Genesis 2:1-25

2:1 The heavens and the earth ¹  were completed with everything that was in them. ²  2:2 By ³  the seventh day God finished the work that he had been doing, ⁴  and he ceased ⁵  on the seventh day all the work that he had been doing. 2:3 God blessed the seventh day and made it holy ⁶  because on it he ceased all the work that he ⁷  had been doing in creation. ⁸ 

The Creation of Man and Woman

2:4 This is the account ⁹  of the heavens and

the earth ¹⁰  when they were created – when the Lord God ¹¹  made the earth and heavens. ¹² 

2:5 Now ¹³  no shrub of the field had yet grown on the earth, and no plant of the field ¹⁴  had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. ¹⁵  2:6 Springs ¹⁶  would well up ¹⁷  from the earth and water ¹⁸  the whole surface of the ground. ¹⁹  2:7 The Lord God formed ²⁰  the man from the soil of the ground ²¹  and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, ²²  and the man became a living being. ²³ 

2:8 The Lord God planted an orchard ²⁴  in the east, ²⁵  in Eden; ²⁶  and there he placed the man he had formed. ²⁷  2:9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow from the soil, ²⁸  every tree that was pleasing to look at ²⁹  and good for food. (Now ³⁰  the tree of life ³¹  and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ³²  were in the middle of the orchard.)

2:10 Now ³³  a river flows ³⁴  from Eden ³⁵  to

water the orchard, and from there it divides ³⁶  into four headstreams. ³⁷  2:11 The name of the first is Pishon; it runs through ³⁸  the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 2:12 (The gold of that land is pure; ³⁹  pearls ⁴⁰  and lapis lazuli ⁴¹  are also there). 2:13 The name of the second river is Gihon; it runs through ⁴²  the entire land of Cush. ⁴³  2:14 The name of the third river is Tigris; it runs along the east side of Assyria. ⁴⁴  The fourth river is the Euphrates.

2:15 The Lord God took the man and placed ⁴⁵  him in the orchard in ⁴⁶  Eden to care for it and to maintain it. ⁴⁷  2:16 Then the Lord God commanded ⁴⁸  the man, “You may freely eat ⁴⁹  fruit ⁵⁰  from every tree of the orchard, 2:17 but ⁵¹  you must not eat ⁵²  from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when ⁵³  you eat from it you will surely die.” ⁵⁴ 

2:18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. ⁵⁵  I will make a companion ⁵⁶  for him who corresponds to him.” ⁵⁷  2:19 The Lord God formed ⁵⁸  out of the ground every living animal of the field and every bird of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would ⁵⁹  name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 2:20 So the man named all the animals, the birds of the air, and the living creatures of the field, but for Adam ⁶⁰  no companion who corresponded to him was found. ⁶¹  2:21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep, ⁶²  and while he was asleep, ⁶³  he took part of the man’s side ⁶⁴  and closed up the place with flesh. ⁶⁵  2:22 Then the Lord God made ⁶⁶  a woman from the part he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 2:23 Then the man said,

“This one at last ⁶⁷  is bone of my bones

and flesh of my flesh;

this one will be called ⁶⁸  ‘woman,’

for she was taken out of ⁶⁹  man.” ⁷⁰ 

2:24 That is why ⁷¹  a man leaves ⁷²  his father and mother and unites with ⁷³  his wife, and they become a new family. ⁷⁴  2:25 The man and his wife were both naked, ⁷⁵  but they were not ashamed. ⁷⁶ 

Genesis 26:15-30

26:15 So the Philistines took dirt and filled up ⁷⁷  all the wells that his father’s servants had dug back in the days of his father Abraham.

26:16 Then Abimelech said to Isaac, “Leave us and go elsewhere, ⁷⁸  for you have become much more powerful ⁷⁹  than we are.” 26:17 So Isaac left there and settled in the Gerar Valley. ⁸⁰  26:18 Isaac reopened ⁸¹  the wells that had been dug ⁸²  back in the days of his father Abraham, for the Philistines had stopped them up ⁸³  after Abraham died. Isaac ⁸⁴  gave these wells ⁸⁵  the same names his father had given them. ⁸⁶ 

26:19 When Isaac’s servants dug in the valley and discovered a well with fresh flowing ⁸⁷  water there, 26:20 the herdsmen of Gerar quarreled ⁸⁸  with Isaac’s herdsmen, saying, “The water belongs to us!” So Isaac ⁸⁹  named the well ⁹⁰  Esek ⁹¹  because they argued with him about it. ⁹²  26:21 His servants ⁹³  dug another well, but they quarreled over it too, so Isaac named it ⁹⁴  Sitnah. ⁹⁵  26:22 Then he moved away from there and dug another well. They did not quarrel over it, so Isaac ⁹⁶  named it ⁹⁷  Rehoboth, ⁹⁸  saying, “For now the Lord has made room for us, and we will prosper in the land.”

