Kejadian 30:2

30:2 Jacob became furious ¹  with Rachel and exclaimed, “Am I in the place of God, who has kept you from having children?” ² 

Keluaran 4:16

4:16 He ³  will speak for you to the people, and it will be as if ⁴  he ⁵  were your mouth ⁶  and as if you were his God. ⁷ 

Keluaran 4:2

4:2 The Lord said to him, “What is that in your hand?” He said, “A staff.” ⁸ 

Kolose 1:20

1:20 and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross – through him, ⁹  whether things on earth or things in heaven.

[30:2]  ¹ tn Heb “and the anger of Jacob was hot.”

[30:2]  ² tn Heb “who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb.”

[4:16]  ³ tn The word “he” represents the Hebrew independent pronoun, which makes the subject emphatic.

[4:16]  ⁴ tn The phrase “as if” is supplied for clarity.

[4:16]  ⁵ tn Heb “and it will be [that] he, he will be to you for a mouth,” or more simply, “he will be your mouth.”

[4:16]  ⁶ tn Heb “he will be to you for a mouth.”

[4:16]  ⁷ tn The phrase “as if” is supplied for clarity. The word “you” represents the Hebrew independent pronoun, which makes the subject emphatic.

[4:16]  sn Moses will be like God to Aaron, giving him the words to say, inspiring him as God would inspire a prophet. The whole process had now been removed one step. Instead of God speaking to Moses and Moses telling the people, Aaron would be the speaker for a while. But God was still going to work through Moses.

[4:2]  ⁸ tn Or “rod” (KJV, ASV); NCV, CEV “walking stick”; NLT “shepherd’s staff.”

[4:2]  sn The staff appears here to be the shepherd’s staff that he was holding. It now will become the instrument with which Moses will do the mighty works, for it is the medium of the display of the divine power (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 27; also, L. Shalit, “How Moses Turned a Staff into a Snake and Back Again,” BAR 9 [1983]: 72-73).

[1:20]  ⁹ tc The presence or absence of the second occurrence of the phrase δι᾿ αὐτοῦ (di’ autou, “through him”) is a difficult textual problem to solve. External evidence is fairly evenly divided. Many ancient and excellent witnesses lack the phrase (B D* F G I 0278 81 1175 1739 1881 2464 al latt sa), but equally important witnesses have it (Ì⁴⁶ א A C D¹ Ψ 048^vid 33 Ï). Both readings have strong Alexandrian support, which makes the problem difficult to decide on external evidence alone. Internal evidence points to the inclusion of the phrase as original. The word immediately preceding the phrase is the masculine pronoun αὐτοῦ (autou); thus the possibility of omission through homoioteleuton in various witnesses is likely. Scribes might have deleted the phrase because of perceived redundancy or awkwardness in the sense: The shorter reading is smoother and more elegant, so scribes would be prone to correct the text in that direction. As far as style is concerned, repetition of key words and phrases for emphasis is not foreign to the corpus Paulinum (see, e.g., Rom 8:23, Eph 1:13, 2 Cor 12:7). In short, it is easier to account for the shorter reading arising from the longer reading than vice versa, so the longer reading is more likely original.