Discovery Box2 Samuel 5:2
Context5:2 In the past, when Saul was our king, you were the real leader in Israel. 1 The Lord said to you, ‘You will shepherd my people Israel; you will rule over Israel.’”
2 Samuel 5:1
Context5:1 All the tribes of Israel came to David at Hebron saying, “Look, we are your very flesh and blood! 2
2 Samuel 11:2
Context11:2 One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of his palace. 3 From the roof he saw a woman bathing. Now this woman was very attractive. 4
Ezekiel 34:23-24
Context34:23 I will set one shepherd over them, and he will feed them – namely, my servant David. 5 He will feed them and will be their shepherd. 34:24 I, the Lord, will be their God, and my servant David will be prince 6 among them; I, the Lord, have spoken!
Micah 5:2-4
Context5:2 (5:1) As for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, 7
seemingly insignificant 8 among the clans of Judah –
from you a king will emerge who will rule over Israel on my behalf, 9
one whose origins 10 are in the distant past. 11
5:3 So the Lord 12 will hand the people of Israel 13 over to their enemies 14
until the time when the woman in labor 15 gives birth. 16
Then the rest of the king’s 17 countrymen will return
to be reunited with the people of Israel. 18
5:4 He will assume his post 19 and shepherd the people 20 by the Lord’s strength,
by the sovereign authority of the Lord his God. 21
They will live securely, 22 for at that time he will be honored 23
even in the distant regions of 24 the earth.
Zechariah 11:4-17
Context11:4 The Lord my God says this: “Shepherd the flock set aside for slaughter. 11:5 Those who buy them 25 slaughter them and are not held guilty; those who sell them say, ‘Blessed be the Lord, for I am rich.’ Their own shepherds have no compassion for them. 11:6 Indeed, I will no longer have compassion on the people of the land,” says the Lord, “but instead I will turn every last person over to his neighbor and his king. They will devastate the land, and I will not deliver it from them.”
11:7 So I 26 began to shepherd the flock destined for slaughter, the most afflicted 27 of all the flock. Then I took two staffs, 28 calling one “Pleasantness” 29 and the other “Binders,” 30 and I tended the flock. 11:8 Next I eradicated the three shepherds in one month, 31 for I ran out of patience with them and, indeed, they detested me as well. 11:9 I then said, “I will not shepherd you. What is to die, let it die, and what is to be eradicated, let it be eradicated. As for those who survive, let them eat each other’s flesh!”
11:10 Then I took my staff “Pleasantness” and cut it in two to annul my covenant that I had made with all the people. 11:11 So it was annulled that very day, and then the most afflicted of the flock who kept faith with me knew that that was the word of the Lord.
11:12 Then I 32 said to them, “If it seems good to you, pay me my wages, but if not, forget it.” So they weighed out my payment – thirty pieces of silver. 33 11:13 The Lord then said to me, “Throw to the potter that exorbitant sum 34 at which they valued me!” So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them to the potter 35 at the temple 36 of the Lord. 11:14 Then I cut the second staff “Binders” in two in order to annul the covenant of brotherhood between Judah and Israel.
11:15 Again the Lord said to me, “Take up once more the equipment of a foolish shepherd. 37 11:16 Indeed, I am about to raise up a shepherd in the land who will not take heed to the sheep headed to slaughter, will not seek the scattered, and will not heal the injured. 38 Moreover, he will not nourish the one that is healthy but instead will eat the meat of the fat sheep 39 and tear off their hooves.
11:17 Woe to the worthless shepherd
who abandons the flock!
May a sword fall on his arm and his right eye!
May his arm wither completely away,
and his right eye become completely blind!”
Matthew 2:6
Context2:6 ‘And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are in no way least among the rulers of Judah,
for out of you will come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.’” 40
John 21:15-17
Context21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, 41 do you love me more than these do?” 42 He replied, 43 “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” 44 Jesus 45 told him, “Feed my lambs.” 21:16 Jesus 46 said 47 a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He replied, 48 “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus 49 told him, “Shepherd my sheep.” 21:17 Jesus 50 said 51 a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed 52 that Jesus 53 asked 54 him a third time, “Do you love me?” and said, 55 “Lord, you know everything. You know that I love you.” Jesus 56 replied, 57 “Feed my sheep.
John 21:1
Context21:1 After this 58 Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias. 59 Now this is how he did so. 60
John 5:2
Context5:2 Now there is 61 in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate 62 a pool called Bethzatha 63 in Aramaic, 64 which has five covered walkways. 65
[5:2] 1 tn Heb “you were the one leading out and the one leading in Israel.”
[5:1] 2 tn Heb “look we are your bone and your flesh.”
[11:2] 3 tn Heb “on the roof of the house of the king.” So also in vv. 8, 9.