26:23 From there Isaac ⁹⁹  went up to Beer Sheba. 26:24 The Lord appeared to him that night and said, “I am the God of your father Abraham. Do not be afraid, for I am with you. I will bless you and multiply your descendants for the sake of my servant Abraham.” 26:25 Then Isaac built an altar there and worshiped ¹⁰⁰  the Lord. He pitched his tent there, and his servants dug a well. ¹⁰¹ 

26:26 Now Abimelech had come ¹⁰²  to him from Gerar along with ¹⁰³  Ahuzzah his friend ¹⁰⁴  and Phicol the commander of his army. 26:27 Isaac asked them, “Why have you come to me? You hate me ¹⁰⁵  and sent me away from you.” 26:28 They replied, “We could plainly see ¹⁰⁶  that the Lord is with you. So we decided there should be ¹⁰⁷  a pact between us ¹⁰⁸  – between us ¹⁰⁹  and you. Allow us to make ¹¹⁰  a treaty with you 26:29 so that ¹¹¹  you will not do us any harm, just as we have not harmed ¹¹²  you, but have always treated you well ¹¹³  before sending you away ¹¹⁴  in peace. Now you are blessed by the Lord.” ¹¹⁵ 

26:30 So Isaac ¹¹⁶  held a feast for them and they celebrated. ¹¹⁷ 

Genesis 36:20-34

36:20 These were the sons of Seir the Horite, ¹¹⁸  who were living in the land: Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, 36:21 Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. These were the chiefs of the Horites, the descendants ¹¹⁹  of Seir in the land of Edom.

36:22 The sons of Lotan were Hori and Homam; ¹²⁰  Lotan’s sister was Timna.

36:23 These were the sons of Shobal: Alvan, Manahath, Ebal, Shepho, ¹²¹  and Onam.

36:24 These were the sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah (who discovered the hot springs ¹²²  in the wilderness as he pastured the donkeys of his father Zibeon).

36:25 These were the children ¹²³  of Anah: Dishon and Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah.

36:26 These were the sons of Dishon: ¹²⁴  Hemdan, Eshban, Ithran, and Keran.

36:27 These were the sons of Ezer: Bilhan, Zaavan, and Akan.

36:28 These were the sons of Dishan: Uz and Aran.

36:29 These were the chiefs of the Horites: chief Lotan, chief Shobal, chief Zibeon, chief Anah, 36:30 chief Dishon, chief Ezer, chief Dishan. These were the chiefs of the Horites, according to their chief lists in the land of Seir.

36:31 These were the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king ruled over the Israelites: ¹²⁵ 

36:32 Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom; the name of his city was Dinhabah.

36:33 When Bela died, Jobab the son of Zerah from Bozrah reigned in his place.

36:34 When Jobab died, Husham from the land of the Temanites reigned in his place.

Leviticus 26:11

26:11 “‘I will put my tabernacle ¹²⁶  in your midst and I will not abhor you. ¹²⁷ 

Ezekiel 37:27-28

37:27 My dwelling place will be with them; I will be their God, and they will be my people. 37:28 Then, when my sanctuary is among them forever, the nations will know that I, the Lord, sanctify Israel.’” ¹²⁸ 

John 1:14

1:14 Now ¹²⁹  the Word became flesh ¹³⁰  and took up residence ¹³¹  among us. We ¹³²  saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, ¹³³  full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.

Galatians 4:4

4:4 But when the appropriate time ¹³⁴  had come, God sent out his Son, born of a woman, born under the law,

Galatians 4:1

4:1 Now I mean that the heir, as long as he is a minor, ¹³⁵  is no different from a slave, though he is the owner ¹³⁶  of everything.

Galatians 1:5

1:5 to whom be glory forever and ever! Amen.

Revelation 21:3

21:3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying: “Look! The residence ¹³⁷  of God is among human beings. ¹³⁸  He ¹³⁹  will live among them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them. ¹⁴⁰ 

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

[2:1]  ² tn Heb “and all the host of them.” Here the “host” refers to all the entities and creatures that God created to populate the world.

[2:2]  ³ tn Heb “on/in the seventh day.”

[2:2]  ⁴ tn Heb “his work which he did [or “made”].”

[2:2]  ⁵ 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.

[2:3]  ⁶ tn The verb is usually translated “and sanctified it.” The Piel verb קִדֵּשׁ (qiddesh) means “to make something holy; to set something apart; to distinguish it.” On the literal level the phrase means essentially that God made this day different. But within the context of the Law, it means that the day belonged to God; it was for rest from ordinary labor, worship, and spiritual service. The day belonged to God.

