Imamat 27:21

27:21 When it reverts ¹  in the jubilee, the field will be holy to the Lord like a permanently dedicated field; ²  it will become the priest’s property. ³ 

Keluaran 22:20

22:20 “Whoever sacrifices to a god other than the Lord ⁴  alone must be utterly destroyed. ⁵ 

Bilangan 21:2-3

21:2 So Israel made a vow ⁶  to the Lord and said, “If you will indeed deliver ⁷  this people into our ⁸  hand, then we will utterly destroy ⁹  their cities.” 21:3 The Lord listened to the voice of Israel and delivered up the Canaanites, ¹⁰  and they utterly destroyed them and their cities. So the name of the place was called ¹¹  Hormah.

Ulangan 7:1-2

The Dispossession of Nonvassals

7:1 When the Lord your God brings you to the land that you are going to occupy and forces out many nations before you – Hittites, ¹²  Girgashites, ¹³  Amorites, ¹⁴  Canaanites, ¹⁵  Perizzites, ¹⁶  Hivites, ¹⁷  and Jebusites, ¹⁸  seven ¹⁹  nations more numerous and powerful than you – 7:2 and he ²⁰  delivers them over to you and you attack them, you must utterly annihilate ²¹  them. Make no treaty ²²  with them and show them no mercy!

Ulangan 13:15-16

13:15 you must by all means ²³  slaughter the inhabitants of that city with the sword; annihilate ²⁴  with the sword everyone in it, as well as the livestock. 13:16 You must gather all of its plunder into the middle of the plaza ²⁵  and burn the city and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. It will be an abandoned ruin ²⁶  forever – it must never be rebuilt again.

Ulangan 20:16-17

Laws Concerning War with Canaanite Nations

20:16 As for the cities of these peoples that ²⁷  the Lord your God is going to give you as an inheritance, you must not allow a single living thing ²⁸  to survive. 20:17 Instead you must utterly annihilate them ²⁹  – the Hittites, ³⁰  Amorites, ³¹  Canaanites, ³²  Perizzites, ³³  Hivites, ³⁴  and Jebusites ³⁵  – just as the Lord your God has commanded you,

Ulangan 25:19

25:19 So when the Lord your God gives you relief from all the enemies who surround you in the land he ³⁶  is giving you as an inheritance, ³⁷  you must wipe out the memory of the Amalekites from under heaven ³⁸  – do not forget! ³⁹ 

Yosua 6:17-19

6:17 The city and all that is in it must be set apart for the Lord, ⁴⁰  except for Rahab the prostitute and all who are with her in her house, because she hid the spies ⁴¹  we sent. 6:18 But be careful when you are setting apart the riches for the Lord. If you take any of it, you will make the Israelite camp subject to annihilation and cause a disaster. ⁴²  6:19 All the silver and gold, as well as bronze and iron items, belong to the Lord. ⁴³  They must go into the Lord’s treasury.”

Yosua 6:26

6:26 At that time Joshua made this solemn declaration: ⁴⁴  “The man who attempts to rebuild ⁴⁵  this city of Jericho ⁴⁶  will stand condemned before the Lord. ⁴⁷  He will lose his firstborn son when he lays its foundations and his youngest son when he erects its gates!” ⁴⁸ 

Yosua 7:1

Achan Sins and is Punished

7:1 But the Israelites disobeyed the command about the city’s riches. ⁴⁹  Achan son of Carmi, son of Zabdi, ⁵⁰  son of Zerah, from the tribe of Judah, stole some of the riches. ⁵¹  The Lord was furious with the Israelites. ⁵² 

Yosua 7:11-13

7:11 Israel has sinned; they have violated my covenantal commandment! ⁵³  They have taken some of the riches; ⁵⁴  they have stolen them and deceitfully put them among their own possessions. ⁵⁵  7:12 The Israelites are unable to stand before their enemies; they retreat because they have become subject to annihilation. ⁵⁶  I will no longer be with you, ⁵⁷  unless you destroy what has contaminated you. ⁵⁸  7:13 Get up! Ritually consecrate the people and tell them this: ‘Ritually consecrate yourselves for tomorrow, because the Lord God of Israel says, “You are contaminated, ⁵⁹  O Israel! You will not be able to stand before your enemies until you remove what is contaminating you.” ⁶⁰ 

Yosua 7:25

7:25 Joshua said, “Why have you brought disaster ⁶¹  on us? The Lord will bring disaster on you today!” All Israel stoned him to death. (They also stoned and burned the others.) ⁶² 

Yudas 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Jude, ⁶³  a slave ⁶⁴  of Jesus Christ and brother of James, ⁶⁵  to those who are called, wrapped in the love of ⁶⁶  God the Father and kept for ⁶⁷  Jesus Christ.