[11:2] 4 tn The disjunctive clause highlights this observation and builds the tension of the story.
[34:23] 4 sn The messianic king is here called “David” (see Jer 30:9 and Hos 3:5, as well as Isa 11:1 and Mic 5:2) because he will fulfill the Davidic royal ideal depicted in the prophets and royal psalms (see Ps 2, 89).
[34:24] 5 sn The messianic king (“David”) is called both “king” and “prince” in 37:24-25. The use of the term “prince” for this king facilitates the contrast between this ideal ruler and the Davidic “princes” denounced in earlier prophecies (see 7:27; 12:10, 12; 19:1; 21:25; 22:6, 25).
[5:2] 6 sn Ephrathah is either an alternate name for Bethlehem or the name of the district in which Bethlehem was located. See Ruth 4:11.
[5:2] 7 tn Heb “being small.” Some omit לִהְיוֹת (lihyot, “being”) because it fits awkwardly and appears again in the next line.
[5:2] 8 tn Heb “from you for me one will go out to be a ruler over Israel.”
[5:2] 9 tn Heb “his goings out.” The term may refer to the ruler’s origins (cf. NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT) or to his activities.
[5:2] 10 tn Heb “from the past, from the days of antiquity.” Elsewhere both phrases refer to the early periods in the history of the world or of the nation of Israel. For מִקֶּדֶם (miqqedem, “from the past”) see Neh 12:46; Pss 74:12; 77:11; Isa 45:21; 46:10. For מִימֵי עוֹלָם (mimey ’olam, “from the days of antiquity”) see Isa 63:9, 11; Amos 9:11; Mic 7:14; Mal 3:4. In Neh 12:46 and Amos 9:11 the Davidic era is in view.
[5:3] 7 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the
[5:3] 8 tn Heb “them”; the referent (the people of Israel) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[5:3] 9 tn The words “to their enemies” are supplied in the translation for clarification.
[5:3] 10 sn The woman in labor. Personified, suffering Jerusalem is the referent. See 4:9-10.
[5:3] 11 sn Gives birth. The point of the figurative language is that Jerusalem finally finds relief from her suffering. See 4:10.
[5:3] 12 tn Heb “his”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[5:3] 13 tn Heb “to the sons of Israel.” The words “be reunited with” are supplied in the translation for clarity.
[5:4] 8 tn Heb “stand up”; NAB “stand firm”; NASB “will arise.”
[5:4] 9 tn The words “the people” are supplied in the translation for clarification.
[5:4] 10 tn Heb “by the majesty of the name of the
[5:4] 11 tn The words “in peace” are supplied in the translation for clarification. Perhaps וְיָשָׁבוּ (vÿyashavu, “and they will live”) should be emended to וְשָׁבוּ (vÿshavu, “and they will return”).
[5:4] 13 tn Or “to the ends of.”
[11:5] 9 sn The expression those who buy them appears to be a reference to the foreign nations to whom Israel’s own kings “sold” their subjects. Far from being good shepherds, then, they were evil and profiteering. The whole section (vv. 4-14) refers to the past when the
[11:7] 10 sn The first person pronoun refers to Zechariah himself who, however, is a “stand-in” for the
[11:7] 11 tc For the MT reading לָכֵן עֲנִיֵּי (lakhen ’aniyyey, “therefore the [most] afflicted of”) the LXX presupposes לִכְנַעֲנֵיּי (“to the merchants of”). The line would then read “So I began to shepherd the flock destined for slaughter for the sheep merchants” (cf. NAB). This helps to explain the difficult לָכֵן (lakhen) here but otherwise has no attestation or justification, so the MT is followed by most modern English versions.
[11:7] 12 sn The two staffs represent the two kingdoms, Israel and Judah. For other examples of staffs representing tribes or nations see Num 17:1-11; Ezek 37:15-23.
[11:7] 13 tn The Hebrew term נֹעַם (no’am) is frequently translated “Favor” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT); cf. KJV “Beauty”; CEV “Mercy.”
[11:7] 14 tn The Hebrew term חֹבְלִים (khovlim) is often translated “Union” (so NASB, NIV, NLT); cf. KJV, ASV “Bands”; NAB “Bonds”; NRSV, TEV, CEV “Unity”).
[11:8] 11 sn Zechariah is only dramatizing what God had done historically (see the note on the word “cedars” in 11:1). The “one month” probably means just any short period of time in which three kings ruled in succession. Likely candidates are Elah, Zimri, Tibni (1 Kgs 16:8-20); Zechariah, Shallum, Menahem (2 Kgs 15:8-16); or Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah (2 Kgs 24:1–25:7).