[2:3]  ⁷ tn Heb “God.” The pronoun (“he”) has been employed in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[2:3]  ⁸ tn Heb “for on it he ceased from all his work which God created to make.” The last infinitive construct and the verb before it form a verbal hendiadys, the infinitive becoming the modifier – “which God creatively made,” or “which God made in his creating.”

[2:4]  ⁹ 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]  ¹⁰ tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1.

[2:4]  ¹¹ 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]  ¹² 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.

[2:5]  ¹³ tn Heb “Now every sprig of the field before it was.” The verb forms, although appearing to be imperfects, are technically preterites coming after the adverb טֶּרֶם (terem). The word order (conjunction + subject + predicate) indicates a disjunctive clause, which provides background information for the following narrative (as in 1:2). Two negative clauses are given (“before any sprig…”, and “before any cultivated grain” existed), followed by two causal clauses explaining them, and then a positive circumstantial clause is given – again dealing with water as in 1:2 (water would well up).

[2:5]  ¹⁴ tn The first term, שִׂיחַ (siakh), probably refers to the wild, uncultivated plants (see Gen 21:15; Job 30:4,7); whereas the second, עֵשֶׂב (’esev), refers to cultivated grains. It is a way of saying: “back before anything was growing.”

[2:5]  ¹⁵ tn The two causal clauses explain the first two disjunctive clauses: There was no uncultivated, general growth because there was no rain, and there were no grains because there was no man to cultivate the soil.

[2:6]  ¹⁶ tn The conjunction vav (ו) introduces a third disjunctive clause. The Hebrew word אֵד (’ed) was traditionally translated “mist” because of its use in Job 36:27. However, an Akkadian cognate edu in Babylonian texts refers to subterranean springs or waterways. Such a spring would fit the description in this context, since this water “goes up” and waters the ground.

[2:6]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “was going up.” The verb is an imperfect form, which in this narrative context carries a customary nuance, indicating continual action in past time.

[2:6]  ¹⁸ tn The perfect with vav (ו) consecutive carries the same nuance as the preceding verb. Whenever it would well up, it would water the ground.

[2:6]  ¹⁹ tn The Hebrew word אֲדָמָה (’adamah) actually means “ground; fertile soil.”

[2:7]  ²⁰ tn Or “fashioned.” The prefixed verb form with vav (ו) consecutive initiates narrative sequence. The Hebrew word יָצַר (yatsar) means “to form” or “to fashion,” usually by plan or design (see the related noun יֵצֶר [yetser] in Gen 6:5). It is the term for an artist’s work (the Hebrew term יוֹצֵר [yotser] refers to a potter; see Jer 18:2-4.)

[2:7]  ²¹ tn The line literally reads “And Yahweh God formed the man, soil, from the ground.” “Soil” is an adverbial accusative, identifying the material from which the man was made.

[2:7]  ²² tn The Hebrew word נְשָׁמָה (nÿshamah, “breath”) is used for God and for the life imparted to humans, not animals (see T. C. Mitchell, “The Old Testament Usage of Nÿshama,” VT 11 [1961]: 177-87). Its usage in the Bible conveys more than a breathing living organism (נֶפֶשׁ חַיַּה, nefesh khayyah). Whatever is given this breath of life becomes animated with the life from God, has spiritual understanding (Job 32:8), and has a functioning conscience (Prov 20:27).

[2:7]  ²³ tn The Hebrew term נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh, “being”) is often translated “soul,” but the word usually refers to the whole person. The phrase נֶפֶשׁ חַיַּה (nefesh khayyah, “living being”) is used of both animals and human beings (see 1:20, 24, 30; 2:19).

[2:8]  ²⁴ tn Traditionally “garden,” but the subsequent description of this “garden” makes it clear that it is an orchard of fruit trees.

[2:8]  ²⁵ tn Heb “from the east” or “off east.”

[2:8]  ²⁶ sn The name Eden (עֵדֶן, ’eden) means “pleasure” in Hebrew.

[2:8]  ²⁷ tn The perfect verbal form here requires the past perfect translation since it describes an event that preceded the event described in the main clause.

[2:9]  ²⁸ tn Heb “ground,” referring to the fertile soil.

[2:9]  ²⁹ tn Heb “desirable of sight [or “appearance”].” The phrase describes the kinds of trees that are visually pleasing and yield fruit that is desirable to the appetite.

[2:9]  ³⁰ tn The verse ends with a disjunctive clause providing a parenthetical bit of information about the existence of two special trees in the garden.

[2:9]  ³¹ tn In light of Gen 3:22, the construction “tree of life” should be interpreted to mean a tree that produces life-giving fruit (objective genitive) rather than a living tree (attributive genitive). See E. O. James, The Tree of Life (SHR); and R. Marcus, “The Tree of Life in Proverbs,” JBL 62 (1943): 117-20.