Yudas 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Jude, ⁶⁸  a slave ⁶⁹  of Jesus Christ and brother of James, ⁷⁰  to those who are called, wrapped in the love of ⁷¹  God the Father and kept for ⁷²  Jesus Christ.

Yudas 1:5

1:5 Now I desire to remind you (even though you have been fully informed of these facts ⁷³  once for all ⁷⁴ ) that Jesus, ⁷⁵  having saved the ⁷⁶  people out of the land of Egypt, later ⁷⁷  destroyed those who did not believe.

Yudas 1:11

1:11 Woe to them! For they have traveled down Cain’s path, ⁷⁸  and because of greed ⁷⁹  have abandoned themselves ⁸⁰  to ⁸¹  Balaam’s error; hence, ⁸²  they will certainly perish ⁸³  in Korah’s rebellion.

Yudas 1:18

1:18 For they said to you, “In the end time there will come ⁸⁴  scoffers, propelled by their own ungodly desires.” ⁸⁵ 

Yudas 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Jude, ⁸⁶  a slave ⁸⁷  of Jesus Christ and brother of James, ⁸⁸  to those who are called, wrapped in the love of ⁸⁹  God the Father and kept for ⁹⁰  Jesus Christ.

1 Samuel 14:24-28

Jonathan Violates Saul’s Oath

14:24 Now the men of Israel were hard pressed that day, for Saul had made the army agree to this oath: “Cursed be the man who eats food before evening! I will get my vengeance on my enemies!” So no one in the army ate anything.

14:25 Now the whole army ⁹¹  entered the forest and there was honey on the ground. ⁹²  14:26 When the army entered the forest, they saw ⁹³  the honey flowing, but no one ate any of it, ⁹⁴  for the army was afraid of the oath. 14:27 But Jonathan had not heard about the oath his father had made the army take. He extended the end of his staff that was in his hand and dipped it in the honeycomb. When he ate it, ⁹⁵  his eyes gleamed. ⁹⁶  14:28 Then someone from the army informed him, “Your father put the army under a strict oath ⁹⁷  saying, ‘Cursed be the man who eats food today!’ That is why the army is tired.”

1 Samuel 14:38-45

14:38 Then Saul said, “All you leaders of the army come here. Find out ⁹⁸  how this sin occurred today. 14:39 For as surely as the Lord, the deliverer of Israel, lives, even if it turns out to be my own son Jonathan, he will certainly die!” But no one from the army said anything. ⁹⁹ 

14:40 Then he said to all Israel, “You will be on one side, and I and my son Jonathan will be on the other side.” The army replied to Saul, “Do whatever you think is best.”

14:41 Then Saul said, “O Lord God of Israel! If this sin has been committed by me or by my son Jonathan, then, O Lord God of Israel, respond with Urim. But if this sin has been committed by your people Israel, respond with Thummim.” ¹⁰⁰  Then Jonathan and Saul were indicated by lot, while the army was exonerated. ¹⁰¹  14:42 Then Saul said, “Cast the lot between me and my son Jonathan!” ¹⁰²  Jonathan was indicated by lot.

14:43 So Saul said to Jonathan, “Tell me what you have done.” Jonathan told him, “I used the end of the staff that was in my hand to taste a little honey. I must die!” ¹⁰³  14:44 Saul said, “God will punish me severely if Jonathan doesn’t die!” ¹⁰⁴ 

14:45 But the army said to Saul, “Should Jonathan, who won this great victory in Israel, die? May it never be! As surely as the Lord lives, not a single hair of his head will fall to the ground! For it is with the help of God that he has acted today.” So the army rescued Jonathan from death. ¹⁰⁵ 

1 Samuel 15:3

15:3 So go now and strike down the Amalekites. Destroy everything that they have. Don’t spare ¹⁰⁶  them. Put them to death – man, woman, child, infant, ox, sheep, camel, and donkey alike.’”

1 Samuel 15:18

15:18 The Lord sent you on a campaign ¹⁰⁷  saying, ‘Go and exterminate those sinful Amalekites! Fight against them until you ¹⁰⁸  have destroyed them.’

1 Samuel 15:32-33

Samuel Puts Agag to Death

15:32 Then Samuel said, “Bring me King Agag of the Amalekites.” So Agag came to him trembling, ¹⁰⁹  thinking to himself, ¹¹⁰  “Surely death is bitter!” ¹¹¹  15:33 Samuel said, “Just as your sword left women childless, so your mother will be the most bereaved among women!” Then Samuel hacked Agag to pieces there in Gilgal before the Lord.

