Deuteronomy 32:2

32:2 My teaching will drop like the rain,

my sayings will drip like the dew, ¹ 

as rain drops upon the grass,

and showers upon new growth.

Psalms 68:17

68:17 God has countless chariots;

they number in the thousands. ² 

The Lord comes from Sinai in holy splendor. ³ 

Acts 7:53

7:53 You ⁴  received the law by decrees given by angels, ⁵  but you did not obey ⁶  it.” ⁷ 

Galatians 3:19

3:19 Why then was the law given? ⁸  It was added ⁹  because of transgressions, ¹⁰  until the arrival of the descendant ¹¹  to whom the promise had been made. It was administered ¹²  through angels by an intermediary. ¹³ 

¹ tn Or “mist,” “light drizzle.” In some contexts the term appears to refer to light rain, rather than dew.

² tn Heb “thousands of [?].” The meaning of the word שִׁנְאָן (shin’an), which occurs only here in the OT, is uncertain. Perhaps the form should be emended to שַׁאֲנָן (sha’anan, “at ease”) and be translated here “held in reserve.”

³ tc The MT reads, “the Lord [is] among them, Sinai, in holiness,” which is syntactically difficult. The present translation assumes an emendation to אֲדֹנָי בָּא מִסִּינַי (’adonay ba’ missinay; see BHS note b-b and Deut 33:2).

⁴ tn Grk “whose betrayers and murderers you have now become, who received the law” The two consecutive relative clauses make for awkward English style, so the second was begun as a new sentence with the pronoun “You” supplied in place of the Greek relative pronoun to make a complete sentence in English.

⁵ tn Traditionally, “as ordained by angels,” but εἰς (eis) with the accusative here should be understood as instrumental (a substitute for ἐν [en]); so BDAG 291 s.v. εἰς 9, BDF §206. Thus the phrase literally means “received the law by the decrees [orders] of angels” with the genitive understood as a subjective genitive, that is, the angels gave the decrees.

⁶ tn The Greek word φυλάσσω (fulassw, traditionally translated “keep”) in this context connotes preservation of and devotion to an object as well as obedience.

⁷ tn Or “did not obey it.”

⁸ tn Grk “Why then the law?”

⁹ tc For προσετέθη (proseteqh) several Western mss have ἐτέθη (eteqh, “it was established”; so D* F G it Ir^lat Ambst Spec). The net effect of this reading, in conjunction with the largely Western reading of πράξεων (praxewn) for παραβάσεων (parabasewn), seems to be a very positive assessment of the law. But there are compelling reasons for rejecting this reading: (1) externally, it is provincial and relatively late; (2) internally: (a) transcriptionally, there seems to be a much higher transcriptional probability that a scribe would try to smooth over Paul’s harsh saying here about the law than vice versa; (b) intrinsically: [1] Paul has already argued that the law came after the promise (vv. 15-18), indicating, more than likely, its temporary nature; [2] the verb “was added” in v. 19 (προσετέθη) is different from the verb in v. 15 (ἐπιδιατάσσεται, epidiatassetai); virtually all exegetes recognize this as an intentional linguistic shift on Paul’s part in order not to contradict his statement in v. 15; [3] the temper of 3:1–4:7 is decidedly against a positive statement about the Torah’s role in Heilsgeschichte.

¹⁰ tc παραδόσεων (paradosewn; “traditions, commandments”) is read by D*, while the vast majority of witnesses read παραβάσεων (parabasewn, “transgressions”). D’s reading makes little sense in this context. πράξεων (praxewn, “of deeds”) replaces παραβάσεων in Ì⁴⁶ F G it Ir^lat Ambst Spec. The wording is best taken as going with νόμος (nomo"; “Why then the law of deeds?”), as is evident by the consistent punctuation in the later witnesses. But such an expression is unpauline and superfluous; it was almost certainly added by some early scribe(s) to soften the blow of Paul’s statement.

¹¹ tn Grk “the seed.” See the note on the first occurrence of the word “descendant” in 3:16.

¹² tn Or “was ordered.” L&N 31.22 has “was put into effect” here.

¹³ tn Many modern translations (NASB, NIV, NRSV) render this word (μεσίτης, mesith"; here and in v. 20) as “mediator,” but this conveys a wrong impression in contemporary English. If this is referring to Moses, he certainly did not “mediate” between God and Israel but was an intermediary on God’s behalf. Moses was not a mediator, for example, who worked for compromise between opposing parties. He instead was God’s representative to his people who enabled them to have a relationship, but entirely on God’s terms.