Genesis 15:1-21

The Cutting of the Covenant

15:1 After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram! I am your shield ¹  and the one who will reward you in great abundance.” ² 

15:2 But Abram said, “O sovereign Lord, ³  what will you give me since ⁴  I continue to be ⁵  childless, and my heir ⁶  is ⁷  Eliezer of Damascus?” ⁸  15:3 Abram added, ⁹  “Since ¹⁰  you have not given me a descendant, then look, one born in my house will be my heir!” ¹¹ 

15:4 But look, ¹²  the word of the Lord came to him: “This man ¹³  will not be your heir, ¹⁴  but instead ¹⁵  a son ¹⁶  who comes from your own body will be ¹⁷  your heir.” ¹⁸  15:5 The Lord ¹⁹  took him outside and said, “Gaze into the sky and count the stars – if you are able to count them!” Then he said to him, “So will your descendants be.”

15:6 Abram believed ²⁰  the Lord, and the Lord ²¹  considered his response of faith ²²  as proof of genuine loyalty. ²³ 

15:7 The Lord said ²⁴  to him, “I am the Lord ²⁵  who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans ²⁶  to give you this land to possess.” 15:8 But ²⁷  Abram ²⁸  said, “O sovereign Lord, ²⁹  by what ³⁰  can I know that I am to possess it?”

15:9 The Lord ³¹  said to him, “Take for me a heifer, a goat, and a ram, each three years old, along with a dove and a young pigeon.” 15:10 So Abram ³²  took all these for him and then cut them in two ³³  and placed each half opposite the other, ³⁴  but he did not cut the birds in half. 15:11 When birds of prey came down on the carcasses, Abram drove them away.

15:12 When the sun went down, Abram fell sound asleep, ³⁵  and great terror overwhelmed him. ³⁶  15:13 Then the Lord said to Abram, “Know for certain ³⁷  that your descendants will be strangers ³⁸  in a foreign country. ³⁹  They will be enslaved and oppressed ⁴⁰  for four hundred years. 15:14 But I will execute judgment on the nation that they will serve. ⁴¹  Afterward they will come out with many possessions. 15:15 But as for you, ⁴²  you will go to your ancestors ⁴³  in peace and be buried at a good old age. ⁴⁴  15:16 In the fourth generation ⁴⁵  your descendants ⁴⁶  will return here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its limit.” ⁴⁷ 

15:17 When the sun had gone down and it was dark, a smoking firepot with a flaming torch ⁴⁸  passed between the animal parts. ⁴⁹  15:18 That day the Lord made a covenant ⁵⁰  with Abram: “To your descendants I give ⁵¹  this land, from the river of Egypt ⁵²  to the great river, the Euphrates River – 15:19 the land ⁵³  of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, 15:20 Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, 15:21 Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites, and Jebusites.” ⁵⁴ 

Genesis 2:4

The Creation of Man and Woman

2:4 This is the account ⁵⁵  of the heavens and

the earth ⁵⁶  when they were created – when the Lord God ⁵⁷  made the earth and heavens. ⁵⁸ 

Genesis 3:5-8

3:5 for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will open ⁵⁹  and you will be like divine beings who know ⁶⁰  good and evil.” ⁶¹ 

3:6 When ⁶²  the woman saw that the tree produced fruit that was good for food, ⁶³  was attractive ⁶⁴  to the eye, and was desirable for making one wise, ⁶⁵  she took some of its fruit and ate it. ⁶⁶  She also gave some of it to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. ⁶⁷  3:7 Then the eyes of both of them opened, and they knew they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

The Judgment Oracles of God at the Fall

3:8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God moving about ⁶⁸  in the orchard at the breezy time ⁶⁹  of the day, and they hid ⁷⁰  from the Lord God among the trees of the orchard.

Genesis 3:1

The Temptation and the Fall

3:1 Now ⁷¹  the serpent ⁷²  was more shrewd ⁷³ 

than any of the wild animals ⁷⁴  that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Is it really true that ⁷⁵  God ⁷⁶  said, ‘You must not eat from any tree of the orchard’?” ⁷⁷ 

Genesis 5:20-21

5:20 The entire lifetime of Jared was 962 years, and then he died.