Matius 25:41

25:41 “Then he will say ¹¹²  to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels!

Kisah Para Rasul 23:12-14

The Plot to Kill Paul

23:12 When morning came, ¹¹³  the Jews formed ¹¹⁴  a conspiracy ¹¹⁵  and bound themselves with an oath ¹¹⁶  not to eat or drink anything ¹¹⁷  until they had killed Paul. 23:13 There were more than forty of them who formed this conspiracy. ¹¹⁸  23:14 They ¹¹⁹  went ¹²⁰  to the chief priests ¹²¹  and the elders and said, “We have bound ourselves with a solemn oath ¹²²  not to partake ¹²³  of anything until we have killed Paul.

Roma 9:3

9:3 For I could wish ¹²⁴  that I myself were accursed – cut off from Christ – for the sake of my people, ¹²⁵  my fellow countrymen, ¹²⁶ 

Roma 9:1

Israel’s Rejection Considered

9:1 ¹²⁷ I am telling the truth in Christ (I am not lying!), for my conscience assures me ¹²⁸  in the Holy Spirit –

Kolose 1:22

1:22 but now he has reconciled you ¹²⁹  by his physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him –

Galatia 3:10

3:10 For all who ¹³⁰  rely on doing the works of the law are under a curse, because it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not keep on doing everything written in the book of the law.” ¹³¹ 

Galatia 3:13

3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming ¹³²  a curse for us (because it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”) ¹³³ 

[27:21]  ¹ tn Heb “When it goes out” (cf. Lev 25:25-34).

[27:21]  ² tn Heb “like the field of the permanent dedication.” The Hebrew word חֵרֶם (kherem) is a much discussed term. In this and the following verses it refers in a general way to the fact that something is permanently devoted to the Lord and therefore cannot be redeemed (cf. v. 20b). See J. A. Naudé, NIDOTTE 2:276-77; N. Lohfink, TDOT 5:180-99, esp. pp. 184, 188, and 198-99; and the numerous explanations in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 483-85.

[27:21]  ³ tn Heb “to the priest it shall be his property.”

[22:20]  ⁴ tn Heb “not to Yahweh.”

[22:20]  ⁵ tn The verb חָרַם (kharam) means “to be devoted” to God or “to be banned.” The idea is that it would be God’s to do with as he liked. What was put under the ban was for God alone, either for his service or for his judgment. But it was out of human control. Here the verb is saying that the person will be utterly destroyed.

[21:2]  ⁶ tn The Hebrew text uses a cognate accusative with the verb: They vowed a vow. The Israelites were therefore determined with God’s help to defeat Arad.

[21:2]  ⁷ tn The Hebrew text has the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense of נָתַן (natan) to stress the point – if you will surely/indeed give.”

[21:2]  ⁸ tn Heb “my.”

[21:2]  ⁹ tn On the surface this does not sound like much of a vow. But the key is in the use of the verb for “utterly destroy” – חָרַם (kharam). Whatever was put to this “ban” or “devotion” belonged to God, either for his use, or for destruction. The oath was in fact saying that they would take nothing from this for themselves. It would simply be the removal of what was alien to the faith, or to God’s program.

[21:3]  ¹⁰ tc Smr, Greek, and Syriac add “into his hand.”

[21:3]  ¹¹ tn In the Hebrew text the verb has no expressed subject, and so here too is made passive. The name “Hormah” is etymologically connected to the verb “utterly destroy,” forming the popular etymology (or paronomasia, a phonetic wordplay capturing the significance of the event).

[7:1]  ¹² sn Hittites. The center of Hittite power was in Anatolia (central modern Turkey). In the Late Bronze Age (1550-1200 b.c.) they were at their zenith, establishing outposts and colonies near and far. Some elements were obviously in Canaan at the time of the Conquest (1400-1350 b.c.).

[7:1]  ¹³ sn Girgashites. These cannot be ethnically identified and are unknown outside the OT. They usually appear in such lists only when the intention is to have seven groups in all (see also the note on the word “seven” later in this verse).

[7:1]  ¹⁴ sn Amorites. Originally from the upper Euphrates region (Amurru), the Amorites appear to have migrated into Canaan beginning in 2200 b.c. or thereabouts.

[7:1]  ¹⁵ sn Canaanites. These were the indigenous peoples of the land, going back to the beginning of recorded history (ca. 3000 b.c.). The OT identifies them as descendants of Ham (Gen 10:6), the only Hamites to have settled north and east of Egypt.

[7:1]  ¹⁶ sn Perizzites. This is probably a subgroup of Canaanites (Gen 13:7; 34:30).

