Yesaya 55:6-7

55:6 Seek the Lord while he makes himself available; ¹ 

call to him while he is nearby!

55:7 The wicked need to abandon their lifestyle ² 

and sinful people their plans. ³ 

They should return ⁴  to the Lord, and he will show mercy to them, ⁵ 

and to their God, for he will freely forgive them. ⁶ 

Yesaya 55:2

55:2 Why pay money for something that will not nourish you? ⁷ 

Why spend ⁸  your hard-earned money ⁹  on something that will not satisfy?

Listen carefully ¹⁰  to me and eat what is nourishing! ¹¹ 

Enjoy fine food! ¹² 

Kolose 1:19-20

1:19 For God ¹³  was pleased to have all his ¹⁴  fullness dwell ¹⁵  in the Son ¹⁶ 

1:20 and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross – through him, ¹⁷  whether things on earth or things in heaven.

Ibrani 4:6

4:6 Therefore it remains for some to enter it, yet those to whom it was previously proclaimed did not enter because of disobedience.

[55:6]  ¹ tn Heb “while he allows himself to be found.” The Niphal form has a tolerative force here.

[55:7]  ² tn Heb “Let the wicked one abandon his way.” The singular is collective.

[55:7]  ³ tn Heb “and the man of evil his thoughts.” The singular is collective.

[55:7]  ⁴ tn Heb “let him return.” The singular is collective, meaning “let them.”

[55:7]  ⁵ tn The imperfect with vav (ו) conjunctive after the jussive indicates purpose/result.

[55:7]  ⁶ sn The appeal and promise of vv. 6-7 echoes the language of Deut 4:25-31; 30:1-10; and 1 Kgs 8:46-53, all of which anticipate the exile and speak of the prerequisites for restoration.

[55:2]  ⁷ tn Heb “for what is not food.”

[55:2]  ⁸ tn The interrogative particle and the verb “spend” are understood here by ellipsis (note the preceding line).

[55:2]  ⁹ tn Heb “your labor,” which stands by metonymy for that which one earns.

[55:2]  ¹⁰ tn The infinitive absolute follows the imperative and lends emphasis to the exhortation.

[55:2]  ¹¹ tn Heb “good” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV).

[55:2]  ¹² tn Heb “Let your appetite delight in fine food.”

[55:2]  sn Nourishing, fine food here represents the blessings God freely offers. These include forgiveness, a new covenantal relationship with God, and national prominence (see vv. 3-6).

[1:19]  ¹³ tn The noun “God” does not appear in the Greek text, but since God is the one who reconciles the world to himself (cf. 2 Cor 5:19), he is clearly the subject of εὐδόκησεν (eudokhsen).

[1:19]  ¹⁴ tn The Greek article τό (to), insofar as it relates to God, may be translated as a possessive pronoun, i.e., “his.” BDAG 404 s.v. εὐδοκέω 1 translates the phrase as “all the fullness willed to dwell in him” thus leaving the referent as impersonal. Insofar as Paul is alluding to the so-called emanations from God this is acceptable. But the fact that “the fullness” dwells in a person (i.e., “in him”) seems to argue for the translation “his fullness” where “his” refers to God.

[1:19]  ¹⁵ tn The aorist verb κατοικῆσαι (katoikhsai) could be taken as an ingressive, in which case it refers to the incarnation and may be translated as “begin to dwell, to take up residence.” It is perhaps better, though, to take it as a constative aorist and simply a reference to the fact that the fullness of God dwells in Jesus Christ. This is a permanent dwelling, though, not a temporary one, as the present tense in 2:9 makes clear.

[1:19]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “him”; the referent (the Son; see v. 13) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:20]  ¹⁷ 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.