[11:12] 12 sn The speaker (Zechariah) represents the
[11:12] 13 sn If taken at face value, thirty pieces (shekels) of silver was worth about two and a half years’ wages for a common laborer. The Code of Hammurabi prescribes a monthly wage for a laborer of one shekel. If this were the case in Israel, 30 shekels would be the wages for 2 1/2 years (R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, pp. 76, 204-5). For other examples of “thirty shekels” as a conventional payment, see K. Luke, “The Thirty Pieces of Silver (Zech. 11:12f.), Ind TS 19 (1982): 26-30. Luke, on the basis of Sumerian analogues, suggests that “thirty” came to be a term meaning anything of little or no value (p. 30). In this he follows Erica Reiner, “Thirty Pieces of Silver,” in Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser, AOS 53, ed. William W. Hallo (New Haven, Conn.: American Oriental Society, 1968), 186-90. Though the 30 shekels elsewhere in the OT may well be taken literally, the context of Zech. 11:12 may indeed support Reiner and Luke in seeing it as a pittance here, not worth considering (cf. Exod 21:32; Lev 27:4; Matt 26:15).
[11:13] 13 tn Heb “splendor of splendor” (אֶדֶר הַיְקָר, ’eder hayqar). This expression sarcastically draws attention to the incredibly low value placed upon the
[11:13] 14 tn The Syriac presupposes הָאוֹצָר (ha’otsar, “treasury”) for the MT הַיּוֹצֵר (hayyotser, “potter”) perhaps because of the lack of evidence for a potter’s shop in the area of the temple. The Syriac reading is followed by NAB, NRSV, TEV. Matthew seems to favor this when he speaks of Judas having thrown the thirty shekels for which he betrayed Jesus into the temple treasury (27:5-6). However, careful reading of the whole gospel pericope makes it clear that the money actually was used to purchase a “potter’s field,” hence Zechariah’s reference to a potter. The MT reading is followed by most other English versions.
[11:13] 15 tn Heb “house” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV).
[11:15] 14 sn The grammar (e.g., the incipient participle מֵקִים, maqim, “about to raise up,” v. 16) and overall sense of vv. 15-17 give the incident a future orientation. Zechariah once more is role-playing but this time he is a “foolish” shepherd, i.e., one who does not know God and who is opposed to him (cf. Prov 1:7; 15:5; 20:3; 27:22). The individual who best represents this eschatological enemy of God and his people is the Antichrist (cf. Matt 24:5, 24; 2 Thess 2:3-4; 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7).
[11:16] 15 tn Heb “the broken” (so KJV, NASB; NRSV “the maimed”).
[11:16] 16 tn Heb “the fat [ones].” Cf. ASV “the fat sheep”; NIV “the choice sheep.”
[2:6] 16 sn A quotation from Mic 5:2.
[21:15] 17 tc The majority of
[21:15] 18 tn To whom (or what) does “these” (τούτων, toutwn) refer? Three possibilities are suggested: (1) τούτων should be understood as neuter, “these things,” referring to the boats, nets, and fishing gear nearby. In light of Peter’s statement in 21:3, “I am going fishing,” some have understood Peter to have renounced his commission in light of his denials of Jesus. Jesus, as he restores Peter and forgives him for his denials, is asking Peter if he really loves his previous vocation more than he loves Jesus. Three things may be said in evaluation of this view: (a) it is not at all necessary to understand Peter’s statement in 21:3 as a renouncement of his discipleship, as this view of the meaning of τούτων would imply; (b) it would probably be more likely that the verb would be repeated in such a construction (see 7:31 for an example where the verb is repeated); and (c) as R. E. Brown has observed (John [AB], 2:1103) by Johannine standards the choice being offered to Peter between material things and the risen Jesus would seem rather ridiculous, especially after the disciples had realized whom it was they were dealing with (the Lord, see v. 12). (2) τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than you love these other disciples?” The same objection mentioned as (c) under (1) would apply here: Could the author, in light of the realization of who Jesus is which has come to the disciples after the resurrection, and which he has just mentioned in 21:12, seriously present Peter as being offered a choice between the other disciples and the risen Jesus? This leaves option (3), that τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than these other disciples do?” It seems likely that there is some irony here: Peter had boasted in 13:37, “I will lay down my life for you,” and the synoptics present Peter as boasting even more explicitly of his loyalty to Jesus (“Even if they all fall away, I will not,” Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29). Thus the semantic force of what Jesus asks Peter here amounts to something like “Now, after you have denied me three times, as I told you you would, can you still affirm that you love me more than these other disciples do?” The addition of the auxiliary verb “do” in the translation is used to suggest to the English reader the third interpretation, which is the preferred one.
[21:15] 19 tn Grk “He said to him.”