[7:1]  ¹⁷ sn Hivites. These are usually thought to be the same as the Hurrians, a people well-known in ancient Near Eastern texts. They are likely identical to the Horites (see note on the term “Horites” in Deut 2:12).

[7:1]  ¹⁸ sn Jebusites. These inhabited the hill country, particularly in and about Jerusalem (cf. Num 13:29; Josh 15:8; 2 Sam 5:6; 24:16).

[7:1]  ¹⁹ sn Seven. This is an ideal number in the OT, one symbolizing fullness or completeness. Therefore, the intent of the text here is not to be precise and list all of Israel’s enemies but simply to state that Israel will have a full complement of foes to deal with. For other lists of Canaanites, some with fewer than seven peoples, see Exod 3:8; 13:5; 23:23, 28; 33:2; 34:11; Deut 20:17; Josh 3:10; 9:1; 24:11. Moreover, the “Table of Nations” (Gen 10:15-19) suggests that all of these (possibly excepting the Perizzites) were offspring of Canaan and therefore Canaanites.

[7:2]  ²⁰ tn Heb “the Lord your God.” The pronoun has been used in the translation for stylistic reasons to avoid redundancy.

[7:2]  ²¹ tn In the Hebrew text the infinitive absolute before the finite verb emphasizes the statement. The imperfect has an obligatory nuance here. Cf. ASV “shalt (must NRSV) utterly destroy them”; CEV “must destroy them without mercy.”

[7:2]  ²² tn Heb “covenant” (so NASB, NRSV); TEV “alliance.”

[13:15]  ²³ tn The Hebrew text uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis, indicated in the translation by the words “by all means.” Cf. KJV, NASB “surely”; NIV “certainly.”

[13:15]  ²⁴ tn Or “put under divine judgment. The Hebrew word (חֵרֶם, kherem) refers to placing persons or things under God’s judgment, usually to the extent of their complete destruction.Though primarily applied against the heathen, this severe judgment could also fall upon unrepentant Israelites (cf. the story of Achan in Josh 7). See also the note on the phrase “divine judgment” in Deut 2:34.

[13:16]  ²⁵ tn Heb “street.”

[13:16]  ²⁶ tn Heb “mound”; NAB “a heap of ruins.” The Hebrew word תֵּל (tel) refers to this day to a ruin represented especially by a built-up mound of dirt or debris (cf. Tel Aviv, “mound of grain”).

[20:16]  ²⁷ tn The antecedent of the relative pronoun is “cities.”

[20:16]  ²⁸ tn Heb “any breath.”

[20:17]  ²⁹ tn The Hebrew text uses the infinitive absolute for emphasis, which the translation seeks to reflect with “utterly.” Cf. CEV “completely wipe out.”

[20:17]  sn The Hebrew verb refers to placing persons or things so evil and/or impure as to be irredeemable under God’s judgment, usually to the extent of their complete destruction. See also the note on the phrase “the divine judgment” in Deut 2:34.

[20:17]  ³⁰ sn Hittite. The center of Hittite power was in Anatolia (central modern Turkey). In the Late Bronze Age (1550-1200 b.c.) they were at their zenith, establishing outposts and colonies near and far. Some elements were obviously in Canaan at the time of the Conquest (1400-1350 b.c.).

[20:17]  ³¹ sn Amorite. Originally from the upper Euphrates region (Amurru), the Amorites appear to have migrated into Canaan beginning in 2200 b.c. or thereabouts.

[20:17]  ³² sn Canaanite. These were the indigenous peoples of the land of Palestine, going back to the beginning of recorded history (ca. 3000 b.c.). The OT identifies them as descendants of Ham (Gen 10:6), the only Hamites to have settled north and east of Egypt.

[20:17]  ³³ sn Perizzite. This probably refers to a subgroup of Canaanites (Gen 13:7; 34:30).

[20:17]  ³⁴ sn Hivite. These are usually thought to be the same as the Hurrians, a people well-known in ancient Near Eastern texts. They are likely identical to the Horites (see note on “Horites” in Deut 2:12).

[20:17]  ³⁵ tc The LXX adds “Girgashites” here at the end of the list in order to list the full (and usual) complement of seven (see note on “seven” in Deut 7:1).

[20:17]  sn Jebusite. These people inhabited the hill country, particularly in and about Jerusalem (cf. Num 13:29; Josh 15:8; 2 Sam 5:6; 24:16).

[25:19]  ³⁶ tn Heb “ the Lord your God.” The pronoun has been used in the translation for stylistic reasons to avoid redundancy.

[25:19]  ³⁷ tn The Hebrew text includes “to possess it.”

[25:19]  ³⁸ tn Or “from beneath the sky.” The Hebrew term שָׁמַיִם (shamayim) may be translated “heaven(s)” or “sky” depending on the context.

