Discovery BoxGenesis 36:1-43
Context36:1 What follows is the account of Esau (also known as Edom). 1
36:2 Esau took his wives from the Canaanites: 2 Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah and granddaughter 3 of Zibeon the Hivite, 36:3 in addition to Basemath the daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.
36:4 Adah bore Eliphaz to Esau, Basemath bore Reuel, 36:5 and Oholibamah bore Jeush, Jalam, and Korah. These were the sons of Esau who were born to him in the land of Canaan.
36:6 Esau took his wives, his sons, his daughters, all the people in his household, his livestock, his animals, and all his possessions which he had acquired in the land of Canaan and went to a land some distance away from 4 Jacob his brother 36:7 because they had too many possessions to be able to stay together and the land where they had settled 5 was not able to support them because of their livestock. 36:8 So Esau (also known as Edom) lived in the hill country of Seir. 6
36:9 This is the account of Esau, the father 7 of the Edomites, in the hill country of Seir.
36:10 These were the names of Esau’s sons:
Eliphaz, the son of Esau’s wife Adah, and Reuel, the son of Esau’s wife Basemath.
36:11 The sons of Eliphaz were:
Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz.
36:12 Timna, a concubine of Esau’s son Eliphaz, bore Amalek to Eliphaz. These were the sons 8 of Esau’s wife Adah.
36:13 These were the sons of Reuel: Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah. These were the sons 9 of Esau’s wife Basemath.
36:14 These were the sons of Esau’s wife Oholibamah the daughter of Anah and granddaughter 10 of Zibeon: She bore Jeush, Jalam, and Korah to Esau.
36:15 These were the chiefs 11 among the descendants 12 of Esau, the sons of Eliphaz, Esau’s firstborn: chief Teman, chief Omar, chief Zepho, chief Kenaz, 36:16 chief Korah, 13 chief Gatam, chief Amalek. These were the chiefs descended from Eliphaz in the land of Edom; these were the sons 14 of Adah.
36:17 These were the sons of Esau’s son Reuel: chief Nahath, chief Zerah, chief Shammah, chief Mizzah. These were the chiefs descended from Reuel in the land of Edom; these were the sons 15 of Esau’s wife Basemath.
36:18 These were the sons of Esau’s wife Oholibamah: chief Jeush, chief Jalam, chief Korah. These were the chiefs descended from Esau’s wife Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah.
36:19 These were the sons of Esau (also known as Edom), and these were their chiefs.
36:20 These were the sons of Seir the Horite, 16 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 17 of Seir in the land of Edom.
36:22 The sons of Lotan were Hori and Homam; 18 Lotan’s sister was Timna.
36:23 These were the sons of Shobal: Alvan, Manahath, Ebal, Shepho, 19 and Onam.
36:24 These were the sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah (who discovered the hot springs 20 in the wilderness as he pastured the donkeys of his father Zibeon).
36:25 These were the children 21 of Anah: Dishon and Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah.
36:26 These were the sons of Dishon: 22 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: 23
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.
36:35 When Husham died, Hadad the son of Bedad, who defeated the Midianites in the land of Moab, reigned in his place; the name of his city was Avith.
36:36 When Hadad died, Samlah from Masrekah reigned in his place.
36:37 When Samlah died, Shaul from Rehoboth by the River 24 reigned in his place.
36:38 When Shaul died, Baal-Hanan the son of Achbor reigned in his place.
36:39 When Baal-Hanan the son of Achbor died, Hadad 25 reigned in his place; the name of his city was Pau. 26 His wife’s name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Me-Zahab.
36:40 These were the names of the chiefs of Esau, according to their families, according to their places, by their names: chief Timna, chief Alvah, chief Jetheth, 36:41 chief Oholibamah, chief Elah, chief Pinon, 36:42 chief Kenaz, chief Teman, chief Mibzar, 36:43 chief Magdiel, chief Iram. These were the chiefs of Edom, according to their settlements 27 in the land they possessed. This was Esau, the father of the Edomites.
Genesis 5:24
Context5:24 Enoch walked with God, and then he disappeared 28 because God took 29 him away.
Genesis 6:1
Context6:1 When humankind 30 began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born 31 to them, 32
Genesis 6:1
Context6:1 When humankind 33 began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born 34 to them, 35
Genesis 20:1
Context20:1 Abraham journeyed from there to the Negev 36 region and settled between Kadesh and Shur. While he lived as a temporary resident 37 in Gerar,
Romans 5:1
Context5:1 38 Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have 39 peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Romans 8:1
Context8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 40
Romans 8:34
Context8:34 Who is the one who will condemn? Christ 41 is the one who died (and more than that, he was raised), who is at the right hand of God, and who also is interceding for us.
