Genesis 12:1-20

The Obedience of Abram

12:1 Now the Lord said ¹  to Abram, ² 

“Go out ³  from your country, your relatives, and your father’s household

to the land that I will show you. ⁴ 

12:2 Then I will make you ⁵  into a great nation, and I will bless you, ⁶ 

and I will make your name great, ⁷ 

so that you will exemplify divine blessing. ⁸ 

12:3 I will bless those who bless you, ⁹ 

but the one who treats you lightly ¹⁰  I must curse,

and all the families of the earth will bless one another ¹¹  by your name.”

12:4 So Abram left, ¹²  just as the Lord had told him to do, ¹³  and Lot went with him. (Now ¹⁴  Abram was 75 years old ¹⁵  when he departed from Haran.) 12:5 And Abram took his wife Sarai, his nephew ¹⁶  Lot, and all the possessions they had accumulated and the people they had acquired ¹⁷  in Haran, and they left for ¹⁸  the land of Canaan. They entered the land of Canaan.

12:6 Abram traveled through the land as far as the oak tree ¹⁹  of Moreh ²⁰  at Shechem. ²¹  (At that time the Canaanites were in the land.) ²²  12:7 The Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your descendants ²³  I will give this land.” So Abram ²⁴  built an altar there to the Lord, who had appeared to him.

12:8 Then he moved from there to the hill country east of Bethel ²⁵  and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to the Lord and worshiped the Lord. ²⁶  12:9 Abram continually journeyed by stages ²⁷  down to the Negev. ²⁸ 

The Promised Blessing Jeopardized

12:10 There was a famine in the land, so Abram went down to Egypt ²⁹  to stay for a while ³⁰  because the famine was severe. ³¹  12:11 As he approached ³²  Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai, “Look, ³³  I know that you are a beautiful woman. ³⁴  12:12 When the Egyptians see you they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me but will keep you alive. ³⁵  12:13 So tell them ³⁶  you are my sister ³⁷  so that it may go well ³⁸  for me because of you and my life will be spared ³⁹  on account of you.”

12:14 When Abram entered Egypt, the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. 12:15 When Pharaoh’s officials saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. So Abram’s wife ⁴⁰  was taken ⁴¹  into the household of Pharaoh, ⁴²  12:16 and he did treat Abram well ⁴³  on account of her. Abram received ⁴⁴  sheep and cattle, male donkeys, male servants, female servants, female donkeys, and camels.

12:17 But the Lord struck Pharaoh and his household with severe diseases ⁴⁵  because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. 12:18 So Pharaoh summoned Abram and said, “What is this ⁴⁶  you have done to me? Why didn’t you tell me that she was your wife? 12:19 Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her ⁴⁷  to be my wife? ⁴⁸  Here is your wife! ⁴⁹  Take her and go!” ⁵⁰  12:20 Pharaoh gave his men orders about Abram, ⁵¹  and so they expelled him, along with his wife and all his possessions.

Genesis 2:2

2:2 By ⁵²  the seventh day God finished the work that he had been doing, ⁵³  and he ceased ⁵⁴  on the seventh day all the work that he had been doing.

John 1:1

The Prologue to the Gospel

1:1 In the beginning ⁵⁵  was the Word, and the Word was with God, ⁵⁶  and the Word was fully God. ⁵⁷ 

John 1:14

1:14 Now ⁵⁸  the Word became flesh ⁵⁹  and took up residence ⁶⁰  among us. We ⁶¹  saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, ⁶²  full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.

John 1:1

The Prologue to the Gospel

1:1 In the beginning ⁶³  was the Word, and the Word was with God, ⁶⁴  and the Word was fully God. ⁶⁵ 

Colossians 1:21-24

Paul’s Goal in Ministry

1:21 And you were at one time strangers and enemies in your ⁶⁶  minds ⁶⁷  as expressed through ⁶⁸  your evil deeds, 1:22 but now he has reconciled you ⁶⁹  by his physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him – 1:23 if indeed you remain in the faith, established and firm, ⁷⁰  without shifting ⁷¹  from the hope of the gospel that you heard. This gospel has also been preached in all creation under heaven, and I, Paul, have become its servant.