[25:19]  ³⁹ sn This command is fulfilled in 1 Sam 15:1-33.

[6:17]  ⁴⁰ tn Or “dedicated to the Lord.”

[6:17]  sn To make the city set apart for the Lord would involve annihilating all the people and animals and placing its riches in the Lord’s treasury (vv. 19, 21, 24).

[6:17]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “messengers.”

[6:18]  ⁴² tn Heb “Only you keep [away] from what is set apart [to the Lord] so that you might not, as you are setting [it] apart, take some of what is set apart [to the Lord] and make the camp of Israel set apart [to destruction by the Lord] and bring trouble on it.”

[6:19]  ⁴³ tn Heb “it is holy to the Lord.”

[6:26]  ⁴⁴ tn Normally the Hiphil of שָׁבַע (shava’) has a causative sense (“make [someone] take an oath”; see Josh 2:17, 20), but here (see also Josh 23:7) no object is stated or implied. If Joshua is calling divine judgment down upon the one who attempts to rebuild Jericho, then “make a solemn appeal [to God as judge]” or “pronounce a curse” would be an appropriate translation. However, the tone seems stronger. Joshua appears to be announcing the certain punishment of the violator. 1 Kgs 16:34, which records the fulfillment of Joshua’s prediction, supports this. Casting Joshua in a prophetic role, it refers to Joshua’s statement as the “word of the Lord” spoken through Joshua.

[6:26]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “rises up and builds.”

[6:26]  ⁴⁶ tc The LXX omits “Jericho.” It is probably a scribal addition.

[6:26]  ⁴⁷ tn The Hebrew phrase אָרוּר לִפְנֵי יְהוָה (’arur lifney yÿhvah, “cursed [i.e., condemned] before the Lord”) also occurs in 1 Sam 26:19.

[6:26]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “With his firstborn he will lay its foundations and with his youngest he will erect its gates.” The Hebrew verb יַצִּיב (yatsiv, “he will erect”) is imperfect, not jussive, suggesting Joshua’s statement is a prediction, not an imprecation.

[7:1]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “But the sons of Israel were unfaithful with unfaithfulness concerning what was set apart [to the Lord].”

[7:1]  ⁵⁰ tn 1 Chr 2:6 lists a “Zimri” (but no Zabdi) as one of the five sons of Zerah (cf. also 1 Chr 7:17, 18).

[7:1]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “took from what was set apart [to the Lord].”

[7:1]  ⁵² tn Heb “the anger of the Lord burned against the sons of Israel.”

[7:1]  sn This incident illustrates well the principle of corporate solidarity and corporate guilt. The sin of one man brought the Lord’s anger down upon the entire nation.

[7:11]  ⁵³ tn Heb “They have violated my covenant which I commanded them.”

[7:11]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “what was set apart [to the Lord].”

[7:11]  ⁵⁵ tn Heb “and also they have stolen, and also they have lied, and also they have placed [them] among their items.”

[7:12]  ⁵⁶ tn Heb “they turn [the] back before their enemies because they are set apart [to destruction by the Lord].”

[7:12]  ⁵⁷ tn The second person pronoun is plural in Hebrew, indicating these words are addressed to the entire nation.

[7:12]  ⁵⁸ tn Heb “what is set apart [to destruction by the Lord] from your midst.”

[7:13]  ⁵⁹ tn Heb “what is set apart [to destruction by the Lord] [is] in your midst.”

[7:13]  ⁶⁰ tn Heb “remove what is set apart [i.e., to destruction by the Lord] from your midst.”

[7:25]  ⁶¹ tn Or “trouble.” The word is “achor” in Hebrew (also in the following clause).

[7:25]  ⁶² tc Heb “and they burned them with fire and they stoned them with stones.” These words are somewhat parenthetical in nature and are omitted in the LXX; they may represent a later scribal addition.

[1:1]  ⁶³ 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]  ⁶⁴ 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]  ⁶⁵ 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]  ⁶⁶ 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]  ⁶⁷ 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.

[1:1]  ⁶⁸ 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]  ⁶⁹ 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]  ⁷⁰ 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]  ⁷¹ 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]  ⁷² 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.

[1:5]  ⁷³ tn Grk “knowing all things.” The subject of the participle “knowing” (εἰδότας, eidota") is an implied ὑμᾶς (Jumas), though several ancient witnesses actually add it. The πάντα (panta) takes on an adverbial force in this context (“fully”), intensifying how acquainted the readers are with the following points.

[1:5]  sn That Jude comments on his audience’s prior knowledge of what he is about to tell them (you have been fully informed of these facts) may imply that they were familiar with 2 Peter. In 2 Pet 2:4ff., the same illustrations from the OT are drawn. See the note on the following phrase once for all.

