּי (khikiy, “my palate”; cf. NEB, NRSV “my mouth”) assuming that an error of transposition has occurred in the traditional Hebrew text.

[22:15]  ²⁰ tn Cf. NEB “my jaw”; NASB, NRSV “my jaws”; NIV “the roof of my mouth.”

[22:15]  ²¹ sn Here the psalmist addresses God and suggests that God is ultimately responsible for what is happening because of his failure to intervene (see vv. 1-2, 11).

[22:15]  ²² sn The imperfect verbal form draws attention to the progressive nature of the action. The psalmist is in the process of dying.

[22:29]  ²³ tn Heb “fat [ones].” This apparently refers to those who are healthy and robust, i.e., thriving. In light of the parallelism, some prefer to emend the form to יְשֵׁנֵי (yÿsheney, “those who sleep [in the earth]”; cf. NAB, NRSV), but דִּשְׁנֵי (dishney, “fat [ones]”) seems to form a merism with “all who descend into the grave” in the following line. The psalmist envisions all people, whether healthy or dying, joining in worship of the Lord.

[22:29]  ²⁴ tn Heb “eat and worship.” The verb forms (a perfect followed by a prefixed form with vav [ו] consecutive) are normally used in narrative to relate completed actions. Here the psalmist uses the forms rhetorically as he envisions a time when the Lord will receive universal worship. The mood is one of wishful thinking and anticipation; this is not prophecy in the strict sense.

[22:29]  ²⁵ tn Heb “all of the ones going down [into] the dust.” This group stands in contrast to those mentioned in the previous line. Together the two form a merism encompassing all human beings – the healthy, the dying, and everyone in between.

[22:29]  ²⁶ tn Heb “and his life he does not revive.”

[104:29]  ²⁷ tn Heb “you hide your face, they are terrified.”

[21:16]  ²⁸ tn The text uses “man” as the subject and the active participle תּוֹעֶה (to’eh) as the predicate. The image of “wandering off the path” signifies leaving a life of knowledge, prudence, and discipline.

[21:16]  ²⁹ tn Or “prudence”; KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV “understanding”; NLT “common sense.”

[21:16]  ³⁰ tn Heb “will remain” or “will rest.” The Hebrew word נוּחַ (nuakh) does not here carry any of the connotations of comforting repose in death that the righteous enjoy; it simply means “to remain; to reside; to dwell.” The choice of this verb might have an ironic twist to it, reminding the wicked what might have been.

[21:16]  ³¹ sn The departed are the Shades (the Rephaim). The literal expression “will rest among the Shades” means “will be numbered among the dead.” So once again physical death is presented as the punishment for folly.

[12:7]  ³² tn Or “spirit.” The likely referent is the life’s breath that originates with God. See Eccl 3:19, as well as Gen 2:7; 6:17; 7:22.

[12:2]  ³³ sn This verse is the only undisputed reference to a literal resurrection found in the Hebrew Bible.

[5:12]  ³⁴ tn Here ἀνθρώπους (anqrwpou") has been translated as a generic (“people”) since both men and women are clearly intended in this context.

[5:12]  ³⁵ tn The translation of the phrase ἐφ᾿ ᾧ (ef Jw) has been heavily debated. For a discussion of all the possibilities, see C. E. B. Cranfield, “On Some of the Problems in the Interpretation of Romans 5.12,” SJT 22 (1969): 324-41. Only a few of the major options can be mentioned here: (1) the phrase can be taken as a relative clause in which the pronoun refers to Adam, “death spread to all people in whom [Adam] all sinned.” (2) The phrase can be taken with consecutive (resultative) force, meaning “death spread to all people with the result that all sinned.” (3) Others take the phrase as causal in force: “death spread to all people because all sinned.”

[5:13]  ³⁶ tn Grk “for before the law.”

[5:13]  ³⁷ tn Or “sin is not reckoned.”

[5:14]  ³⁸ tn Or “pattern.”

[5:14]  ³⁹ tn Or “disobeyed”; Grk “in the likeness of Adam’s transgression.”

[5:15]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “but not as the transgression, so also [is] the gracious gift.”

[5:15]  ⁴¹ sn Here the one man refers to Adam (cf. 5:14).

[5:16]  ⁴² tn Grk “and not as through the one who sinned [is] the gift.”

[5:16]  ⁴³ tn The word “transgression” is not in the Greek text at this point, but has been supplied for clarity.

[5:16]  ⁴⁴ tn Greek emphasizes the contrast between these two clauses more than can be easily expressed in English.

[5:16]  ⁴⁵ tn Or “falls, trespasses,” the same word used in vv. 15, 17, 18, 20.

[5:17]  ⁴⁶ sn Here the one man refers to Adam (cf. 5:14).

[5:18]  ⁴⁷ tn There is a double connective here that cannot be easily preserved in English: “consequently therefore,” emphasizing the conclusion of what he has been arguing.

[5:18]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “[it is] unto condemnation for all people.”

[5:18]  ⁴⁹ tn Here ἀνθρώπους (anqrwpou") has been translated as a generic (“people”) since both men and women are clearly intended in this context.

[5:18]  ⁵⁰ tn There are no verbs in the Greek text of v. 18, forcing translators to supply phrases like “came through one transgression,” “resulted from one transgression,” etc.

[5:18]  ⁵¹ sn One transgression refers to the sin of Adam in Gen 3:1-24.

[5:18]  ⁵² sn The one righteous act refers to Jesus’ death on the cross.

