Yeremia 4:22

4:22 The Lord answered, ¹ 

“This will happen ²  because my people are foolish.

They do not know me.

They are like children who have no sense. ³ 

They have no understanding.

They are skilled at doing evil.

They do not know how to do good.”

Yeremia 22:16

22:16 He upheld the cause of the poor and needy.

So things went well for Judah.’ ⁴ 

The Lord says,

‘That is a good example of what it means to know me.’ ⁵ 

Yeremia 31:34

31:34 “People will no longer need to teach their neighbors and relatives to know me. ⁶  For all of them, from the least important to the most important, will know me,” ⁷  says the Lord. “For ⁸  I will forgive their sin and will no longer call to mind the wrong they have done.”

Yudas 1:10

1:10 But these men do not understand the things they slander, and they are being destroyed by the very things that, like irrational animals, they instinctively comprehend. ⁹ 

Yudas 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Jude, ¹⁰  a slave ¹¹  of Jesus Christ and brother of James, ¹²  to those who are called, wrapped in the love of ¹³  God the Father and kept for ¹⁴  Jesus Christ.

1 Samuel 2:12

Eli’s Sons Misuse Their Sacred Office

2:12 The sons of Eli were wicked men. ¹⁵  They did not recognize the Lord’s authority. ¹⁶ 

Hosea 4:1-3

The Lord’s Covenant Lawsuit against the Nation Israel

4:1 Hear the word of the Lord, you Israelites! ¹⁷ 

For the Lord has a covenant lawsuit ¹⁸  against the people of Israel. ¹⁹ 

For there is neither faithfulness nor loyalty in the land,

nor do they acknowledge God. ²⁰ 

4:2 There is only cursing, lying, murder, stealing, and adultery.

They resort to violence and bloodshed. ²¹ 

4:3 Therefore the land will mourn,

and all its inhabitants will perish. ²² 

The wild animals, ²³  the birds of the sky,

and even the fish in the sea will perish.

Yohanes 8:54-55

8:54 Jesus replied, ²⁴  “If I glorify myself, my glory is worthless. ²⁵  The one who glorifies me is my Father, about whom you people ²⁶  say, ‘He is our God.’ 8:55 Yet ²⁷  you do not know him, but I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, ²⁸  I would be a liar like you. But I do know him, and I obey ²⁹  his teaching. ³⁰ 

Yohanes 17:3

17:3 Now this ³¹  is eternal life ³²  – that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, ³³  whom you sent.

Roma 1:28

1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, ³⁴  God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done. ³⁵ 

Roma 1:2

1:2 This gospel ³⁶  he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures,

Kolose 4:4-6

4:4 Pray that I may make it known as I should. ³⁷  4:5 Conduct yourselves ³⁸  with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunities. 4:6 Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you should answer everyone.

[4:22]  ¹ tn These words are not in the text but are supplied in the translation to show clearly the shift in speaker. Jeremiah has been speaking; now the Lord answers, giving the reason for the devastation Jeremiah foresees.

[4:22]  ² tn Heb “For….” This gives the explanation for the destruction envisaged in 4:20 to which Jeremiah responds in 4:19, 21.

[4:22]  ³ tn Heb “They are senseless children.”

[22:16]  ⁴ tn The words “for Judah” are not in the text, but the absence of the preposition plus object as in the preceding verse suggests that this is a more general statement, i.e., “things went well for everyone.”

[22:16]  ⁵ tn Heb “Is that not what it means to know me.” The question is rhetorical and expects a positive answer. It is translated in the light of the context.

[22:16]  sn Comparison of the usage of the words “know me” in their context in Jer 2:8; 9:3, 6, 24 and here will show that more than mere intellectual knowledge is involved. It involves also personal commitment to God and obedience to the demands of the agreements with him. The word “know” is used in ancient Near Eastern treaty contexts of submission to the will of the overlord. See further the notes on 9:3.

[31:34]  ⁶ tn Heb “teach…, saying, ‘Know the Lord.’” The indirect quote has been chosen for stylistic reasons, i.e., to better parallel the following line.

[31:34]  sn As mentioned in the translator’s note on 9:3 (9:2 HT) “knowing” God in covenant contexts like this involves more than just an awareness of who he is (9:23 [9:22 HT]). It involves an acknowledgment of his sovereignty and whole hearted commitment to obedience to him. This is perhaps best seen in the parallelisms in Hos 4:1; 6:6 where “the knowledge of God” is parallel with faithfulness and steadfast love and in the context of Hos 4 refers to obedience to the Lord’s commands.