[21:15] 20 tn Is there a significant difference in meaning between the two words for love used in the passage, ἀγαπάω and φιλέω (agapaw and filew)? Aside from Origen, who saw a distinction in the meaning of the two words, most of the Greek Fathers like Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria, saw no real difference of meaning. Neither did Augustine nor the translators of the Itala (Old Latin). This was also the view of the Reformation Greek scholars Erasmus and Grotius. The suggestion that a distinction in meaning should be seen comes primarily from a number of British scholars of the 19th century, especially Trench, Westcott, and Plummer. It has been picked up by others such as Spicq, Lenski, and Hendriksen. But most modern scholars decline to see a real difference in the meaning of the two words in this context, among them Bernard, Moffatt, Bonsirven, Bultmann, Barrett, Brown, Morris, Haenchen, and Beasley-Murray. There are three significant reasons for seeing no real difference in the meaning of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses: (1) the author has a habit of introducing slight stylistic variations in repeated material without any significant difference in meaning (compare, for example, 3:3 with 3:5, and 7:34 with 13:33). An examination of the uses of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in the Fourth Gospel seems to indicate a general interchangeability between the two. Both terms are used of God’s love for man (3:16, 16:27); of the Father’s love for the Son (3:35, 5:20); of Jesus’ love for men (11:5, 11:3); of the love of men for men (13:34, 15:19); and of the love of men for Jesus (8:42, 16:27). (2) If (as seems probable) the original conversation took place in Aramaic (or possibly Hebrew), there would not have been any difference expressed because both Aramaic and Hebrew have only one basic word for love. In the LXX both ἀγαπάω and φιλέω are used to translate the same Hebrew word for love, although ἀγαπάω is more frequent. It is significant that in the Syriac version of the NT only one verb is used to translate vv. 15-17 (Syriac is very similar linguistically to Palestinian Aramaic). (3) Peter’s answers to the questions asked with ἀγαπάω are ‘yes’ even though he answers using the verb φιλέω. If he is being asked to love Jesus on a higher or more spiritual level his answers give no indication of this, and one would be forced to say (in order to maintain a consistent distinction between the two verbs) that Jesus finally concedes defeat and accepts only the lower form of love which is all that Peter is capable of offering. Thus it seems best to regard the interchange between ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses as a minor stylistic variation of the author, consistent with his use of minor variations in repeated material elsewhere, and not indicative of any real difference in meaning. Thus no attempt has been made to distinguish between the two Greek words in the translation.
[21:15] 21 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:16] 18 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:16] 19 tn Grk “said again.” The word “again” (when used in connection with the phrase “a second time”) is redundant and has not been translated.
[21:16] 20 tn Grk “He said to him.”
[21:16] 21 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 19 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 20 tn Grk “said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.
[21:17] 22 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 24 tn Grk “and said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.
[21:17] 25 tc ‡ Most witnesses, especially later ones (A Θ Ψ Ë13 Ï), read ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (Jo Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while B C have ᾿Ιησοῦς without the article and א D W Ë1 33 565 al lat lack both. Because of the rapid verbal exchange in this pericope, “Jesus” is virtually required for clarity, providing a temptation to scribes to add the name. Further, the name normally occurs with the article. Although it is possible that B C accidentally omitted the article with the name, it is just as likely that they added the simple name to the text for clarity’s sake, while other witnesses added the article as well. The omission of ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς thus seems most likely to be authentic. NA27 includes the words in brackets, indicating some doubts as to their authenticity.
[21:17] 26 tn Grk “Jesus said to him.”
[21:1] 20 tn The time reference indicated by μετὰ ταῦτα (meta tauta) is indefinite, in comparison with the specific “after eight days” (μεθ᾿ ἡμέρας ὀκτώ, meq’ Jhmera" oktw) between the two postresurrection appearances of Jesus in 20:26.
[21:1] 21 sn The Sea of Tiberias is another name for the Sea of Galilee (see 6:1).
[21:1] 22 tn Grk “how he revealed himself.”
[5:2] 21 tn Regarding the use of the present tense ἐστιν (estin) and its implications for the dating of the Gospel of John, see the article by D. B. Wallace, “John 5,2 and the Date of the Fourth Gospel,” Bib 71 (1990): 177-205.
[5:2] 22 tn The site of the miracle is also something of a problem: προβατικῇ (probatikh) is usually taken as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple. Some (R. E. Brown and others) would place the word κολυμβήθρα (kolumbhqra) with προβατικῇ to read “in Jerusalem, by the Sheep Pool, there is (another pool) with the Hebrew name.” This would imply that there is reference to two pools in the context rather than only one. This does not seem necessary (although it is a grammatical possibility). The gender of the words does not help since both are feminine (as is the participle ἐπιλεγομένη [epilegomenh]). Note however that Brown’s suggestion would require a feminine word to be supplied (for the participle ἐπιλεγομένη to modify). The traditional understanding of the phrase as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple appears more probably correct.
[5:2] 23 tc Some