[5:18]  ⁵³ tn Grk “righteousness of life.”

[5:19]  ⁵⁴ sn Here the one man refers to Adam (cf. 5:14).

[5:19]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “the many.”

[5:19]  ⁵⁶ sn One man refers here to Jesus Christ.

[5:19]  ⁵⁷ tn Grk “the many.”

[5:20]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “slipped in.”

[5:20]  ⁵⁹ tn Or “trespass.”

[5:1]  ⁶⁰ sn Many interpreters see Rom 5:1 as beginning the second major division of the letter.

[5:1]  ⁶¹ tc A number of important witnesses have the subjunctive ἔχωμεν (ecwmen, “let us have”) instead of ἔχομεν (ecomen, “we have”) in v. 1. Included in the subjunctive’s support are א* A B* C D K L 33 81 630 1175 1739* pm lat bo. But the indicative is not without its supporters: א¹ B² F G P Ψ 0220^vid 104 365 1241 1505 1506 1739^c 1881 2464 pm. If the problem were to be solved on an external basis only, the subjunctive would be preferred. Because of this, the “A” rating on behalf of the indicative in the UBS⁴ appears overly confident. Nevertheless, the indicative is probably correct. First, the earliest witness to Rom 5:1 has the indicative (0220^vid, third century). Second, the first set of correctors is sometimes, if not often, of equal importance with the original hand. Hence, א¹ might be given equal value with א*. Third, there is a good cross-section of witnesses for the indicative: Alexandrian (in 0220^vid, probably א¹ 1241 1506 1881 al), Western (in F G), and Byzantine (noted in NA²⁷ as pm). Thus, although the external evidence is strongly in favor of the subjunctive, the indicative is represented well enough that its ancestry could easily go back to the original. Turning to the internal evidence, the indicative gains much ground. (1) The variant may have been produced via an error of hearing (since omicron and omega were pronounced alike in ancient Greek). This, of course, does not indicate which reading was original – just that an error of hearing may have produced one of them. In light of the indecisiveness of the transcriptional evidence, intrinsic evidence could play a much larger role. This is indeed the case here. (2) The indicative fits well with the overall argument of the book to this point. Up until now, Paul has been establishing the “indicatives of the faith.” There is only one imperative (used rhetorically) and only one hortatory subjunctive (and this in a quotation within a diatribe) up till this point, while from ch. 6 on there are sixty-one imperatives and seven hortatory subjunctives. Clearly, an exhortation would be out of place in ch. 5. (3) Paul presupposes that the audience has peace with God (via reconciliation) in 5:10. This seems to assume the indicative in v. 1. (4) As C. E. B. Cranfield notes, “it would surely be strange for Paul, in such a carefully argued writing as this, to exhort his readers to enjoy or to guard a peace which he has not yet explicitly shown to be possessed by them” (Romans [ICC], 1:257). (5) The notion that εἰρήνην ἔχωμεν (eirhnhn ecwmen) can even naturally mean “enjoy peace” is problematic (ExSyn 464), yet those who embrace the subjunctive have to give the verb some such force. Thus, although the external evidence is stronger in support of the subjunctive, the internal evidence points to the indicative. Although a decision is difficult, ἔχομεν appears to be the authentic reading.

[1:21]  ⁶² tn The article τῇ (th) has been translated as a possessive pronoun (ExSyn 215).

[1:21]  ⁶³ tn Although διανοία (dianoia) is singular in Greek, the previous plural noun ἐχθρούς (ecqrous) indicates that all those from Colossae are in view here.

[1:21]  ⁶⁴ tn The dative ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις τοῖς πονηροῖς (en toi" ergoi" toi" ponhroi") is taken as means, indicating the avenue through which hostility in the mind is revealed and made known.

[1:22]  ⁶⁵ tc Some of the better representatives of the Alexandrian and Western texts have a passive verb here instead of the active ἀποκατήλλαξεν (apokathllaxen, “he has reconciled”): ἀποκατηλλάγητε (apokathllaghte) in (Ì⁴⁶) B, ἀποκατήλλακται [sic] (apokathllaktai) in 33, and ἀποκαταλλαγέντες (apokatallagente") in D* F G. Yet the active verb is strongly supported by א A C D² Ψ 048 075 [0278] 1739 1881 Ï lat sy. Internally, the passive creates an anacoluthon in that it looks back to the accusative ὑμᾶς (Juma", “you”) of v. 21 and leaves the following παραστῆσαι (parasthsai) dangling (“you were reconciled…to present you”). The passive reading is certainly the harder reading. As such, it may well explain the rise of the other readings. At the same time, it is possible that the passive was produced by scribes who wanted some symmetry between the ποτε (pote, “at one time”) of v. 21 and the νυνὶ δέ (nuni de, “but now”) of v. 22: Since a passive periphrastic participle is used in v. 21, there may have a temptation to produce a corresponding passive form in v. 22, handling the ὑμᾶς of v. 21 by way of constructio ad sensum. Since παραστῆσαι occurs ten words later, it may not have been considered in this scribal modification. Further, the Western reading (ἀποκαταλλαγέντες) hardly seems to have arisen from ἀποκατηλλάγητε (contra TCGNT 555). As difficult as this decision is, the preferred reading is the active form because it is superior externally and seems to explain the rise of all forms of the passive readings.

[1:22]  tn The direct object is omitted in the Greek text, but it is clear from context that “you” (ὑμᾶς, Jumas) is implied.