1:24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for you, and I fill up in my physical body – for the sake of his body, the church – what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ.

Colossians 2:2

2:2 My goal is that ⁷²  their hearts, having been knit together ⁷³  in love, may be encouraged, and that ⁷⁴  they may have all the riches that assurance brings in their understanding of the knowledge of the mystery of God, namely, Christ, ⁷⁵ 

Colossians 1:1-4

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ⁷⁶  an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, 1:2 to the saints, the faithful ⁷⁷  brothers and sisters ⁷⁸  in Christ, at Colossae. Grace and peace to you ⁷⁹  from God our Father! ⁸⁰ 

Paul’s Thanksgiving and Prayer for the Church

1:3 We always ⁸¹  give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you, 1:4 since ⁸²  we heard about your faith in Christ Jesus and the love that you have for all the saints.

Ephesians 2:17

2:17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near,

Ephesians 3:8

3:8 To me – less than the least of all the saints ⁸³  – this grace was given, ⁸⁴  to proclaim to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ

Titus 1:3

1:3 But now in his own time ⁸⁵  he has made his message evident through the preaching I was entrusted with according to the command of God our Savior.

Titus 1:2

1:2 in hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the ages began. ⁸⁶ 

Titus 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ⁸⁷  a slave ⁸⁸  of God and apostle of Jesus Christ, to further the faith ⁸⁹  of God’s chosen ones and the knowledge of the truth that is in keeping with godliness,

Titus 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ⁹⁰  a slave ⁹¹  of God and apostle of Jesus Christ, to further the faith ⁹²  of God’s chosen ones and the knowledge of the truth that is in keeping with godliness,

Titus 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ⁹³  a slave ⁹⁴  of God and apostle of Jesus Christ, to further the faith ⁹⁵  of God’s chosen ones and the knowledge of the truth that is in keeping with godliness,

Titus 1:3

1:3 But now in his own time ⁹⁶  he has made his message evident through the preaching I was entrusted with according to the command of God our Savior.

[12:1]  ¹ sn The Lord called Abram while he was in Ur (see Gen 15:7; Acts 7:2); but the sequence here makes it look like it was after the family left to migrate to Canaan (11:31-32). Genesis records the call of Abram at this place in the narrative because it is the formal beginning of the account of Abram. The record of Terah was brought to its end before this beginning.

[12:1]  ² tn The call of Abram begins with an imperative לֶךְ־לְךָ (lekh-lÿkha, “go out”) followed by three cohortatives (v. 2a) indicating purpose or consequence (“that I may” or “then I will”). If Abram leaves, then God will do these three things. The second imperative (v. 2b, literally “and be a blessing”) is subordinated to the preceding cohortatives and indicates God’s ultimate purpose in calling and blessing Abram. On the syntactical structure of vv. 1-2 see R. B. Chisholm, “Evidence from Genesis,” A Case for Premillennialism, 37. For a similar sequence of volitive forms see Gen 45:18.

[12:1]  ³ tn The initial command is the direct imperative (לֶךְ, lekh) from the verb הָלַךְ (halakh). It is followed by the lamed preposition with a pronominal suffix (לְךָ, lÿkha) emphasizing the subject of the imperative: “you leave.”

[12:1]  ⁴ sn To the land that I will show you. The call of Abram illustrates the leading of the Lord. The command is to leave. The Lord’s word is very specific about what Abram is to leave (the three prepositional phrases narrow to his father’s household), but is not specific at all about where he is to go. God required faith, a point that Heb 11:8 notes.

[12:2]  ⁵ tn The three first person verbs in v. 2a should be classified as cohortatives. The first two have pronominal suffixes, so the form itself does not indicate a cohortative. The third verb form is clearly cohortative.

[12:2]  ⁶ sn I will bless you. The blessing of creation is now carried forward to the patriarch. In the garden God blessed Adam and Eve; in that blessing he gave them (1) a fruitful place, (2) endowed them with fertility to multiply, and (3) made them rulers over creation. That was all ruined at the fall. Now God begins to build his covenant people; in Gen 12-22 he promises to give Abram (1) a land flowing with milk and honey, (2) a great nation without number, and (3) kingship.

[12:2]  ⁷ tn Or “I will make you famous.”

