Amsal 15:1

15:1 A gentle response ¹  turns away anger,

but a harsh word ²  stirs up wrath. ³ 

Amsal 16:1

16:1 The intentions of the heart ⁴  belong to a man, ⁵ 

but the answer of the tongue ⁶  comes from ⁷  the Lord. ⁸ 

Amsal 18:13

18:13 The one who gives an answer ⁹  before he listens ¹⁰  –

that is his folly and his shame. ¹¹ 

Amsal 24:26

24:26 Like a kiss on the lips ¹² 

is the one who gives an honest answer.

Kisah Para Rasul 11:4

11:4 But Peter began and explained it to them point by point, ¹³  saying,

Yakobus 1:19

Living Out the Message

1:19 Understand this, my dear brothers and sisters! ¹⁴  Let every person be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to anger.

Yakobus 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From James, ¹⁵  a slave ¹⁶  of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes dispersed abroad. ¹⁷  Greetings!

Pengkhotbah 3:15

3:15 Whatever exists now has already been, and whatever will be has already been;

for God will seek to do again ¹⁸  what has occurred ¹⁹  in the past. ²⁰ 

[15:1]  ¹ tn Heb “soft answer.” The adjective רַּךְ (rakh, “soft; tender; gentle”; BDB 940 s.v.) is more than a mild response; it is conciliatory, an answer that restores good temper and reasonableness (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 477). Gideon illustrates this kind of answer (Judg 8:1-3) that brings peace.

[15:1]  ² tn Heb “word of harshness”; KJV “grievous words.” The noun עֶצֶב (’etsev, “pain, hurt”) functions as an attributive genitive. The term עֶצֶב refers to something that causes pain (BDB 780 s.v. I עֶצֶב). For example, Jephthah’s harsh answer led to war (Judg 12:1-6).

[15:1]  ³ tn Heb “raises anger.” A common response to painful words is to let one’s temper flare up.

[16:1]  ⁴ tn Heb “plans of the heart” (so ASV, NASB, NIV). The phrase מַעַרְכֵי־לֵב (ma’arkhe-lev) means “the arrangements of the mind.”

[16:1]  sn Humans may set things in order, plan out what they are going to say, but God sovereignly enables them to put their thoughts into words.

[16:1]  ⁵ tn Heb “[are] to a man.”

[16:1]  ⁶ tn Here “the tongue” is a metonymy of cause in which the instrument of speech is put for what is said: the answer expressed.

[16:1]  ⁷ sn The contrasting prepositions enhance the contrasting ideas – the ideas belong to people, but the words come from the Lord.

[16:1]  ⁸ sn There are two ways this statement can be taken: (1) what one intends to say and what one actually says are the same, or (2) what one actually says differs from what the person intended to say. The second view fits the contrast better. The proverb then is giving a glimpse of how God even confounds the wise. When someone is trying to speak [“answer” in the book seems to refer to a verbal answer] before others, the Lord directs the words according to his sovereign will.

[18:13]  ⁹ tn Heb “returns a word”; KJV “He that answereth a matter.”

[18:13]  ¹⁰ sn Poor listening and premature answering indicate that the person has a low regard for what the other is saying, or that he is too absorbed in his own ideas. The Mishnah lists this as the second characteristic of the uncultured person (m. Avot 5:7).

[18:13]  ¹¹ tn Heb “it is folly to him and shame.” The verse uses formal parallelism, with the second colon simply completing the thought of the first.

[24:26]  ¹² tn Heb “the one who returns right words kisses the lips.” This is an implied comparison for giving an honest answer. Honesty is like a kiss. The kiss would signify love, devotion, sincerity, and commitment (in that culture) – an outward expression of what is in the heart. It is an apt illustration of telling the truth. Some English versions now replace the figure to avoid cultural misunderstanding (cf. TEV, CEV “a sign of true friendship”; NLT “an honor”).

[11:4]  ¹³ tn Or “to them in logical sequence,” “to them in order.” BDAG 490 s.v. καθεξῆς has “explain to someone point by point” for this phrase. This is the same term used in Luke 1:3.

[1:19]  ¹⁴ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.

[1:1]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “James.” The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ¹⁶ tn Traditionally, “servant” or “bondservant.” 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.). 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]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “to the twelve tribes in the Diaspora.” The Greek term διασπορά (diaspora, “dispersion”) refers to Jews not living in Palestine but “dispersed” or scattered among the Gentiles.

[3:15]  ¹⁸ tn The phrase “to do again” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[3:15]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “God will seek that which is driven away.” The meaning of יְבַקֵּשׁ אֶת־נִרְדָּף (yÿvaqqesh ’et-nirdaf) is difficult to determine: יְבַקֵּשׁ (yÿvaqqesh) is Piel imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from בָּקַשׁ (baqash, “to seek”) and נִרְדָּף (nirdaf) is a Niphal participle 3rd person masculine singular from רָדַף (radaf, “to drive away”). There are several options: (1) God watches over the persecuted: יְבַקֵּשׁ (“seeks”) functions as a metonymy of cause for effect (i.e., to protect), and אֶת־נִרְדָּף (“what is driven away”) refers to “those who are persecuted.” But this does not fit the context. (2) God will call the past to account: יְבַקֵּשׁ functions as a metonymy of cause for effect (i.e., to hold accountable), and אֶת־נִרְדָּף is a metonymy of attribute (i.e., the past). This approach is adopted by several English translations: “God requires that which is past” (KJV), “God will call the past to account” (NIV) and “God summons each event back in its turn” (NEB). (3) God finds what has been lost: יְבַקֵּשׁ functions as a metonymy of cause for effect (i.e., to find), and אֶת־נִרְדָּף refers to what has been lost: “God restores what would otherwise be displaced” (NAB). (4) God repeats what has already occurred: יְבַקֵּשׁ functions as a metonymy of effect (i.e., to repeat), and אֶת־נִרְדָּף is a metonymy (i.e., that which has occurred). This fits the context and provides a tight parallel with the preceding line: “That which is has already been, and that which will be has already been” (3:15a) parallels “God seeks [to repeat] that which has occurred [in the past].” This is the most popular approach among English versions: “God restores that which has past” (Douay), “God seeks again that which is passed away” (ASV), “God seeks what has passed by” (NASB), “God seeks what has been driven away” (RSV), “God seeks out what has passed by” (MLB), “God seeks out what has gone by” (NRSV), and “God is ever bringing back what disappears” (Moffatt).

[3:15]  ²⁰ tn The phrase “in the past” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.