[1:5]  ⁷⁴ tc ‡ Some translations take ἅπαξ (Japax) with the following clause (thus, “[Jesus,] having saved the people once for all”). Such a translation presupposes that ἅπαξ is a part of the ὅτι (Joti) clause. The reading of NA²⁷, πάντα ὅτι [ὁ] κύριος ἅπαξ (panta {oti [Jo] kurio" {apax), suggests this interpretation (though with “Lord” instead of “Jesus”). This particle is found before λαόν (laon) in the ὅτι clause in א C* Ψ 630 1241 1243 1505 1739 1846 1881 pc co. But ἅπαξ is found before the ὅτι clause in most witnesses, including several important ones (Ì⁷² A B C² 33 81 623 2344 Ï vg). What seems best able to explain the various placements of the adverb is that scribes were uncomfortable with ἅπαξ referring to the readers’ knowledge, feeling it was more appropriate to the theological significance of “saved” (σώσας, swsas).

[1:5]  sn In this translation, Jude is stressing that the readers have been informed once for all of the OT illustrations he is about to mention. Where would they get this information? Most likely from having read 2 Peter. Earlier Jude used the same adverb to indicate that these believers had a written record of the faith. This seems to be his implication here, too. Thus, for the second time Jude is appealing to the written documents of the early church as authoritative as opposed to the messages of the false teachers. As the 1st century began to draw to a close, the early church found itself increasingly dependent on the letters and gospels of the apostles and their associates. Once those apostles died, false apostles and false teachers sprang up, like wolves in sheep’s clothing (cf. Acts 20:29-30). To combat this, some of the latest books of the NT stressed the authority of what had been written (so Hebrews, Jude, Ephesians, 1 John). Although these writers anticipated the return of the Lord, they also braced their audiences for a delay of the parousia (the second coming of Christ) by suggesting that when they were gone the NT documents should guide them.

[1:5]  ⁷⁵ tc ‡ The reading ᾿Ιησοῦς (Ihsous, “Jesus”) is deemed too hard by several scholars, since it involves the notion of Jesus acting in the early history of the nation Israel. However, not only does this reading enjoy the strongest support from a variety of early witnesses (e.g., A B 33 81 1241 1739 1881 2344 pc vg co Or^1739mg), but the plethora of variants demonstrate that scribes were uncomfortable with it, for they seemed to exchange κύριος (kurios, “Lord”) or θεός (qeos, “God”) for ᾿Ιησοῦς (though Ì⁷² has the intriguing reading θεὸς Χριστός [qeos Cristos, “God Christ”] for ᾿Ιησοῦς). In addition to the evidence supplied in NA²⁷ for this reading, note also {88 322 323 424^c 665 915 2298 eth Cyr Hier Bede}. As difficult as the reading ᾿Ιησοῦς is, in light of v. 4 and in light of the progress of revelation (Jude being one of the last books in the NT to be composed), it is wholly appropriate.

[1:5]  sn The construction our Master and Lord, Jesus Christ in v. 4 follows Granville Sharp’s rule (see note on Lord). The construction strongly implies the deity of Christ. This is followed by a statement that Jesus was involved in the salvation (and later judgment) of the Hebrews. He is thus to be identified with the Lord God, Yahweh. Verse 5, then, simply fleshes out what is implicit in v. 4.

[1:5]  ⁷⁶ tn Or perhaps “a,” though this is less likely.

[1:5]  ⁷⁷ tn Grk “the second time.”

[1:11]  ⁷⁸ tn Or “they have gone the way of Cain.”

[1:11]  ⁷⁹ tn Grk “for wages.”

[1:11]  ⁸⁰ tn The verb ἐκχέω (ekcew) normally means “pour out.” Here, in the passive, it occasionally has a reflexive idea, as BDAG 312 s.v. 3. suggests (with extra-biblical examples).

[1:11]  ⁸¹ tn Or “in.”

[1:11]  ⁸² tn Grk “and.” See note on “perish” later in this verse.

[1:11]  ⁸³ tn The three verbs in this verse are all aorist indicative (“have gone down,” “have abandoned,” “have perished”). Although the first and second could be considered constative or ingressive, the last is almost surely proleptic (referring to the certainty of their future judgment). Although it may seem odd that a proleptic aorist is so casually connected to other aorists with a different syntactical force, it is not unparalleled (cf. Rom 8:30).

[1:18]  ⁸⁴ tn Grk “be.”

[1:18]  ⁸⁵ tn Grk “going according to their own desires of ungodliness.”