5:21 When Enoch had lived 65 years, he became the father of Methuselah.

Galatians 5:13

Practice Love

5:13 For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters; ⁷⁸  only do not use your freedom as an opportunity to indulge your flesh, ⁷⁹  but through love serve one another. ⁸⁰ 

Galatians 5:1

Freedom of the Believer

5:1 For freedom ⁸¹  Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not be subject again to the yoke ⁸²  of slavery.

Galatians 2:16

2:16 yet we know ⁸³  that no one ⁸⁴  is justified by the works of the law ⁸⁵  but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. ⁸⁶  And ⁸⁷  we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ ⁸⁸  and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one ⁸⁹  will be justified.

Galatians 2:2

2:2 I went there ⁹⁰  because of ⁹¹  a revelation and presented ⁹²  to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did so ⁹³  only in a private meeting with the influential people, ⁹⁴  to make sure that I was not running – or had not run ⁹⁵  – in vain.

Galatians 2:18-19

2:18 But if I build up again those things I once destroyed, ⁹⁶  I demonstrate that I am one who breaks God’s law. ⁹⁷  2:19 For through the law I died to the law so that I may live to God.

Jude 1:4

1:4 For certain men ⁹⁸  have secretly slipped in among you ⁹⁹  – men who long ago ¹⁰⁰  were marked out ¹⁰¹  for the condemnation I am about to describe ¹⁰²  – ungodly men who have turned the grace of our God into a license for evil ¹⁰³  and who deny our only Master ¹⁰⁴  and Lord, ¹⁰⁵  Jesus Christ.

[15:1]  ¹ sn The noun “shield” recalls the words of Melchizedek in 14:20. If God is the shield, then God will deliver. Abram need not fear reprisals from those he has fought.

[15:1]  ² tn Heb “your reward [in] great abundance.” When the phrase הַרְבּה מְאֹדֵ (harbeh mÿod) follows a noun it invariably modifies the noun and carries the nuance “very great” or “in great abundance.” (See its use in Gen 41:49; Deut 3:5; Josh 22:8; 2 Sam 8:8; 12:2; 1 Kgs 4:29; 10:10-11; 2 Chr 14:13; 32:27; Jer 40:12.) Here the noun “reward” is in apposition to “shield” and refers by metonymy to God as the source of the reward. Some translate here “your reward will be very great” (cf. NASB, NRSV), taking the statement as an independent clause and understanding the Hiphil infinitive absolute as a substitute for a finite verb. However, the construction הַרְבּה מְאֹדֵ is never used this way elsewhere, where it either modifies a noun (see the texts listed above) or serves as an adverb in relation to a finite verb (see Josh 13:1; 1 Sam 26:21; 2 Sam 12:30; 2 Kgs 21:16; 1 Chr 20:2; Neh 2:2).

[15:2]  ³ tn The Hebrew text has אֲדֹנָי יֱהוִה (’adonay yehvih, “Master, Lord”). Since the tetragrammaton (YHWH) usually is pointed with the vowels for the Hebrew word אֲדֹנָי (’adonay, “master”) to avoid pronouncing the divine name, that would lead in this place to a repetition of אֲדֹנָי. So the tetragrammaton is here pointed with the vowels for the word אֱלֹהִים (’elohim, “God”) instead. That would produce the reading of the Hebrew as “Master, God” in the Jewish textual tradition. But the presence of “Master” before the holy name is rather compelling evidence that the original would have been “Master, Lord,” which is rendered here “sovereign Lord.”

[15:2]  ⁴ tn The vav (ו) disjunctive at the beginning of the clause is circumstantial, expressing the cause or reason.

[15:2]  ⁵ tn Heb “I am going.”

[15:2]  ⁶ tn Heb “the son of the acquisition of my house.”

[15:2]  ⁷ tn The pronoun is anaphoric here, equivalent to the verb “to be” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 23, §115).