[12:2]  ⁸ tn Heb “and be a blessing.” The verb form הְיֵה (hÿyeh) is the Qal imperative of the verb הָיָה (hayah). The vav (ו) with the imperative after the cohortatives indicates purpose or consequence. What does it mean for Abram to “be a blessing”? Will he be a channel or source of blessing for others, or a prime example of divine blessing? A similar statement occurs in Zech 8:13, where God assures his people, “You will be a blessing,” in contrast to the past when they “were a curse.” Certainly “curse” here does not refer to Israel being a source of a curse, but rather to the fact that they became a curse-word or byword among the nations, who regarded them as the epitome of an accursed people (see 2 Kgs 22:19; Jer 42:18; 44:8, 12, 22). Therefore the statement “be a blessing” seems to refer to Israel being transformed into a prime example of a blessed people, whose name will be used in blessing formulae, rather than in curses. If the statement “be a blessing” is understood in the same way in Gen 12:2, then it means that God would so bless Abram that other nations would hear of his fame and hold him up as a paradigm of divine blessing in their blessing formulae.

[12:3]  ⁹ tn The Piel cohortative has as its object a Piel participle, masculine plural. Since the Lord binds himself to Abram by covenant, those who enrich Abram in any way share in the blessings.

[12:3]  ¹⁰ tn In this part of God’s statement there are two significant changes that often go unnoticed. First, the parallel and contrasting participle מְקַלֶּלְךָ (mÿqallelkha) is now singular and not plural. All the versions and a few Masoretic mss read the plural. But if it had been plural, there would be no reason to change it to the singular and alter the parallelism. On the other hand, if it was indeed singular, it is easy to see why the versions would change it to match the first participle. The MT preserves the original reading: “the one who treats you lightly.” The point would be a contrast with the lavish way that God desires to bless many. The second change is in the vocabulary. The English usually says, “I will curse those who curse you.” But there are two different words for curse here. The first is קָלַל (qalal), which means “to be light” in the Qal, and in the Piel “to treat lightly, to treat with contempt, to curse.” The second verb is אָרַר (’arar), which means “to banish, to remove from the blessing.” The point is simple: Whoever treats Abram and the covenant with contempt as worthless God will banish from the blessing. It is important also to note that the verb is not a cohortative, but a simple imperfect. Since God is binding himself to Abram, this would then be an obligatory imperfect: “but the one who treats you with contempt I must curse.”

[12:3]  ¹¹ tn Theoretically the Niphal can be translated either as passive or reflexive/reciprocal. (The Niphal of “bless” is only used in formulations of the Abrahamic covenant. See Gen 12:2; 18:18; 28:14.) Traditionally the verb is taken as passive here, as if Abram were going to be a channel or source of blessing. But in later formulations of the Abrahamic covenant (see Gen 22:18; 26:4) the Hitpael replaces this Niphal form, suggesting a translation “will bless [i.e., “pronounce blessings on”] themselves [or “one another”].” The Hitpael of “bless” is used with a reflexive/reciprocal sense in Deut 29:18; Ps 72:17; Isa 65:16; Jer 4:2. Gen 12:2 predicts that Abram will be held up as a paradigm of divine blessing and that people will use his name in their blessing formulae. For examples of blessing formulae utilizing an individual as an example of blessing see Gen 48:20 and Ruth 4:11.

[12:4]  ¹² sn So Abram left. This is the report of Abram’s obedience to God’s command (see v. 1).

[12:4]  ¹³ tn Heb “just as the Lord said to him.”

[12:4]  ¹⁴ tn The disjunctive clause (note the pattern conjunction + subject + implied “to be” verb) is parenthetical, telling the age of Abram when he left Haran.

[12:4]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “was the son of five years and seventy year[s].”

[12:5]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “the son of his brother.”

[12:5]  ¹⁷ tn For the semantic nuance “acquire [property]” for the verb עָשָׂה (’asah), see BDB 795 s.v. עָשָׂה.

[12:5]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “went out to go.”

[12:6]  ¹⁹ tn Or “terebinth.”

[12:6]  ²⁰ sn The Hebrew word Moreh (מוֹרֶה, moreh) means “teacher.” It may well be that the place of this great oak tree was a Canaanite shrine where instruction took place.