[2:9]  ³² tn The expression “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” must be interpreted to mean that the tree would produce fruit which, when eaten, gives special knowledge of “good and evil.” Scholars debate what this phrase means here. For a survey of opinions, see G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:62-64. One view is that “good” refers to that which enhances, promotes, and produces life, while “evil” refers to anything that hinders, interrupts or destroys life. So eating from this tree would change human nature – people would be able to alter life for better (in their thinking) or for worse. See D. J. A. Clines, “The Tree of Knowledge and the Law of Yahweh,” VT 24 (1974): 8-14; and I. Engnell, “‘Knowledge’ and ‘Life’ in the Creation Story,” Wisdom in Israel and in the Ancient Near East [VTSup], 103-19. Another view understands the “knowledge of good and evil” as the capacity to discern between moral good and evil. The following context suggests the tree’s fruit gives one wisdom (see the phrase “capable of making one wise” in 3:6, as well as the note there on the word “wise”), which certainly includes the capacity to discern between good and evil. Such wisdom is characteristic of divine beings, as the serpent’s promise implies (3:5) and as 3:22 makes clear. (Note, however, that this capacity does not include the ability to do what is right.) God prohibits man from eating of the tree. The prohibition becomes a test to see if man will be satisfied with his role and place, or if he will try to ascend to the divine level. There will be a time for man to possess moral discernment/wisdom, as God reveals and imparts it to him, but it is not something to be grasped at in an effort to become “a god.” In fact, the command to be obedient was the first lesson in moral discernment/wisdom. God was essentially saying: “Here is lesson one – respect my authority and commands. Disobey me and you will die.” When man disobeys, he decides he does not want to acquire moral wisdom God’s way, but instead tries to rise immediately to the divine level. Once man has acquired such divine wisdom by eating the tree’s fruit (3:22), he must be banned from the garden so that he will not be able to achieve his goal of being godlike and thus live forever, a divine characteristic (3:24). Ironically, man now has the capacity to discern good from evil (3:22), but he is morally corrupted and rebellious and will not consistently choose what is right.

[2:10]  ³³ tn The disjunctive clause (note the construction conjunction + subject + predicate) introduces an entire paragraph about the richness of the region in the east.

[2:10]  ³⁴ tn The Hebrew active participle may be translated here as indicating past durative action, “was flowing,” or as a present durative, “flows.” Since this river was the source of the rivers mentioned in vv. 11-14, which appear to describe a situation contemporary with the narrator, it is preferable to translate the participle in v. 10 with the present tense. This suggests that Eden and its orchard still existed in the narrator’s time. According to ancient Jewish tradition, Enoch was taken to the Garden of Eden, where his presence insulated the garden from the destructive waters of Noah’s flood. See Jub. 4:23-24.

[2:10]  ³⁵ sn Eden is portrayed here as a source of life-giving rivers (that is, perennial streams). This is no surprise because its orchard is where the tree of life is located. Eden is a source of life, but tragically its orchard is no longer accessible to humankind. The river flowing out of Eden is a tantalizing reminder of this. God continues to provide life-giving water to sustain physical existence on the earth, but immortality has been lost.

[2:10]  ³⁶ tn The imperfect verb form has the same nuance as the preceding participle. (If the participle is taken as past durative, then the imperfect would be translated “was dividing.”)

[2:10]  ³⁷ tn Or “branches”; Heb “heads.” Cf. NEB “streams”; NASB “rivers.”

[2:11]  ³⁸ tn Heb “it is that which goes around.”

[2:12]  ³⁹ tn Heb “good.”

[2:12]  ⁴⁰ tn The Hebrew term translated “pearls” may be a reference to resin (cf. NIV “aromatic resin”) or another precious stone (cf. NEB, NASB, NRSV “bdellium”).

[2:12]  ⁴¹ tn Or “onyx.”

[2:13]  ⁴² tn Heb “it is that which goes around.”

[2:13]  ⁴³ sn Cush. In the Bible the Hebrew word כּוּשׁ (kush, “Kush”) often refers to Ethiopia (so KJV, CEV), but here it must refer to a region in Mesopotamia, the area of the later Cassite dynasty of Babylon. See Gen 10:8 as well as E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB), 20.

[2:14]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “Asshur” (so NEB, NIV).

[2:15]  ⁴⁵ tn The Hebrew verb נוּחַ (nuakh, translated here as “placed”) is a different verb than the one used in 2:8.

[2:15]  ⁴⁶ tn Traditionally translated “the Garden of Eden,” the context makes it clear that the garden (or orchard) was in Eden (making “Eden” a genitive of location).