[15:2]  ⁸ sn The sentence in the Hebrew text employs a very effective wordplay on the name Damascus: “The son of the acquisition (בֶּן־מֶשֶׁק, ben-mesheq) of my house is Eliezer of Damascus (דַּמֶּשֶׁק, dammesheq).” The words are not the same; they have different sibilants. But the sound play gives the impression that “in the nomen is the omen.” Eliezer the Damascene will be Abram’s heir if Abram dies childless because “Damascus” seems to mean that. See M. F. Unger, “Some Comments on the Text of Genesis 15:2-3,” JBL 72 (1953): 49-50; H. L. Ginsberg, “Abram’s ‘Damascene’ Steward,” BASOR 200 (1970): 31-32.

[15:3]  ⁹ tn Heb “And Abram said.”

[15:3]  ¹⁰ tn The construction uses הֵן (hen) to introduce the foundational clause (“since…”), and וְהִנֵּה (vÿhinneh) to introduce the main clause (“then look…”).

[15:3]  ¹¹ tn Heb “is inheriting me.”

[15:4]  ¹² tn The disjunctive draws attention to God’s response and the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, translated “look”) mirrors Abram’s statement in v. 3 and highlights the fact that God responded to Abram.

[15:4]  ¹³ tn The subject of the verb is the demonstrative pronoun, which can be translated “this one” or “this man.” That the Lord does not mention him by name is significant; often in ancient times the use of the name would bring legitimacy to inheritance and adoption cases.

[15:4]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “inherit you.”

[15:4]  ¹⁵ tn The Hebrew כִּי־אִם (ki-’im) forms a very strong adversative.

[15:4]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “he who”; the implied referent (Abram’s unborn son who will be his heir) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[15:4]  ¹⁷ tn The pronoun could also be an emphatic subject: “whoever comes out of your body, he will inherit you.”

[15:4]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “will inherit you.”

[15:5]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “he”; the referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[15:6]  ²⁰ tn The nonconsecutive vav (ו) is on a perfect verbal form. If the composer of the narrative had wanted to show simple sequence, he would have used the vav consecutive with the preterite. The perfect with vav conjunctive (where one expects the preterite with vav consecutive) in narrative contexts can have a variety of discourse functions, but here it probably serves to highlight Abram’s response to God’s promise. For a detailed discussion of the vav + perfect construction in Hebrew narrative, see R. Longacre, “Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose: A Discourse-modular Approach,” Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, 50-98. The Hebrew verb אָמַן (’aman) means “to confirm, to support” in the Qal verbal stem. Its derivative nouns refer to something or someone that/who provides support, such as a “pillar,” “nurse,” or “guardian, trustee.” In the Niphal stem it comes to mean “to be faithful, to be reliable, to be dependable,” or “to be firm, to be sure.” In the Hiphil, the form used here, it takes on a declarative sense: “to consider something reliable [or “dependable”].” Abram regarded the God who made this promise as reliable and fully capable of making it a reality.

[15:6]  ²¹ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[15:6]  ²² tn Heb “and he reckoned it to him.” The third feminine singular pronominal suffix refers back to Abram’s act of faith, mentioned in the preceding clause. On third feminine singular pronouns referring back to verbal ideas see GKC 440-41 §135.p. Some propose taking the suffix as proleptic, anticipating the following feminine noun (“righteousness”). In this case one might translate: “and he reckoned it to him – [namely] righteousness.” See O. P. Robertson, “Genesis 15:6: A New Covenant Exposition of an Old Covenant Text,” WTJ 42 (1980): 259-89.

[15:6]  ²³ tn Or “righteousness”; or “evidence of steadfast commitment.” The noun is an adverbial accusative. The verb translated “considered” (Heb “reckoned”) also appears with צְדָקָה (tsÿdaqah, “righteousness”) in Ps 106:31. Alluding to the events recorded in Numbers 25, the psalmist notes that Phinehas’ actions were “credited to him as righteousness for endless generations to come.” Reference is made to the unconditional, eternal covenant with which God rewarded Phinehas’ loyalty (Num 25:12-13). So צְדָקָה seems to carry by metonymy the meaning “loyal, rewardable behavior” here, a nuance that fits nicely in Genesis 15, where God responds to Abram’s faith by formally ratifying his promise to give Abram and his descendants the land. (See R. B. Chisholm, “Evidence from Genesis,” A Case for Premillennialism, 40.) In Phoenician and Old Aramaic inscriptions cognate nouns glossed as “correct, justifiable conduct” sometimes carry this same semantic nuance (DNWSI 2:962).