[12:6]  ²¹ tn Heb “as far as the place of Shechem, as far as the oak of Moreh.”

[12:6]  ²² tn The disjunctive clause gives important information parenthetical in nature – the promised land was occupied by Canaanites.

[12:7]  ²³ tn The same Hebrew term זֶרַע (zera’) may mean “seed” (for planting), “offspring” (occasionally of animals, but usually of people), or “descendants” depending on the context.

[12:7]  ²⁴ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been supplied in the translation for clarification.

[12:8]  ²⁵ map For location see Map4 G4; Map5 C1; Map6 E3; Map7 D1; Map8 G3.

[12:8]  ²⁶ tn Heb “he called in the name of the Lord.” The expression refers to worshiping the Lord through prayer and sacrifice (see Gen 4:26; 13:4; 21:33; 26:25). See G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:116, 281.

[12:9]  ²⁷ tn The Hebrew verb נָסַע (nasa’) means “to journey”; more specifically it means to pull up the tent and move to another place. The construction here uses the preterite of this verb with its infinitive absolute to stress the activity of traveling. But it also adds the infinitive absolute of הָלַךְ (halakh) to stress that the traveling was continually going on. Thus “Abram journeyed, going and journeying” becomes “Abram continually journeyed by stages.”

[12:9]  ²⁸ tn Or “the South [country].”

[12:10]  ²⁹ sn Abram went down to Egypt. The Abrahamic narrative foreshadows some of the events in the life of the nation of Israel. This sojourn in Egypt is typological of Israel’s bondage there. In both stories there is a famine that forces the family to Egypt, death is a danger to the males while the females are preserved alive, great plagues bring about their departure, there is a summons to stand before Pharaoh, and there is a return to the land of Canaan with great wealth.

[12:10]  ³⁰ tn The Hebrew verb גּוּר (gur), traditionally rendered “to sojourn,” means “to stay for a while.” The “stranger” (traditionally “sojourner”) is one who is a temporary resident, a visitor, one who is passing through. Abram had no intention of settling down in Egypt or owning property. He was only there to wait out the famine.

[12:10]  ³¹ tn Heb “heavy in the land.” The words “in the land,” which also occur at the beginning of the verse in the Hebrew text, have not been repeated here in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[12:11]  ³² tn Heb “drew near to enter.”

[12:11]  ³³ tn The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “look”) is deictic here; it draws attention to the following fact.

[12:11]  ³⁴ tn Heb “a woman beautiful of appearance are you.”

[12:12]  ³⁵ tn The Piel of the verb חָיָה (khayah, “to live”) means “to keep alive, to preserve alive,” and in some places “to make alive.” See D. Marcus, “The Verb ‘to Live’ in Ugaritic,” JSS 17 (1972): 76-82.

[12:13]  ³⁶ tn Heb “say.”

[12:13]  ³⁷ sn Tell them you are my sister. Abram’s motives may not be as selfish as they appear. He is aware of the danger to the family. His method of dealing with it is deception with a half truth, for Sarai really was his sister – but the Egyptians would not know that. Abram presumably thought that there would be negotiations for a marriage by anyone interested (as Laban does later for his sister Rebekah), giving him time to react. But the plan backfires because Pharaoh does not take the time to negotiate. There is a good deal of literature on the wife-sister issue. See (among others) E. A. Speiser, “The Wife-Sister Motif in the Patriarchal Narratives,” Oriental and Biblical Studies, 62-81; C. J. Mullo-Weir, “The Alleged Hurrian Wife-Sister Motif in Genesis,” GOT 22 (1967-1970): 14-25.

[12:13]  ³⁸ tn The Hebrew verb translated “go well” can encompass a whole range of favorable treatment, but the following clause indicates it means here that Abram’s life will be spared.

[12:13]  ³⁹ tn Heb “and my life will live.”

[12:15]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “and the woman.” The word also means “wife”; the Hebrew article can express the possessive pronoun (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 19, §86). Here the proper name (Abram) has been used in the translation instead of a possessive pronoun (“his”) for clarity.