[31:34]  ⁷ sn This statement should be understood against the background of Jer 8:8-9 where class distinctions were drawn and certain people were considered to have more awareness and responsibility for knowing the law and also Jer 5:1-5 and 9:3-9 where the sinfulness of Israel was seen to be universal across these class distinctions and no trust was to be placed in friends, neighbors, or relatives because all without distinction had cast off God’s yoke (i.e., refused to submit themselves to his authority).

[31:34]  ⁸ tn The Hebrew particle כִּי (ki) that introduces this clause refers to more than just the preceding clause (i.e., that all will know the Lord) but to all of vv. 31-34a (See BDB 474 s.v. כִּי 3.c).

[1:10]  ⁹ tn Or “they should naturally comprehend.” The present tense in this context may have a conative force.

[1:10]  sn They instinctively comprehend. Like irrational animals, these false teachers do grasp one thing – the instinctive behavior of animals in heat. R. Bauckham (Jude, 2 Peter [WBC], 63) notes that “Though they claim to be guided by special spiritual insight gained in heavenly revelations, they are in fact following the sexual instincts which they share with the animals.” Jude’s focus is somewhat different from Peter’s: Peter argued that, like irrational animals who are born to be caught and killed, these men will be destroyed when destroying others (2 Pet 2:12). Jude, however, does not mention the destruction of animals, just that these false teachers will be destroyed for mimicking them.

[1:1]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “Judas,” traditionally “Jude” in English versions to distinguish him from the one who betrayed Jesus. The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ¹¹ tn 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.). At the same time, perhaps “servant” is apt in that the δοῦλος of Jesus Christ took on that role voluntarily, unlike a slave. 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]  ¹² sn Although Jude was half-brother of Jesus, he humbly associates himself with James, his full brother. By first calling himself a slave of Jesus Christ, it is evident that he wants no one to place stock in his physical connections. At the same time, he must identify himself further: Since Jude was a common name in the 1st century (two of Jesus’ disciples were so named, including his betrayer), more information was needed, that is to say, brother of James.

[1:1]  ¹³ tn Grk “loved in.” The perfect passive participle suggests that the audience’s relationship to God is not recent; the preposition ἐν (en) before πατρί (patri) could be taken as sphere or instrument (agency is unlikely, however). Another possible translation would be “dear to God.”

[1:1]  ¹⁴ tn Or “by.” Datives of agency are quite rare in the NT (and other ancient Greek), almost always found with a perfect verb. Although this text qualifies, in light of the well-worn idiom of τηρέω (threw) in eschatological contexts, in which God or Christ keeps the believer safe until the parousia (cf. 1 Thess 5:23; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 3:10; other terms meaning “to guard,” “to keep” are also found in similar eschatological contexts [cf. 2 Thess 3:3; 2 Tim 1:12; 1 Pet 1:5; Jude 24]), it is probably better to understand this verse as having such an eschatological tinge. It is at the same time possible that Jude’s language was intentionally ambiguous, implying both ideas (“kept by Jesus Christ [so that they might be] kept for Jesus Christ”). Elsewhere he displays a certain fondness for wordplays; this may be a hint of things to come.

[2:12]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “sons of worthlessness.”

[2:12]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “they did not know the Lord.” The verb here has the semantic nuance “recognize the authority of.” Eli’s sons obviously knew who the Lord was; they served in his sanctuary. But they did not recognize his moral authority.

[4:1]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “sons of Israel” (so NASB); KJV “children of Israel”; NAB, NRSV “people of Israel.”

[4:1]  ¹⁸ tn The noun רִיב (riv, “dispute, lawsuit”) is used in two contexts: (1) nonlegal contexts: (a) “dispute” between individuals (e.g., Gen 13:7; Isa 58:1; Jer 15:10) or (b) “brawl; quarrel” between people (e.g., Exod 17:7; Deut 25:1); and (2) legal contexts: (a) “lawsuit; legal process” (e.g., Exod 23:3-6; Deut 19:17; 21:5; Ezek 44:24; Ps 35:23), (b) “lawsuit; legal case” (e.g., Deut 1:12; 17:8; Prov 18:17; 25:9), and (c) God’s “lawsuit” on behalf of a person or against his own people (Hos 4:1; 12:3; Mic 6:2; HALOT 1225-26 s.v. רִיב). The term in Hosea refers to a covenant lawsuit in which Yahweh the suzerain lodges a legal case against his disobedient vassal, accusing Israel and Judah of breach of covenant which will elicit the covenant curses.