[15:7]  ²⁴ tn Heb “And he said.”

[15:7]  ²⁵ sn I am the Lord. The Lord initiates the covenant-making ceremony with a declaration of who he is and what he has done for Abram. The same form appears at the beginning of the covenant made at Sinai (see Exod 20:1).

[15:7]  ²⁶ sn The phrase of the Chaldeans is a later editorial clarification for the readers, designating the location of Ur. From all evidence there would have been no Chaldeans in existence at this early date; they are known in the time of the neo-Babylonian empire in the first millennium b.c.

[15:8]  ²⁷ tn Here the vav carries adversative force and is translated “but.”

[15:8]  ²⁸ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[15:8]  ²⁹ tn See note on the phrase “sovereign Lord” in 15:2.

[15:8]  ³⁰ tn Or “how.”

[15:9]  ³¹ tn Heb “He”; the referent (the Lord) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[15:10]  ³² tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[15:10]  ³³ tn Heb “in the middle.”

[15:10]  ³⁴ tn Heb “to meet its neighbor.”

[15:12]  ³⁵ tn Heb “a deep sleep fell on Abram.”

[15:12]  ³⁶ tn Heb “and look, terror, a great darkness was falling on him.”

[15:13]  ³⁷ tn The Hebrew construction is emphatic, with the Qal infinitive absolute followed by the imperfect from יָדַע (yada’, “know”). The imperfect here has an obligatory or imperatival force.

[15:13]  ³⁸ tn The Hebrew word גֵּר (ger, “sojourner, stranger”) is related to the verb גּוּר (gur, “to sojourn, to stay for awhile”). Abram’s descendants will stay in a land as resident aliens without rights of citizenship.

[15:13]  ³⁹ tn Heb “in a land not theirs.”

[15:13]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “and they will serve them and they will oppress them.” The verb עִנּוּ, (’innu, a Piel form from עָנָה, ’anah, “to afflict, to oppress, to treat harshly”), is used in Exod 1:11 to describe the oppression of the Israelites in Egypt.

[15:14]  ⁴¹ tn The participle דָּן (dan, from דִּין, din) is used here for the future: “I am judging” = “I will surely judge.” The judgment in this case will be condemnation and punishment. The translation “execute judgment on” implies that the judgment will certainly be carried out.

[15:15]  ⁴² tn The vav with the pronoun before the verb calls special attention to the subject in contrast to the preceding subject.

[15:15]  ⁴³ sn You will go to your ancestors. This is a euphemistic expression for death.

[15:15]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “in a good old age.”

[15:16]  ⁴⁵ sn The term generation is being used here in its widest sense to refer to a full life span. When the chronological factors are considered and the genealogies tabulated, there are four hundred years of bondage. This suggests that in this context a generation is equivalent to one hundred years.

[15:16]  ⁴⁶ tn Heb “they”; the referent (“your descendants”) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

[15:16]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “is not yet complete.”

[15:17]  ⁴⁸ sn A smoking pot with a flaming torch. These same implements were used in Mesopotamian rituals designed to ward off evil (see E. A. Speiser, Genesis [AB], 113-14).

[15:17]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “these pieces.”

[15:18]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “cut a covenant.”

[15:18]  ⁵¹ tn The perfect verbal form is understood as instantaneous (“I here and now give”). Another option is to understand it as rhetorical, indicating certitude (“I have given” meaning it is as good as done, i.e., “I will surely give”).

[15:18]  ⁵² sn The river of Egypt is a wadi (a seasonal stream) on the northeastern border of Egypt, not to the River Nile.

[15:19]  ⁵³ tn The words “the land” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[15:21]  ⁵⁴ tn Each of the names in the list has the Hebrew definite article, which is used here generically for the class of people identified.