Romans 8:1
Context8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 42
Romans 5:12
Context5:12 So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all people 43 because 44 all sinned –
[36:1] 1 sn Chapter 36 records what became of Esau. It will list both his actual descendants as well as the people he subsumed under his tribal leadership, people who were aboriginal Edomites. The chapter is long and complicated (see further J. R. Bartlett, “The Edomite King-List of Genesis 36:31-39 and 1 Chronicles 1:43-50,” JTS 16 [1965]: 301-14; and W. J. Horowitz, “Were There Twelve Horite Tribes?” CBQ 35 [1973]: 69-71). In the format of the Book of Genesis, the line of Esau is “tidied up” before the account of Jacob is traced (37:2). As such the arrangement makes a strong contrast with Jacob. As F. Delitzsch says, “secular greatness in general grows up far more rapidly than spiritual greatness” (New Commentary on Genesis, 2:238). In other words, the progress of the world far out distances the progress of the righteous who are waiting for the promise.
[36:2] 2 tn Heb “from the daughters of Canaan.”
[36:2] 3 tn Heb “daughter,” but see Gen 36:24-25.
[36:6] 4 tn Heb “from before.”
[36:7] 5 tn Heb “land of their settlements.”
[36:8] 6 tn Traditionally “Mount Seir,” but in this case the expression בְּהַר שֵׂעִיר (bÿhar se’ir) refers to the hill country or highlands of Seir.
[36:9] 7 sn The term father in genealogical records needs to be carefully defined. It can refer to a literal father, a grandfather, a political overlord, or a founder.
[36:12] 8 tn Or “grandsons” (NIV); “descendants” (NEB).
[36:13] 9 tn Or “grandsons” (NIV); “descendants” (NEB).
[36:14] 10 tn Heb “daughter,” but see Gen 36:24-25.
[36:15] 11 tn Or “clan leaders” (so also throughout this chapter).
[36:16] 13 tc The Samaritan Pentateuch omits the name “Korah” (see v. 11 and 1 Chr 1:36).
[36:16] 14 tn Or “grandsons” (NIV); “descendants” (NEB).
[36:17] 15 tn Or “grandsons” (NIV); “descendants” (NEB).
[36:20] 16 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).
[36:22] 18 tn Heb “Hemam”; this is probably a variant spelling of “Homam” (1 Chr 1:39); cf. NRSV, NLT “Heman.”
[36:23] 19 tn This name is given as “Shephi” in 1 Chr 1:40.
[36:24] 20 tn The meaning of this Hebrew term is uncertain; Syriac reads “water” and Vulgate reads “hot water.”
[36:25] 21 tn Heb “sons,” but since a daughter is included in the list, the word must be translated “children.”
[36:26] 22 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] 23 tn Or perhaps “before any Israelite king ruled over [them].”
[36:37] 24 tn Typically the Hebrew expression “the River” refers to the Euphrates River, but it is not certain whether that is the case here. Among the modern English versions which take this as a reference to the Euphrates are NASB, NCV, NRSV, CEV, NLT. Cf. NAB, TEV “Rehoboth-on-the-River.”
[36:39] 25 tc Most
[36:39] 26 tn The name of the city is given as “Pai” in 1 Chr 1:50.
[36:43] 27 tn Or perhaps “territories”; Heb “dwelling places.”
[5:24] 28 tn The Hebrew construction has the negative particle אֵין (’en, “there is not,” “there was not”) with a pronominal suffix, “he was not.” Instead of saying that Enoch died, the text says he no longer was present.
[5:24] 29 sn The text simply states that God took Enoch. Similar language is used of Elijah’s departure from this world (see 2 Kgs 2:10). The text implies that God overruled death for this man who walked with him.
[6:1] 30 tn The Hebrew text has the article prefixed to the noun. Here the article indicates the generic use of the word אָדָם (’adam): “humankind.”
[6:1] 31 tn This disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + verb) is circumstantial to the initial temporal clause. It could be rendered, “with daughters being born to them.” For another example of such a disjunctive clause following the construction וַיְהִיכִּי (vayÿhiki, “and it came to pass when”), see 2 Sam 7:1.
[6:1] 32 tn The pronominal suffix is third masculine plural, indicating that the antecedent “humankind” is collective.
[6:1] 33 tn The Hebrew text has the article prefixed to the noun. Here the article indicates the generic use of the word אָדָם (’adam): “humankind.”
[6:1] 34 tn This disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + verb) is circumstantial to the initial temporal clause. It could be rendered, “with daughters being born to them.” For another example of such a disjunctive clause following the construction וַיְהִיכִּי (vayÿhiki, “and it came to pass when”), see 2 Sam 7:1.
[6:1] 35 tn The pronominal suffix is third masculine plural, indicating that the antecedent “humankind” is collective.
[20:1] 36 tn Or “the South [country]”; Heb “the land of the Negev.”
[20:1] 37 tn Heb “and he sojourned.”
[5:1] 38 sn Many interpreters see Rom 5:1 as beginning the second major division of the letter.
[5:1] 39 tc A number of important witnesses have the subjunctive ἔχωμεν (ecwmen, “let us have”) instead of ἔχομεν (ecomen, “we have”) in v. 1. Included in the subjunctive’s support are א* A B* C D K L 33 81 630 1175 1739* pm lat bo. But the indicative is not without its supporters: א1 B2 F G P Ψ 0220vid 104 365 1241 1505 1506 1739c 1881 2464 pm. If the problem were to be solved on an external basis only, the subjunctive would be preferred. Because of this, the “A” rating on behalf of the indicative in the UBS4 appears overly confident. Nevertheless, the indicative is probably correct. First, the earliest witness to Rom 5:1 has the indicative (0220vid, third century). Second, the first set of correctors is sometimes, if not often, of equal importance with the original hand. Hence, א1 might be given equal value with א*. Third, there is a good cross-section of witnesses for the indicative: Alexandrian (in 0220vid, probably א1 1241 1506 1881 al), Western (in F G), and Byzantine (noted in NA27 as pm). Thus, although the external evidence is strongly in favor of the subjunctive, the indicative is represented well enough that its ancestry could easily go back to the original. Turning to the internal evidence, the indicative gains much ground. (1) The variant may have been produced via an error of hearing (since omicron and omega were pronounced alike in ancient Greek). This, of course, does not indicate which reading was original – just that an error of hearing may have produced one of them. In light of the indecisiveness of the transcriptional evidence, intrinsic evidence could play a much larger role. This is indeed the case here. (2) The indicative fits well with the overall argument of the book to this point. Up until now, Paul has been establishing the “indicatives of the faith.” There is only one imperative (used rhetorically) and only one hortatory subjunctive (and this in a quotation within a diatribe) up till this point, while from ch. 6 on there are sixty-one imperatives and seven hortatory subjunctives. Clearly, an exhortation would be out of place in ch. 5. (3) Paul presupposes that the audience has peace with God (via reconciliation) in 5:10. This seems to assume the indicative in v. 1. (4) As C. E. B. Cranfield notes, “it would surely be strange for Paul, in such a carefully argued writing as this, to exhort his readers to enjoy or to guard a peace which he has not yet explicitly shown to be possessed by them” (Romans [ICC], 1:257). (5) The notion that εἰρήνην ἔχωμεν (eirhnhn ecwmen) can even naturally mean “enjoy peace” is problematic (ExSyn 464), yet those who embrace the subjunctive have to give the verb some such force. Thus, although the external evidence is stronger in support of the subjunctive, the internal evidence points to the indicative. Although a decision is difficult, ἔχομεν appears to be the authentic reading.
[8:1] 40 tc The earliest and best witnesses of the Alexandrian and Western texts, as well as a few others (א* B D* F G 6 1506 1739 1881 pc co), have no additional words for v. 1. Later scribes (A D1 Ψ 81 365 629 pc vg) added the words μὴ κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦσιν (mh kata sarka peripatousin, “who do not walk according to the flesh”), while even later ones (א2 D2 33vid Ï) added ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα (alla kata pneuma, “but [who do walk] according to the Spirit”). Both the external evidence and the internal evidence are compelling for the shortest reading. The scribes were evidently motivated to add such qualifications (interpolated from v. 4) to insulate Paul’s gospel from charges that it was characterized too much by grace. The KJV follows the longest reading found in Ï.
[8:34] 41 tc ‡ A number of significant and early witnesses, along with several others (Ì46vid א A C F G L Ψ 6 33 81 104 365 1505 al lat bo), read ᾿Ιησοῦς (Ihsous, “Jesus”) after Χριστός (Cristos, “Christ”) in v. 34. But the shorter reading is not unrepresented (B D 0289 1739 1881 Ï sa). Once ᾿Ιησοῦς got into the text, what scribe would omit it? Although the external evidence is on the side of the longer reading, internally such an expansion seems suspect. The shorter reading is thus preferred. NA27 has the word in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.
[8:1] 42 tc The earliest and best witnesses of the Alexandrian and Western texts, as well as a few others (א* B D* F G 6 1506 1739 1881 pc co), have no additional words for v. 1. Later scribes (A D1 Ψ 81 365 629 pc vg) added the words μὴ κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦσιν (mh kata sarka peripatousin, “who do not walk according to the flesh”), while even later ones (א2 D2 33vid Ï) added ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα (alla kata pneuma, “but [who do walk] according to the Spirit”). Both the external evidence and the internal evidence are compelling for the shortest reading. The scribes were evidently motivated to add such qualifications (interpolated from v. 4) to insulate Paul’s gospel from charges that it was characterized too much by grace. The KJV follows the longest reading found in Ï.
[5:12] 43 tn Here ἀνθρώπους (anqrwpou") has been translated as a generic (“people”) since both men and women are clearly intended in this context.
[5:12] 44 tn The translation of the phrase ἐφ᾿ ᾧ (ef Jw) has been heavily debated. For a discussion of all the possibilities, see C. E. B. Cranfield, “On Some of the Problems in the Interpretation of Romans 5.12,” SJT 22 (1969): 324-41. Only a few of the major options can be mentioned here: (1) the phrase can be taken as a relative clause in which the pronoun refers to Adam, “death spread to all people in whom [Adam] all sinned.” (2) The phrase can be taken with consecutive (resultative) force, meaning “death spread to all people with the result that all sinned.” (3) Others take the phrase as causal in force: “death spread to all people because all sinned.”
