Esther 3:5
Context3:5 When Haman saw that Mordecai was not bowing or paying homage to him, he 1 was filled with rage.
Proverbs 13:10
Context13:10 With pride 2 comes only 3 contention,
but wisdom is with the well-advised. 4
Proverbs 27:4
Context27:4 Wrath is cruel and anger is overwhelming, 5
but who can stand before jealousy? 6
Ecclesiastes 4:4
Context4:4 Then I considered 7 all the skillful work 8 that is done:
Surely it is nothing more than 9 competition 10 between one person and another. 11
This also is profitless – like 12 chasing the wind.
James 4:5
Context4:5 Or do you think the scripture means nothing when it says, 13 “The spirit that God 14 caused 15 to live within us has an envious yearning”? 16
[3:5] 1 tn Heb “Haman.” The pronoun (“he”) was used in the translation for stylistic reasons. Repeating the proper name here is redundant according to contemporary English style, although the name is repeated in NASB and NRSV.
[13:10] 2 sn The parallelism suggests pride here means contempt for the opinions of others. The wise listen to advice rather than argue out of stubborn pride.
[13:10] 3 tn The particle רַק (raq, “only”) modifies the noun “contention” – only contention can come from such a person.
[13:10] 4 tn The Niphal of יָעַץ (ya’ats, “to advise; to counsel”) means “to consult together; to take counsel.” It means being well-advised, receiving advice or consultation (cf. NCV “those who take advice are wise”).
[27:4] 5 tn Heb “fierceness of wrath and outpouring [= flood] of anger.” A number of English versions use “flood” here (e.g., NASB, NCV, NLT).
[27:4] 6 tn The Hebrew term translated “jealousy” here probably has the negative sense of “envy” rather than the positive sense of “zeal.” It is a raging emotion (like “anger” and “wrath,” this word has nuances of heat, intensity) that defies reason at times and can be destructive like a consuming fire (e.g., 6:32-35; Song 8:6-7). The rhetorical question is intended to affirm that no one can survive a jealous rage. (Whether one is the subject who is jealous or the object of the jealousy of someone else is not so clear.)
[4:4] 8 tn Heb “all the toil and all the skill.” This Hebrew clause (אֶת־כָּל־עָמָל וְאֵת כָּל־כִּשְׁרוֹן, ’et-kol-’amal vÿ’et kol-kishron) is a nominal hendiadys (a figurative expression in which two independent phrases are used to connote the same thing). The second functions adverbially, modifying the first, which retains its full nominal function: “all the skillful work.”
[4:4] 9 tn The phrase “nothing more than” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.
[4:4] 10 tn The noun קִנְאַה (qin’ah, “competition”) has a wide range of meanings: “zeal; jealousy; envy; rivalry; competition; suffering; animosity; anger; wrath” (HALOT 1110 s.v.; BDB 888 s.v.). Here, as in 9:6, it denotes “rivalry” (BDB 888 s.v. 1) or “competitive spirit” (HALOT 1110 s.v. 1.b). The LXX rendered it ζῆλος (zhlos, “envy; jealousy”). The English versions reflect this broad range: “rivalry” (NEB, NAB, NASB), “envy” (KJV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, MLB, NIV, NJPS), and “jealousy” (Moffatt).
[4:4] 11 tn Heb “a man and his neighbor.”
[4:4] 12 tn The word “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.
[4:5] 13 tn Grk “vainly says.”
[4:5] 14 tn Grk “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[4:5] 15 tc The Byzantine text and a few other
[4:5] 16 tn Interpreters debate the referent of the word “spirit” in this verse: (1) The translation takes “spirit” to be the lustful capacity within people that produces a divided mind (1:8, 14) and inward conflicts regarding God (4:1-4). God has allowed it to be in man since the fall, and he provides his grace (v. 6) and the new birth through the gospel message (1:18-25) to counteract its evil effects. (2) On the other hand the word “spirit” may be taken positively as the Holy Spirit and the sense would be, “God yearns jealously for the Spirit he caused to live within us.” But the word for “envious” or “jealous” is generally negative in biblical usage and the context before and after seems to favor the negative interpretation.