[2:4]  ⁵⁵ tn The Hebrew phrase אֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת (’elle tolÿdot) is traditionally translated as “these are the generations of” because the noun was derived from the verb “beget.” Its usage, however, shows that it introduces more than genealogies; it begins a narrative that traces what became of the entity or individual mentioned in the heading. In fact, a good paraphrase of this heading would be: “This is what became of the heavens and the earth,” for what follows is not another account of creation but a tracing of events from creation through the fall and judgment (the section extends from 2:4 through 4:26). See M. H. Woudstra, “The Toledot of the Book of Genesis and Their Redemptive-Historical Significance,” CTJ 5 (1970): 184-89.

[2:4]  ⁵⁶ tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1.

[2:4]  ⁵⁷ sn Advocates of the so-called documentary hypothesis of pentateuchal authorship argue that the introduction of the name Yahweh (Lord) here indicates that a new source (designated J), a parallel account of creation, begins here. In this scheme Gen 1:1-2:3 is understood as the priestly source (designated P) of creation. Critics of this approach often respond that the names, rather than indicating separate sources, were chosen to reflect the subject matter (see U. Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis). Gen 1:1–2:3 is the grand prologue of the book, showing the sovereign God creating by decree. The narrative beginning in 2:4 is the account of what this God invested in his creation. Since it deals with the close, personal involvement of the covenant God, the narrative uses the covenantal name Yahweh (Lord) in combination with the name God. For a recent discussion of the documentary hypothesis from a theologically conservative perspective, see D. A. Garrett, Rethinking Genesis. For an attempt by source critics to demonstrate the legitimacy of the source critical method on the basis of ancient Near Eastern parallels, see J. H. Tigay, ed., Empirical Models for Biblical Criticism. For reaction to the source critical method by literary critics, see I. M. Kikawada and A. Quinn, Before Abraham Was; R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 131-54; and Adele Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative, 111-34.

[2:4]  ⁵⁸ tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1; the order here is reversed, but the meaning is the same.

[3:5]  ⁵⁹ tn Or “you will have understanding.” This obviously refers to the acquisition of the “knowledge of good and evil,” as the next statement makes clear.

[3:5]  ⁶⁰ tn Or perhaps “like God, knowing.” It is unclear how the plural participle translated “knowing” is functioning. On the one hand, יֹדְעֵי (yodÿ’e) could be taken as a substantival participle functioning as a predicative adjective in the sentence. In this case one might translate: “You will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil.” On the other hand, it could be taken as an attributive adjective modifying אֱלֹהִים (’elohim). In this case אֱלֹהִים has to be taken as a numerical plural referring to “gods,” “divine beings,” for if the one true God were the intended referent, a singular form of the participle would almost certainly appear as a modifier. Following this line of interpretation, one could translate, “You will be like divine beings who know good and evil.” The following context may favor this translation, for in 3:22 God says to an unidentified group, “Look, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” It is probable that God is addressing his heavenly court (see the note on the word “make” in 1:26), the members of which can be called “gods” or “divine beings” from the ancient Israelite perspective. (We know some of these beings as messengers or “angels.”) An examination of parallel constructions shows that a predicative understanding (“you will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil,” cf. NIV, NRSV) is possible, but rare (see Gen 27:23, where “hairy” is predicative, complementing the verb “to be”). The statistical evidence strongly suggests that the participle is attributive, modifying “divine beings” (see Ps 31:12; Isa 1:30; 13:14; 16:2; 29:5; 58:11; Jer 14:9; 20:9; 23:9; 31:12; 48:41; 49:22; Hos 7:11; Amos 4:11). In all of these texts, where a comparative clause and accompanying adjective/participle follow a copulative (“to be”) verb, the adjective/participle is attributive after the noun in the comparative clause.

[3:5]  ⁶¹ sn You will be like divine beings who know good and evil. The serpent raises doubts about the integrity of God. He implies that the only reason for the prohibition was that God was protecting the divine domain. If the man and woman were to eat, they would enter into that domain. The temptation is to overstep divinely established boundaries. (See D. E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God [PTMS], 25.)

[3:6]  ⁶² tn Heb “And the woman saw.” The clause can be rendered as a temporal clause subordinate to the following verb in the sequence.