[2:15]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “to work it and to keep it.”

[2:16]  ⁴⁸ sn This is the first time in the Bible that the verb tsavah (צָוָה, “to command”) appears. Whatever the man had to do in the garden, the main focus of the narrative is on keeping God’s commandments. God created humans with the capacity to obey him and then tested them with commands.

[2:16]  ⁴⁹ tn The imperfect verb form probably carries the nuance of permission (“you may eat”) since the man is not being commanded to eat from every tree. The accompanying infinitive absolute adds emphasis: “you may freely eat,” or “you may eat to your heart’s content.”

[2:16]  ⁵⁰ tn The word “fruit” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied as the direct object of the verb “eat.” Presumably the only part of the tree the man would eat would be its fruit (cf. 3:2).

[2:17]  ⁵¹ tn The disjunctive clause here indicates contrast: “but from the tree of the knowledge….”

[2:17]  ⁵² tn The negated imperfect verb form indicates prohibition, “you must not eat.”

[2:17]  ⁵³ tn Or “in the very day, as soon as.” If one understands the expression to have this more precise meaning, then the following narrative presents a problem, for the man does not die physically as soon as he eats from the tree. In this case one may argue that spiritual death is in view. If physical death is in view here, there are two options to explain the following narrative: (1) The following phrase “You will surely die” concerns mortality which ultimately results in death (a natural paraphrase would be, “You will become mortal”), or (2) God mercifully gave man a reprieve, allowing him to live longer than he deserved.

[2:17]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “dying you will die.” The imperfect verb form here has the nuance of the specific future because it is introduced with the temporal clause, “when you eat…you will die.” That certainty is underscored with the infinitive absolute, “you will surely die.”

[2:18]  ⁵⁵ tn Heb “The being of man by himself is not good.” The meaning of “good” must be defined contextually. Within the context of creation, in which God instructs humankind to be fruitful and multiply, the man alone cannot comply. Being alone prevents the man from fulfilling the design of creation and therefore is not good.

[2:18]  ⁵⁶ tn Traditionally “helper.” The English word “helper,” because it can connote so many different ideas, does not accurately convey the connotation of the Hebrew word עֵזֶר (’ezer). Usage of the Hebrew term does not suggest a subordinate role, a connotation which English “helper” can have. In the Bible God is frequently described as the “helper,” the one who does for us what we cannot do for ourselves, the one who meets our needs. In this context the word seems to express the idea of an “indispensable companion.” The woman would supply what the man was lacking in the design of creation and logically it would follow that the man would supply what she was lacking, although that is not stated here. See further M. L. Rosenzweig, “A Helper Equal to Him,” Jud 139 (1986): 277-80.

[2:18]  ⁵⁷ tn The Hebrew expression כְּנֶגְדּוֹ (kÿnegdo) literally means “according to the opposite of him.” Translations such as “suitable [for]” (NASB, NIV), “matching,” “corresponding to” all capture the idea. (Translations that render the phrase simply “partner” [cf. NEB, NRSV], while not totally inaccurate, do not reflect the nuance of correspondence and/or suitability.) The man’s form and nature are matched by the woman’s as she reflects him and complements him. Together they correspond. In short, this prepositional phrase indicates that she has everything that God had invested in him.

[2:19]  ⁵⁸ tn Or “fashioned.” To harmonize the order of events with the chronology of chapter one, some translate the prefixed verb form with vav (ו) consecutive as a past perfect (“had formed,” cf. NIV) here. (In chapter one the creation of the animals preceded the creation of man; here the animals are created after the man.) However, it is unlikely that the Hebrew construction can be translated in this way in the middle of this pericope, for the criteria for unmarked temporal overlay are not present here. See S. R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew, 84-88, and especially R. Buth, “Methodological Collision between Source Criticism and Discourse Analysis,” Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, 138-54. For a contrary viewpoint see IBHS 552-53 §33.2.3 and C. J. Collins, “The Wayyiqtol as ‘Pluperfect’: When and Why,” TynBul 46 (1995): 117-40.

[2:19]  ⁵⁹ tn The imperfect verb form is future from the perspective of the past time narrative.

[2:20]  ⁶⁰ tn Here for the first time the Hebrew word אָדָם (’adam) appears without the article, suggesting that it might now be the name “Adam” rather than “[the] man.” Translations of the Bible differ as to where they make the change from “man” to “Adam” (e.g., NASB and NIV translate “Adam” here, while NEB and NRSV continue to use “the man”; the KJV uses “Adam” twice in v. 19).

[2:20]  ⁶¹ tn Heb “there was not found a companion who corresponded to him.” The subject of the third masculine singular verb form is indefinite. Without a formally expressed subject the verb may be translated as passive: “one did not find = there was not found.”