[12:15]  ⁴¹ tn The Hebrew term וַתֻּקַּח (vattuqqakh, “was taken”) is a rare verbal form, an old Qal passive preterite from the verb “to take.” It is pointed as a Hophal would be by the Masoretes, but does not have a Hophal meaning.

[12:15]  ⁴² tn The Hebrew text simply has “house of Pharaoh.” The word “house” refers to the household in general, more specifically to the royal harem.

[12:16]  ⁴³ sn He did treat Abram well. The construction of the parenthetical disjunctive clause, beginning with the conjunction on the prepositional phrase, draws attention to the irony of the story. Abram wanted Sarai to lie “so that it would go well” with him. Though he lost Sarai to Pharaoh, it did go well for him – he received a lavish bride price. See also G. W. Coats, “Despoiling the Egyptians,” VT 18 (1968): 450-57.

[12:16]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “and there was to him.”

[12:17]  ⁴⁵ tn The cognate accusative adds emphasis to the verbal sentence: “he plagued with great plagues,” meaning the Lord inflicted numerous plagues, probably diseases (see Exod 15:26). The adjective “great” emphasizes that the plagues were severe and overwhelming.

[12:18]  ⁴⁶ tn The demonstrative pronoun translated “this” adds emphasis: “What in the world have you done to me?” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 24, §118).

[12:19]  ⁴⁷ tn The preterite with vav (ו) consecutive here expresses consequence.

[12:19]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “to me for a wife.”

[12:19]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “Look, your wife!”

[12:19]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “take and go.”

[12:20]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “him”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:2]  ⁵² tn Heb “on/in the seventh day.”

[2:2]  ⁵³ tn Heb “his work which he did [or “made”].”

[2:2]  ⁵⁴ tn The Hebrew term שָׁבַּת (shabbat) can be translated “to rest” (“and he rested”) but it basically means “to cease.” This is not a rest from exhaustion; it is the cessation of the work of creation.

[1:1]  ⁵⁵ sn In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning, John 1:1) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis – “In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in Gen 1 are also found in John’s prologue: “life” (1:4) “light” (1:4) and “darkness” (1:5). Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in John 2 with the changing of water into wine, in John 11 with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)

[1:1]  ⁵⁶ tn The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός …means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.

[1:1]  ⁵⁷ tn Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.

[1:14]  ⁵⁸ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic, the incarnation of the Word. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.

[1:14]  ⁵⁹ tn This looks at the Word incarnate in humility and weakness; the word σάρξ (sarx) does not carry overtones of sinfulness here as it frequently does in Pauline usage. See also John 3:6.

[1:14]  ⁶⁰ tn Grk “and tabernacled.”

[1:14]  ⁶¹ tn Grk “and we saw.”

[1:14]  ⁶² tn Or “of the unique one.” Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant., 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).

[1:1]  ⁶³ sn In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning, John 1:1) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis – “In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in Gen 1 are also found in John’s prologue: “life” (1:4) “light” (1:4) and “darkness” (1:5). Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in John 2 with the changing of water into wine, in John 11 with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)

[1:1]  ⁶⁴ tn The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός …means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.

[1:1]  ⁶⁵ tn Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.

[1:21]  ⁶⁶ tn The article τῇ (th) has been translated as a possessive pronoun (ExSyn 215).

[1:21]  ⁶⁷ tn Although διανοία (dianoia) is singular in Greek, the previous plural noun ἐχθρούς (ecqrous) indicates that all those from Colossae are in view here.

[1:21]  ⁶⁸ tn The dative ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις τοῖς πονηροῖς (en toi" ergoi" toi" ponhroi") is taken as means, indicating the avenue through which hostility in the mind is revealed and made known.

[1:22]  ⁶⁹ 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.

[1:23]  ⁷⁰ tn BDAG 276 s.v. ἑδραῖος suggests “firm, steadfast.”

[1:23]  ⁷¹ tn BDAG 639 s.v. μετακινέω suggests “without shifting from the hope” here.

[2:2]  ⁷² tn Verse two begins a subordinate ἵνα (Jina) clause which was divided up into two sentences for the sake of clarity in English. Thus the phrase “My goal is that” is an attempt to reflect in the translation the purpose expressed through the ἵνα clauses.