[3:6]  ⁶³ tn Heb “that the tree was good for food.” The words “produced fruit that was” are not in the Hebrew text, but are implied.

[3:6]  ⁶⁴ tn The Hebrew word תַּאֲוָה (ta’avah, translated “attractive” here) actually means “desirable.” This term and the later term נֶחְמָד (nekhmad, “desirable”) are synonyms.

[3:6]  ⁶⁵ tn Heb “that good was the tree for food, and that desirable it was to the eyes, and desirable was the tree to make one wise.” On the connection between moral wisdom and the “knowledge of good and evil,” see the note on the word “evil” in 2:9.

[3:6]  ⁶⁶ tn The pronoun “it” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied (here and also after “ate” at the end of this verse) for stylistic reasons.

[3:6]  ⁶⁷ sn This pericope (3:1-7) is a fine example of Hebrew narrative structure. After an introductory disjunctive clause that introduces a new character and sets the stage (3:1), the narrative tension develops through dialogue, culminating in the action of the story. Once the dialogue is over, the action is told in a rapid sequence of verbs – she took, she ate, she gave, and he ate.

[3:8]  ⁶⁸ tn The Hitpael participle of הָלָךְ (halakh, “to walk, to go”) here has an iterative sense, “moving” or “going about.” While a translation of “walking about” is possible, it assumes a theophany, the presence of the Lord God in a human form. This is more than the text asserts.

[3:8]  ⁶⁹ tn The expression is traditionally rendered “cool of the day,” because the Hebrew word רוּחַ (ruakh) can mean “wind.” U. Cassuto (Genesis: From Adam to Noah, 152-54) concludes after lengthy discussion that the expression refers to afternoon when it became hot and the sun was beginning to decline. J. J. Niehaus (God at Sinai [SOTBT], 155-57) offers a different interpretation of the phrase, relating יוֹם (yom, usually understood as “day”) to an Akkadian cognate umu (“storm”) and translates the phrase “in the wind of the storm.” If Niehaus is correct, then God is not pictured as taking an afternoon stroll through the orchard, but as coming in a powerful windstorm to confront the man and woman with their rebellion. In this case קוֹל יְהוָה (qol yÿhvah, “sound of the Lord”) may refer to God’s thunderous roar, which typically accompanies his appearance in the storm to do battle or render judgment (e.g., see Ps 29).

[3:8]  ⁷⁰ tn The verb used here is the Hitpael, giving the reflexive idea (“they hid themselves”). In v. 10, when Adam answers the Lord, the Niphal form is used with the same sense: “I hid.”

[3:1]  ⁷¹ tn The chapter begins with a disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + predicate) that introduces a new character and a new scene in the story.

[3:1]  ⁷² sn Many theologians identify or associate the serpent with Satan. In this view Satan comes in the disguise of a serpent or speaks through a serpent. This explains the serpent’s capacity to speak. While later passages in the Bible may indicate there was a satanic presence behind the serpent (see, for example, Rev 12:9), the immediate context pictures the serpent as simply one of the animals of the field created by God (see vv. 1, 14). An ancient Jewish interpretation explains the reference to the serpent in a literal manner, attributing the capacity to speak to all the animals in the orchard. This text (Jub. 3:28) states, “On that day [the day the man and woman were expelled from the orchard] the mouth of all the beasts and cattle and birds and whatever walked or moved was stopped from speaking because all of them used to speak to one another with one speech and one language [presumed to be Hebrew, see 12:26].” Josephus, Ant. 1.1.4 (1.41) attributes the serpent’s actions to jealousy. He writes that “the serpent, living in the company of Adam and his wife, grew jealous of the blessings which he supposed were destined for them if they obeyed God’s behests, and, believing that disobedience would bring trouble on them, he maliciously persuaded the woman to taste of the tree of wisdom.”

[3:1]  ⁷³ tn The Hebrew word עָרוּם (’arum) basically means “clever.” This idea then polarizes into the nuances “cunning” (in a negative sense, see Job 5:12; 15:5), and “prudent” in a positive sense (Prov 12:16, 23; 13:16; 14:8, 15, 18; 22:3; 27:12). This same polarization of meaning can be detected in related words derived from the same root (see Exod 21:14; Josh 9:4; 1 Sam 23:22; Job 5:13; Ps 83:3). The negative nuance obviously applies in Gen 3, where the snake attempts to talk the woman into disobeying God by using half-truths and lies.

[3:1]  ⁷⁴ tn Heb “animals of the field.”

[3:1]  ⁷⁵ tn Heb “Indeed that God said.” The beginning of the quotation is elliptical and therefore difficult to translate. One must supply a phrase like “is it true”: “Indeed, [is it true] that God said.”

[3:1]  ⁷⁶ sn God. The serpent does not use the expression “Yahweh God” [Lord God] because there is no covenant relationship involved between God and the serpent. He only speaks of “God.” In the process the serpent draws the woman into his manner of speech so that she too only speaks of “God.”

[3:1]  ⁷⁷ tn Heb “you must not eat from all the tree[s] of the orchard.” After the negated prohibitive verb, מִכֹּל (mikkol, “from all”) has the meaning “from any.” Note the construction in Lev 18:26, where the statement “you must not do from all these abominable things” means “you must not do any of these abominable things.” See Lev 22:25 and Deut 28:14 as well.

[5:13]  ⁷⁸ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:11.

[5:13]  ⁷⁹ tn Grk “as an opportunity for the flesh”; BDAG 915 s.v. σάρξ 2.c.α states: “In Paul’s thought esp., all parts of the body constitute a totality known as σ. or flesh, which is dominated by sin to such a degree that wherever flesh is, all forms of sin are likew. present, and no good thing can live in the σάρξ…Gal 5:13, 24;…Opp. τὸ πνεῦμα…Gal 3:3; 5:16, 17ab; 6:8ab.”

[5:13]  ⁸⁰ tn It is possible that the verb δουλεύετε (douleuete) should be translated “serve one another in a humble manner” here, referring to the way in which slaves serve their masters (see L&N 35.27).

[5:1]  ⁸¹ tn Translating the dative as “For freedom” shows the purpose for Christ setting us free; however, it is also possible to take the phrase in the sense of means or instrument (“with [or by] freedom”), referring to the freedom mentioned in 4:31 and implied throughout the letter.

[5:1]  ⁸² sn Here the yoke figuratively represents the burdensome nature of slavery.

[2:16]  ⁸³ tn Grk “yet knowing”; the participle εἰδότες (eidotes) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[2:16]  ⁸⁴ tn Grk “no man,” but ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") is used here in a generic sense, referring to both men and women.

[2:16]  ⁸⁵ sn The law is a reference to the law of Moses.

[2:16]  ⁸⁶ tn Or “faith in Jesus Christ.” A decision is difficult here. Though traditionally translated “faith in Jesus Christ,” an increasing number of NT scholars are arguing that πίστις Χριστοῦ (pisti" Cristou) and similar phrases in Paul (here and in v. 20; Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 3:22; Eph 3:12; Phil 3:9) involve a subjective genitive and mean “Christ’s faith” or “Christ’s faithfulness” (cf., e.g., G. Howard, “The ‘Faith of Christ’,” ExpTim 85 [1974]: 212-15; R. B. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ [SBLDS]; Morna D. Hooker, “Πίστις Χριστοῦ,” NTS 35 [1989]: 321-42). Noteworthy among the arguments for the subjective genitive view is that when πίστις takes a personal genitive it is almost never an objective genitive (cf. Matt 9:2, 22, 29; Mark 2:5; 5:34; 10:52; Luke 5:20; 7:50; 8:25, 48; 17:19; 18:42; 22:32; Rom 1:8; 12; 3:3; 4:5, 12, 16; 1 Cor 2:5; 15:14, 17; 2 Cor 10:15; Phil 2:17; Col 1:4; 2:5; 1 Thess 1:8; 3:2, 5, 10; 2 Thess 1:3; Titus 1:1; Phlm 6; 1 Pet 1:9, 21; 2 Pet 1:5). On the other hand, the objective genitive view has its adherents: A. Hultgren, “The Pistis Christou Formulations in Paul,” NovT 22 (1980): 248-63; J. D. G. Dunn, “Once More, ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ,” SBL Seminar Papers, 1991, 730-44. Most commentaries on Romans and Galatians usually side with the objective view.