[2:21]  ⁶² tn Heb “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on the man.”

[2:21]  ⁶³ tn Heb “and he slept.” In the sequence the verb may be subordinated to the following verb to indicate a temporal clause (“while…”).

[2:21]  ⁶⁴ tn Traditionally translated “rib,” the Hebrew word actually means “side.” The Hebrew text reads, “and he took one from his sides,” which could be rendered “part of his sides.” That idea may fit better the explanation by the man that the woman is his flesh and bone.

[2:21]  ⁶⁵ tn Heb “closed up the flesh under it.”

[2:22]  ⁶⁶ tn The Hebrew verb is בָּנָה (banah, “to make, to build, to construct”). The text states that the Lord God built the rib into a woman. Again, the passage gives no indication of precisely how this was done.

[2:23]  ⁶⁷ tn The Hebrew term הַפַּעַם (happa’am) means “the [this] time, this place,” or “now, finally, at last.” The expression conveys the futility of the man while naming the animals and finding no one who corresponded to him.

[2:23]  ⁶⁸ tn The Hebrew text is very precise, stating: “of this one it will be said, ‘woman’.” The text is not necessarily saying that the man named his wife – that comes after the fall (Gen 3:20).

[2:23]  ⁶⁹ tn Or “from” (but see v. 22).

[2:23]  ⁷⁰ sn This poetic section expresses the correspondence between the man and the woman. She is bone of his bones, flesh of his flesh. Note the wordplay (paronomasia) between “woman” (אִשָּׁה, ’ishah) and “man” (אִישׁ, ’ish). On the surface it appears that the word for woman is the feminine form of the word for man. But the two words are not etymologically related. The sound and the sense give that impression, however, and make for a more effective wordplay.

[2:24]  ⁷¹ tn This statement, introduced by the Hebrew phrase עַל־כֵּן (’al-ken, “therefore” or “that is why”), is an editorial comment, not an extension of the quotation. The statement is describing what typically happens, not what will or should happen. It is saying, “This is why we do things the way we do.” It links a contemporary (with the narrator) practice with the historical event being narrated. The historical event narrated in v. 23 provides the basis for the contemporary practice described in v. 24. That is why the imperfect verb forms are translated with the present tense rather than future.

[2:24]  ⁷² tn The imperfect verb form has a habitual or characteristic nuance. For other examples of עַל־כֵּן (’al-ken, “therefore, that is why”) with the imperfect in a narrative framework, see Gen 10:9; 32:32 (the phrase “to this day” indicates characteristic behavior is in view); Num 21:14, 27; 1 Sam 5:5 (note “to this day”); 19:24 (perhaps the imperfect is customary here, “were saying”); 2 Sam 5:8. The verb translated “leave” (עָזָב, ’azab) normally means “to abandon, to forsake, to leave behind, to discard,” when used with human subject and object (see Josh 22:3; 1 Sam 30:13; Ps 27:10; Prov 2:17; Isa 54:6; 60:15; 62:4; Jer 49:11). Within the context of the ancient Israelite extended family structure, this cannot refer to emotional or geographical separation. The narrator is using hyperbole to emphasize the change in perspective that typically overtakes a young man when his thoughts turn to love and marriage.

[2:24]  ⁷³ tn The perfect with vav (ו) consecutive carries the same habitual or characteristic nuance as the preceding imperfect. The verb is traditionally translated “cleaves [to]”; it has the basic idea of “stick with/to” (e.g., it is used of Ruth resolutely staying with her mother-in-law in Ruth 1:14). In this passage it describes the inseparable relationship between the man and the woman in marriage as God intended it.

[2:24]  ⁷⁴ tn Heb “and they become one flesh.” The perfect with vav consecutive carries the same habitual or characteristic nuance as the preceding verbs in the verse. The retention of the word “flesh” (בָּשָׂר, basar) in the translation often leads to improper or incomplete interpretations. The Hebrew word refers to more than just a sexual union. When they unite in marriage, the man and woman bring into being a new family unit (הָיָה + לְ, hayah + lamed preposition means “become”). The phrase “one flesh” occurs only here and must be interpreted in light of v. 23. There the man declares that the woman is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. To be one’s “bone and flesh” is to be related by blood to someone. For example, the phrase describes the relationship between Laban and Jacob (Gen 29:14); Abimelech and the Shechemites (Judg 9:2; his mother was a Shechemite); David and the Israelites (2 Sam 5:1); David and the elders of Judah (2 Sam 19:12); and David and his nephew Amasa (2 Sam 19:13, see 2 Sam 17:2; 1 Chr 2:16-17). The expression “one flesh” seems to indicate that they become, as it were, “kin,” at least legally (a new family unit is created) or metaphorically. In this first marriage in human history, the woman was literally formed from the man’s bone and flesh. Even though later marriages do not involve such a divine surgical operation, the first marriage sets the pattern for how later marriages are understood and explains why marriage supersedes the parent-child relationship.