[2:2]  ⁷³ tn BDAG 956 s.v. συμβιβάζω 1.b reads “unite, knit together.” Some commentators take the verb as a reference to instruction, “instructed in love.” See P. T. O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon (WBC), 93.

[2:2]  ⁷⁴ tn The phrase “and that” translates the first εἰς (eis) clause of v. 2 and reflects the second goal of Paul’s striving and struggle for the Colossians – the first is “encouragement” and the second is “full assurance.”

[2:2]  ⁷⁵ tc There are at least a dozen variants here, almost surely generated by the unusual wording τοῦ θεοῦ, Χριστοῦ (tou qeou, Cristou, “of God, Christ”; so Ì⁴⁶ B Hil). Scribes would be prone to conform this to more common Pauline expressions such as “of God, who is in Christ” (33), “of God, the Father of Christ” (א* A C 048^vid 1175 bo), and “of the God and Father of Christ” (א² Ψ 075 0278 365 1505 pc). Even though the external support for the wording τοῦ θεοῦ, Χριστοῦ is hardly overwhelming, it clearly best explains the rise of the other readings and should thus be regarded as authentic.

[1:1]  ⁷⁶ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:2]  ⁷⁷ tn Grk “and faithful.” The construction in Greek (as well as Paul’s style) suggests that the saints are identical to the faithful; hence, the καί (kai) is best left untranslated (cf. Eph 1:1). See ExSyn 281-82.

[1:2]  ⁷⁸ tn Grk “brothers,” but the Greek word may be used for “brothers and sisters” or “fellow Christians” as here (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 1, where considerable nonbiblical evidence for the plural ἀδελφοί [adelfoi] meaning “brothers and sisters” is cited).

[1:2]  ⁷⁹ tn Or “Grace to you and peace.”

[1:2]  ⁸⁰ tc Most witnesses, including some important ones (א A C F G I [P] 075 Ï it bo), read “and the Lord Jesus Christ” at the end of this verse, no doubt to conform the wording to the typical Pauline salutation. However, excellent and early witnesses (B D K L Ψ 33 81 1175 1505 1739 1881 al sa) lack this phrase. Since the omission is inexplicable as arising from the longer reading (otherwise, these mss would surely have deleted the phrase in the rest of the corpus Paulinum), it is surely authentic.

[1:3]  ⁸¹ tn The adverb πάντοτε (pantote) is understood to modify the indicative εὐχαριστοῦμεν (eucaristoumen) because it precedes περὶ ὑμῶν (peri Jumwn) which probably modifies the indicative and not the participle προσευχόμενοι (proseucomenoi). But see 1:9 where the same expression occurs and περὶ ὑμῶν modifies the participle “praying” (προσευχόμενοι).

[1:4]  ⁸² tn The adverbial participle ἀκούσαντες (akousante") is understood to be temporal and translated with “since.” A causal idea may also be in the apostle’s mind, but the context emphasizes temporal ideas, e.g., “from the day” (v. 6).

[3:8]  ⁸³ sn In Pauline writings saints means any true believer. Thus for Paul to view himself as less than the least of all the saints is to view himself as the most unworthy object of Christ’s redemption.

[3:8]  ⁸⁴ sn The parallel phrases to proclaim and to enlighten which follow indicate why God’s grace was manifested to Paul. Grace was not something just to be received, but to be shared with others (cf. Acts 13:47).

[1:3]  ⁸⁵ tn The Greek text emphasizes the contrast between vv. 2b and 3a: God promised this long ago but now has revealed it in his own time.

[1:2]  ⁸⁶ tn Grk “before eternal ages.”

[1:1]  ⁸⁷ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ⁸⁸ 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]  ⁸⁹ tn Grk “for the faith,” possibly, “in accordance with the faith.”

[1:1]  ⁹⁰ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ⁹¹ 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]  ⁹² tn Grk “for the faith,” possibly, “in accordance with the faith.”

[1:1]  ⁹³ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ⁹⁴ 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]  ⁹⁵ tn Grk “for the faith,” possibly, “in accordance with the faith.”

[1:3]  ⁹⁶ tn The Greek text emphasizes the contrast between vv. 2b and 3a: God promised this long ago but now has revealed it in his own time.