[1:18]  sn Jude cites 2 Pet 3:3, changing a few of the words among other things, cleaning up the syntax, conforming it to Hellenistic style.

[1:1]  ⁸⁶ 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]  ⁸⁷ 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]  ⁸⁸ 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]  ⁸⁹ 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]  ⁹⁰ 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.

[14:25]  ⁹¹ tn Heb “all the land.”

[14:25]  ⁹² tn Heb “the surface of the field.”

[14:26]  ⁹³ tn Heb “and the army entered the forest, and look!”

[14:26]  ⁹⁴ tn Heb “and there was no one putting his hand to his mouth.”

[14:27]  ⁹⁵ tn Heb “and he returned his hand to his mouth.”

[14:27]  ⁹⁶ tc The translation follows the Qere and several medieval Hebrew mss in reading “gleamed,” rather than the Kethib, “saw.”

[14:28]  ⁹⁷ tn Heb “your father surely put the army under an oath.” The infinitive absolute is used before the finite verb to emphasize the solemn nature of the oath.

[14:38]  ⁹⁸ tn Heb “know and see.”

[14:39]  ⁹⁹ tn Heb “and there was no one answering from all the army.”

[14:41]  ¹⁰⁰ tc Heb “to the Lord God of Israel: ‘Give what is perfect.’” The Hebrew textual tradition has accidentally omitted several words here. The present translation follows the LXX (as do several English versions, cf. NAB, NRSV, TEV). See P. K. McCarter, I Samuel (AB), 247-48, and R. W. Klein, 1 Samuel (WBC), 132.

[14:41]  sn The Urim and Thummim were used for lot casting in ancient Israel. Their exact identity is uncertain; they may have been specially marked stones drawn from a bag. See Exod 28:30; Lev 8:8, and Deut 33:8, as well as the discussion in R. W. Klein, 1 Samuel (WBC), 140.

[14:41]  ¹⁰¹ tn Heb “went out.”

[14:42]  ¹⁰² tc The LXX includes the following words: “Whomever the Lord will indicate by the lot, let him die! And the people said to Saul, ‘It is not this word.’ But Saul prevailed over the people, and they cast lots between him and between Jonathan his son.”

[14:43]  ¹⁰³ tn Heb “Look, I, I will die.” Apparently Jonathan is acquiescing to his anticipated fate of death. However, the words may be taken as sarcastic (“Here I am about to die!”) or as a question, “Must I now die?” (cf. NAB, NIV, NCV, NLT).

[14:44]  ¹⁰⁴ tn Heb “So God will do and so he will add, surely you will certainly die, Jonathan.”

[14:45]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Heb “and he did not die.”

[15:3]  ¹⁰⁶ tn Or perhaps “don’t take pity on” (cf. CEV).

[15:18]  ¹⁰⁷ tn Heb “journey.”

[15:18]  ¹⁰⁸ tc The translation follows the LXX, the Syriac Peshitta, and the Targum in reading the second person singular suffix (“you”) rather than the third person plural suffix of the MT (“they”).

[15:32]  ¹⁰⁹ tn The MT reading מַעֲדַנֹּת (ma’adannot, literally, “bonds,” used here adverbially, “in bonds”) is difficult. The word is found only here and in Job 38:31. Part of the problem lies in determining the root of the word. Some scholars have taken it to be from the root ענד (’nd, “to bind around”), but this assumes a metathesis of two of the letters of the root. Others take it from the root עדן (’dn) with the meaning “voluptuously,” but this does not seem to fit the context. It seems better to understand the word to be from the root מעד (m’d, “to totter” or “shake”). In that case it describes the fear that Agag experienced in realizing the mortal danger that he faced as he approached Samuel. This is the way that the LXX translators understood the word, rendering it by the Greek participle τρέμον (tremon, “trembling”).

[15:32]  ¹¹⁰ tn Heb “and Agag said.”

[15:32]  ¹¹¹ tc The text is difficult here. With the LXX, two Old Latin mss, and the Syriac Peshitta it is probably preferable to delete סָר (sar, “is past”) of the MT; it looks suspiciously like a dittograph of the following word מַר (mar, “bitter”). This further affects the interpretation of Agag’s comment. In the MT he comes to Samuel confidently assured that the danger is over (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV “Surely the bitterness of death is past,” along with NLT, CEV). However, it seems more likely that Agag realized that his fortunes had suddenly taken a turn for the worse and that the clemency he had enjoyed from Saul would not be his lot from Samuel. The present translation thus understands Agag to approach not confidently but in the stark realization that his death is imminent (“Surely death is bitter!”). Cf. NAB “So it is bitter death!”; NRSV “Surely this is the bitterness of death”; TEV “What a bitter thing it is to die!”

[25:41]  ¹¹² tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated.

[23:12]  ¹¹³ tn Grk “when it was day.”

[23:12]  ¹¹⁴ tn Grk “forming a conspiracy, bound.” The participle ποιήσαντες (poihsantes) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[23:12]  ¹¹⁵ tn L&N 30.72 has ‘some Jews formed a conspiracy’ Ac 23:12”; BDAG 979 s.v. συστροφή 1 has “Judeans came together in a mob 23:12. But in the last pass. the word may also mean – 2. the product of a clandestine gathering, plot, conspiracy” (see also Amos 7:10; Ps 63:3).

[23:12]  ¹¹⁶ tn Or “bound themselves under a curse.” BDAG 63 s.v. ἀναθεματίζω 1 has “trans. put under a curse τινά someone…pleonastically ἀναθέματι ἀ. ἑαυτόν Ac 23:14…ἀ. ἑαυτόν vss. 12, 21, 13 v.l.” On such oaths see m. Shevi’it 3:1-5. The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant in English and has not been translated.

[23:12]  ¹¹⁷ tn The word “anything” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context, but must be supplied for the modern English reader.

[23:13]  ¹¹⁸ tn L&N 30.73 defines συνωμοσία (sunwmosia) as “a plan for taking secret action someone or some institution, with the implication of an oath binding the conspirators – ‘conspiracy, plot.’ …‘there were more than forty of them who formed this conspiracy’ Ac 23:13.”

[23:14]  ¹¹⁹ tn Grk “who.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the relative pronoun (“whom”) was translated by the third person plural pronoun (“them”) and a new sentence begun in the translation.

[23:14]  ¹²⁰ tn Grk “going.” The participle προσελθόντες (proselqonte") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[23:14]  ¹²¹ sn They went to the chief priests. The fact that the high priest knew of this plot and did nothing shows the Jewish leadership would even become accomplices to murder to stop Paul. They would not allow Roman justice to take its course. Paul’s charge in v. 3 of superficially following the law is thus shown to be true.

[23:14]  ¹²² tn Or “bound ourselves under a curse.” BDAG 63 s.v. ἀναθεματίζω 1 has “trans. put under a curse τινά someone…pleonastically ἀναθέματι ἀ. ἑαυτόν Ac 23:14…ἀ. ἑαυτόν vss. 12, 21, 13 v.l.” The pleonastic use ἀναθέματι ἀνεθεματίσαμεν (literally “we have cursed ourselves with a curse”) probably serves as an intensifier following Semitic usage, and is represented in the translation by the word “solemn.” On such oaths see m. Nedarim 3:1, 3.

[23:14]  ¹²³ tn This included both food and drink (γεύομαι [geuomai] is used of water turned to wine in John 2:9).

[9:3]  ¹²⁴ tn Or “For I would pray.” The implied condition is “if this could save my fellow Jews.”

[9:3]  ¹²⁵ tn Grk “brothers.” See BDAG 18-19 s.v. ἀδελφός 2.b.

[9:3]  ¹²⁶ tn Grk “my kinsmen according to the flesh.”

[9:1]  ¹²⁷ sn Rom 9:1–11:36. These three chapters are among the most difficult and disputed in Paul’s Letter to the Romans. One area of difficulty is the relationship between Israel and the church, especially concerning the nature and extent of Israel’s election. Many different models have been constructed to express this relationship. For a representative survey, see M. Barth, The People of God (JSNTSup), 22-27. The literary genre of these three chapters has been frequently identified as a diatribe, a philosophical discussion or conversation evolved by the Cynic and Stoic schools of philosophy as a means of popularizing their ideas (E. Käsemann, Romans, 261 and 267). But other recent scholars have challenged the idea that Rom 9–11 is characterized by diatribe. Scholars like R. Scroggs and E. E. Ellis have instead identified the material in question as midrash. For a summary and discussion of the rabbinic connections, see W. R. Stegner, “Romans 9.6-29 – A Midrash,” JSNT 22 (1984): 37-52.

[9:1]  ¹²⁸ tn Or “my conscience bears witness to me.”

[1:22]  ¹²⁹ 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.

[3:10]  ¹³⁰ tn Grk “For as many as.”

[3:10]  ¹³¹ tn Grk “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all the things written in the book of the law, to do them.”

[3:10]  sn A quotation from Deut 27:26.

[3:13]  ¹³² tn Grk “having become”; the participle γενόμενος (genomenos) has been taken instrumentally.

[3:13]  ¹³³ sn A quotation from Deut 21:23. By figurative extension the Greek word translated tree (ζύλον, zulon) can also be used to refer to a cross (L&N 6.28), the Roman instrument of execution.