[2:25]  ⁷⁵ tn Heb “And the two of them were naked, the man and his wife.”

[2:25]  ⁷⁶ tn The imperfect verb form here has a customary nuance, indicating a continuing condition in past time. The meaning of the Hebrew term בּוֹשׁ (bosh) is “to be ashamed, to put to shame,” but its meaning is stronger than “to be embarrassed.” The word conveys the fear of exploitation or evil – enemies are put to shame through military victory. It indicates the feeling of shame that approximates a fear of evil.

[26:15]  ⁷⁷ tn Heb “and the Philistines stopped them up and filled them with dirt.”

[26:16]  ⁷⁸ tn Heb “Go away from us.”

[26:16]  ⁷⁹ sn You have become much more powerful. This explanation for the expulsion of Isaac from Philistine territory foreshadows the words used later by the Egyptians to justify their oppression of Israel (see Exod 1:9).

[26:17]  ⁸⁰ tn Heb “and he camped in the valley of Gerar and he lived there.”

[26:18]  ⁸¹ tn Heb “he returned and dug,” meaning “he dug again” or “he reopened.”

[26:18]  ⁸² tn Heb “that they dug.” Since the subject is indefinite, the verb is translated as passive.

[26:18]  ⁸³ tn Heb “and the Philistines had stopped them up.” This clause explains why Isaac had to reopen them.

[26:18]  ⁸⁴ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:18]  ⁸⁵ tn Heb “them”; the referent (the wells) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:18]  ⁸⁶ tn Heb “called names to them according to the names that his father called them.”

[26:19]  ⁸⁷ tn Heb “living.” This expression refers to a well supplied by subterranean streams (see Song 4:15).

[26:20]  ⁸⁸ tn The Hebrew verb translated “quarreled” describes a conflict that often has legal ramifications.

[26:20]  ⁸⁹ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:20]  ⁹⁰ tn Heb “and he called the name of the well.”

[26:20]  ⁹¹ sn The name Esek means “argument” in Hebrew. The following causal clause explains that Isaac gave the well this name as a reminder of the conflict its discovery had created. In the Hebrew text there is a wordplay, for the name is derived from the verb translated “argued.”

[26:20]  ⁹² tn The words “about it” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[26:21]  ⁹³ tn Heb “they”; the referent (Isaac’s servants) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:21]  ⁹⁴ tn Heb “and he called its name.” The referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:21]  ⁹⁵ sn The name Sitnah (שִׂטְנָה, sitnah) is derived from a Hebrew verbal root meaning “to oppose; to be an adversary” (cf. Job 1:6). The name was a reminder that the digging of this well caused “opposition” from the Philistines.

[26:22]  ⁹⁶ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:22]  ⁹⁷ tn Heb “and he called its name.”

[26:22]  ⁹⁸ sn The name Rehoboth (רְהֹבוֹת, rehovot) is derived from a verbal root meaning “to make room.” The name was a reminder that God had made room for them. The story shows Isaac’s patience with the opposition; it also shows how God’s blessing outdistanced the men of Gerar. They could not stop it or seize it any longer.

[26:23]  ⁹⁹ tn Heb “and he went up from there”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:25]  ¹⁰⁰ tn Heb “called in the name of.” The expression refers to worshiping the Lord through prayer and sacrifice (see Gen 4:26; 12:8; 13:4; 21:33). See G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:116.

[26:25]  ¹⁰¹ tn Heb “and they dug there, the servants of Isaac, a well.”

[26:26]  ¹⁰² tn The disjunctive clause supplies pertinent supplemental information. The past perfect is used because the following narrative records the treaty at Beer Sheba. Prior to this we are told that Isaac settled in Beer Sheba; presumably this treaty would have allowed him to do that. However, it may be that he settled there and then made the treaty by which he renamed the place Beer Sheba. In this case one may translate “Now Abimelech came to him.”

[26:26]  ¹⁰³ tn Heb “and.”

[26:26]  ¹⁰⁴ tn Many modern translations render the Hebrew term מֵרֵעַ (merea’) as “councillor” or “adviser,” but the term may not designate an official position but simply a close personal friend.

[26:27]  ¹⁰⁵ tn The disjunctive clause is circumstantial, expressing the reason for his question.

[26:28]  ¹⁰⁶ tn The infinitive absolute before the verb emphasizes the clarity of their perception.

[26:28]  ¹⁰⁷ tn Heb “And we said, ‘Let there be.’” The direct discourse in the Hebrew text has been rendered as indirect discourse in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[26:28]  ¹⁰⁸ tn The pronoun “us” here is inclusive – it refers to the Philistine contingent on the one hand and Isaac on the other.