[2:16]  ⁸⁷ tn In Greek this is a continuation of the preceding sentence, but the construction is too long and complex for contemporary English style, so a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[2:16]  ⁸⁸ tn Or “by faith in Christ.” See comment above on “the faithfulness of Jesus Christ.”

[2:16]  ⁸⁹ tn Or “no human being”; Grk “flesh.”

[2:2]  ⁹⁰ tn Grk “I went up”; one always spoke idiomatically of going “up” to Jerusalem.

[2:2]  ⁹¹ tn Or “in accordance with.” According to BDAG 512 s.v. κατά B.5.a.δ, “Oft. the norm is at the same time the reason, so that in accordance with and because of are merged…Instead of ‘in accordance w.’ κ. can mean simply because of, as a result of, on the basis of…κ. ἀποκάλυψιν Gal 2:2.”

[2:2]  ⁹² tn Or “set before them.”

[2:2]  ⁹³ tn Grk “Gentiles, but only privately…to make sure.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started with “But” and the words “I did so,” an implied repetition from the previous clause, were supplied to make a complete English sentence.

[2:2]  ⁹⁴ tn L&N 87.42 has “important persons, influential persons, prominent persons” for οἱ δοκοῦντες and translates this phrase in Gal 2:2 as “in a private meeting with the prominent persons.” The “prominent people” referred to here are the leaders of the Jerusalem church.

[2:2]  ⁹⁵ tn Here the first verb (τρέχω, trecw, “was not running”) is present subjunctive, while the second (ἔδραμον, edramon, “had not run”) is aorist indicative.

[2:18]  ⁹⁶ tn Or “once tore down.”

[2:18]  ⁹⁷ tn Traditionally, “that I am a transgressor.”

[1:4]  ⁹⁸ tn Grk “people.” However, if Jude is indeed arguing that Peter’s prophecy about false teachers has come true, these are most likely men in the original historical and cultural setting. See discussion of this point in the note on the phrase “these men” in 2 Pet 2:12.

[1:4]  ⁹⁹ tn “Among you” is not in the Greek text, but is obviously implied.

[1:4]  ¹⁰⁰ tn Or “in the past.” The adverb πάλαι (palai) can refer to either, though the meaning “long ago” is more common.

[1:4]  ¹⁰¹ tn Grk “written about.”

[1:4]  ¹⁰² tn Grk “for this condemnation.” τοῦτο (touto) is almost surely a kataphoric demonstrative pronoun, pointing to what follows in vv. 5-18. Otherwise, the condemnation is only implied (in v. 3b) or is merely a statement of their sinfulness (“ungodly” in v. 4b), not a judgment of it.

[1:4]  ¹⁰³ tn Grk “debauchery.” This is the same word Peter uses to predict what the false teachers will be like (2 Pet 2:2, 7, 18).

[1:4]  ¹⁰⁴ tc Most later witnesses (P Ψ Ï sy) have θεόν (qeon, “God”) after δεσπότην (despothn, “master”), which appears to be a motivated reading in that it explicitly links “Master” to “God” in keeping with the normal NT pattern (see Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Tim 2:21; Rev 6:10). In patristic Greek, δεσπότης (despoth") was used especially of God (cf. BDAG 220 s.v. 1.b.). The earlier and better witnesses (Ì^72,78 א A B C 0251 33 81 323 1241 1739 al co) lack θεόν; the shorter reading is thus preferred on both internal and external grounds.

[1:4]  ¹⁰⁵ tn The terms “Master and Lord” both refer to the same person. The construction in Greek is known as the Granville Sharp rule, named after the English philanthropist-linguist who first clearly articulated the rule in 1798. Sharp pointed out that in the construction article-noun-καί-noun (where καί [kai] = “and”), when two nouns are singular, personal, and common (i.e., not proper names), they always had the same referent. Illustrations such as “the friend and brother,” “the God and Father,” etc. abound in the NT to prove Sharp’s point. For more discussion see ExSyn 270-78. See also Titus 2:13 and 2 Pet 1:1