[4:1]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “with the inhabitants of the land” (so KJV); NAB, NASB, NRSV “against the inhabitants of the land.”

[4:1]  ²⁰ tn Heb “there is no truthfulness nor loyalty nor knowledge of God in the land.” Here “knowledge of God” refers to recognition of his authority and obedience to his will.

[4:2]  ²¹ tn Heb “they break out and bloodshed touches bloodshed.” The Hebrew term פָּרַץ (parats, “to break out”) refers to violent and wicked actions (BDB 829 s.v. פָּרַץ 7; HALOT 972 s.v. פרץ 6.c). It is used elsewhere in a concrete sense to describe breaking through physical barriers. Here it is used figuratively to describe breaking moral barriers and restraints (cf. TEV “Crimes increase, and there is one murder after another”).

[4:3]  ²² tn Or “languish” (so KJV, NRSV); NIV “waste away.”

[4:3]  ²³ tn Heb “the beasts of the field” (so NAB, NIV).

[8:54]  ²⁴ tn Grk “Jesus answered.”

[8:54]  ²⁵ tn Grk “is nothing.”

[8:54]  ²⁶ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied in English to clarify the plural Greek pronoun and verb.

[8:55]  ²⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “Yet” to indicate the contrast present in the context.

[8:55]  ²⁸ tn Grk “If I say, ‘I do not know him.’”

[8:55]  ²⁹ tn Grk “I keep.”

[8:55]  ³⁰ tn Grk “his word.”

[17:3]  ³¹ tn Using αὕτη δέ (Jauth de) to introduce an explanation is typical Johannine style; it was used before in John 1:19, 3:19, and 15:12.

[17:3]  ³² sn This is eternal life. The author here defines eternal life for the readers, although it is worked into the prayer in such a way that many interpreters do not regard it as another of the author’s parenthetical comments. It is not just unending life in the sense of prolonged duration. Rather it is a quality of life, with its quality derived from a relationship with God. Having eternal life is here defined as being in relationship with the Father, the one true God, and Jesus Christ whom the Father sent. Christ (Χριστός, Cristos) is not characteristically attached to Jesus’ name in John’s Gospel; it occurs elsewhere primarily as a title and is used with Jesus’ name only in 1:17. But that is connected to its use here: The statement here in 17:3 enables us to correlate the statement made in 1:18 of the prologue, that Jesus has fully revealed what God is like, with Jesus’ statement in 10:10 that he has come that people might have life, and have it abundantly. These two purposes are really one, according to 17:3, because (abundant) eternal life is defined as knowing (being in relationship with) the Father and the Son. The only way to gain this eternal life, that is, to obtain this knowledge of the Father, is through the Son (cf. 14:6). Although some have pointed to the use of know (γινώσκω, ginwskw) here as evidence of Gnostic influence in the Fourth Gospel, there is a crucial difference: For John this knowledge is not intellectual, but relational. It involves being in relationship.

[17:3]  ³³ tn Or “and Jesus the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[1:28]  ³⁴ tn Grk “and just as they did not approve to have God in knowledge.”

[1:28]  ³⁵ tn Grk “the things that are improper.”

[1:2]  ³⁶ tn Grk “the gospel of God, which he promised.” Because of the length and complexity of this sentence in Greek, it was divided into shorter English sentences in keeping with contemporary English style. To indicate the referent of the relative pronoun (“which”), the word “gospel” was repeated at the beginning of v. 2.

[4:4]  ³⁷ tn The phrase begins with the ἵνα (Jina) clause and is subordinate to the imperative προσκαρτερεῖτε (proskartereite) in v. 2. The reference to the idea that Paul must make it known indicates that this clause is probably best viewed as purpose and not content, like the ἵνα of v. 3. It is the second purpose stated in the context; the first is expressed through the infinitive λαλῆσαι (lalhsai) in v. 3. The term “pray” at the beginning of the sentence is intended to pick up the imperative of v. 3.

[4:5]  ³⁸ tn Grk “walk.” The verb περιπατέω (peripatew) is a common NT idiom for one’s lifestyle, behavior, or manner of conduct (L&N 41.11).