[26:28]  ¹⁰⁹ tn The pronoun “us” here is exclusive – it refers to just the Philistine contingent (the following “you” refers to Isaac).

[26:28]  ¹¹⁰ tn The translation assumes that the cohortative expresses their request. Another option is to understand the cohortative as indicating resolve: “We want to make.’”

[26:29]  ¹¹¹ tn The oath formula is used: “if you do us harm” means “so that you will not do.”

[26:29]  ¹¹² tn Heb “touched.”

[26:29]  ¹¹³ tn Heb “and just as we have done only good with you.”

[26:29]  ¹¹⁴ tn Heb “and we sent you away.”

[26:29]  ¹¹⁵ tn The Philistine leaders are making an observation, not pronouncing a blessing, so the translation reads “you are blessed” rather than “may you be blessed” (cf. NAB).

[26:30]  ¹¹⁶ tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Isaac) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[26:30]  ¹¹⁷ tn Heb “and they ate and drank.”

[36:20]  ¹¹⁸ sn The same pattern of sons, grandsons, and chiefs is now listed for Seir the Horite. “Seir” is both the name of the place and the name of the ancestor of these tribes. The name “Horite” is probably not to be identified with “Hurrian.” The clan of Esau settled in this area, intermarried with these Horites and eventually dispossessed them, so that they all became known as Edomites (Deut 2:12 telescopes the whole development).

[36:21]  ¹¹⁹ tn Or “sons.”

[36:22]  ¹²⁰ tn Heb “Hemam”; this is probably a variant spelling of “Homam” (1 Chr 1:39); cf. NRSV, NLT “Heman.”

[36:23]  ¹²¹ tn This name is given as “Shephi” in 1 Chr 1:40.

[36:24]  ¹²² tn The meaning of this Hebrew term is uncertain; Syriac reads “water” and Vulgate reads “hot water.”

[36:25]  ¹²³ tn Heb “sons,” but since a daughter is included in the list, the word must be translated “children.”

[36:26]  ¹²⁴ tn Heb “Dishan,” but this must be either a scribal error or variant spelling, since “Dishan” is mentioned in v. 28 (see also v. 21).

[36:31]  ¹²⁵ tn Or perhaps “before any Israelite king ruled over [them].”

[26:11]  ¹²⁶ tn LXX codexes Vaticanus and Alexandrinus have “my covenant” rather than “my tabernacle.” Cf. NAB, NASB, NRSV “my dwelling.”

[26:11]  ¹²⁷ tn Heb “and my soul [נֶפֶשׁ, nefesh] will not abhor you.”

[37:28]  ¹²⁸ sn The sanctuary of Israel becomes the main focus of Ezek 40-48.

[1:14]  ¹²⁹ 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]  ¹³⁰ 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]  ¹³¹ tn Grk “and tabernacled.”

[1:14]  ¹³² tn Grk “and we saw.”

[1:14]  ¹³³ 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).

[4:4]  ¹³⁴ tn Grk “the fullness of time” (an idiom for the totality of a period of time, with the implication of proper completion; see L&N 67.69).

[4:1]  ¹³⁵ tn Grk “a small child.” The Greek term νήπιος (nhpios) refers to a young child, no longer a helpless infant but probably not more than three or four years old (L&N 9.43). The point in context, though, is that this child is too young to take any responsibility for the management of his assets.

[4:1]  ¹³⁶ tn Grk “master” or “lord” (κύριος, kurios).

[21:3]  ¹³⁷ tn Or “dwelling place”; traditionally, “tabernacle”; literally “tent.”

[21:3]  ¹³⁸ tn Or “people”; Grk “men” (ἀνθρώπων, anqrwpwn), a generic use of the term. In the translation “human beings” was used here because “people” occurs later in the verse and translates a different Greek word (λαοί, laoi).

[21:3]  ¹³⁹ tn Grk “men, and he.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[21:3]  ¹⁴⁰ tc ‡ Most mss (א Ï^K) do not add the words “[as] their God” (αὐτῶν θεός, autwn qeos) after “he will be with them.” The mss with these words include A 2030 2050 2329 al. The Andreas group (Ï^A) also has the words, but in a different arrangement with the preceding (ἔσται μετ᾿ αὐτῶν θεὸς αὐτῶν, estai met’ autwn qeo" autwn). Not only do the words float, but scribes may have been motivated to make a connection here more directly with Isa 7:14; 8:8; Jer 24:7; 31:33; Zech 8:8. In light of sufficient external evidence as well as the possibility that the longer reading is theologically motivated, the shorter reading is preferred. NA²⁷ places the words in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity.