Ezra 4:12

4:12 Now ¹  let the king be aware that the Jews who came up to us from you have gone to Jerusalem. They are rebuilding that rebellious and odious city. ²  They are completing its walls and repairing its foundations.

Nehemiah 2:19

2:19 But when Sanballat the Horonite, Tobiah the Ammonite official, and Geshem the Arab heard all this, ³  they derided us and expressed contempt toward us. They said, “What is this you are doing? Are you rebelling against the king?”

Nehemiah 6:6

6:6 Written in it were the following words:

“Among the nations it is rumored ⁴  (and Geshem ⁵  has substantiated ⁶  this) that you and the Jews have intentions of revolting, and for this reason you are building the wall. Furthermore, according to these rumors ⁷  you are going to become their king.

Esther 3:5-8

3:5 When Haman saw that Mordecai was not bowing or paying homage to him, he ⁸  was filled with rage. 3:6 But the thought of striking out against ⁹  Mordecai alone was repugnant to him, for he had been informed ¹⁰  of the identity of Mordecai’s people. ¹¹  So Haman sought to destroy all the Jews (that is, the people of Mordecai) ¹²  who were in all the kingdom of Ahasuerus.

3:7 In the first month (that is, the month of Nisan), in the twelfth year ¹³  of King Ahasuerus’ reign, pur ¹⁴  (that is, the lot) was cast before Haman in order to determine a day and a month. ¹⁵  It turned out to be the twelfth month (that is, the month of Adar). ¹⁶ 

3:8 Then Haman said to King Ahasuerus, “There is a particular people ¹⁷  that is dispersed and spread among the inhabitants ¹⁸  throughout all the provinces of your kingdom whose laws differ from those of all other peoples. Furthermore, they do not observe the king’s laws. It is not appropriate for the king to provide a haven for them. ¹⁹ 

Daniel 6:4-13

6:4 Consequently the supervisors and satraps were trying to find ²⁰  some pretext against Daniel in connection with administrative matters. ²¹  But they were unable to find any such damaging evidence, ²²  because he was trustworthy and guilty of no negligence or corruption. ²³  6:5 So these men concluded, ²⁴  “We won’t find any pretext against this man Daniel unless it is ²⁵  in connection with the law of his God.”

6:6 So these supervisors and satraps came by collusion ²⁶  to the king and said ²⁷  to him, “O King Darius, live forever! 6:7 To all the supervisors of the kingdom, the prefects, satraps, counselors, and governors it seemed like a good idea for a royal edict to be issued and an interdict to be enforced. For the next thirty days anyone who prays ²⁸  to any god or human other than you, O king, should be thrown into a den of lions. 6:8 Now let the king issue a written interdict ²⁹  so that it cannot be altered, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be changed. ³⁰  6:9 So King Darius issued the written interdict.

6:10 When Daniel realized ³¹  that a written decree had been issued, he entered his home, where the windows ³²  in his upper room opened toward Jerusalem. ³³  Three ³⁴  times daily he was ³⁵  kneeling ³⁶  and offering prayers and thanks to his God just as he had been accustomed to do previously. 6:11 Then those officials who had gone to the king ³⁷  came by collusion and found Daniel praying and asking for help before his God. 6:12 So they approached the king and said to him, ³⁸  “Did you not issue an edict to the effect that for the next thirty days anyone who prays to any god or human other than to you, O king, would be thrown into a den of lions?” The king replied, “That is correct, ³⁹  according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be changed.” 6:13 Then they said to the king, “Daniel, who is one of the captives ⁴⁰  from Judah, pays no attention to you, O king, or to the edict that you issued. Three times daily he offers his prayer.” ⁴¹ 

Acts 17:6-7

17:6 When they did not find them, they dragged ⁴²  Jason and some of the brothers before the city officials, ⁴³  screaming, “These people who have stirred up trouble ⁴⁴  throughout the world ⁴⁵  have come here too, 17:7 and ⁴⁶  Jason has welcomed them as guests! They ⁴⁷  are all acting against Caesar’s ⁴⁸  decrees, saying there is another king named ⁴⁹  Jesus!” ⁵⁰ 

[4:12]  ¹ tn The MT takes this word with the latter part of v. 11, but in English style it fits better with v. 12.

[4:12]  ² sn Management of the provinces that were distantly removed from the capital was difficult, and insurrection in such places was a perennial problem. The language used in this report about Jerusalem (i.e., “rebellious,” “odious”) is intentionally inflammatory. It is calculated to draw immediate attention to the perceived problem.

[2:19]  ³ tn The Hebrew text does not include the words “all this,” but they have been added in the translation for clarity.

[6:6]  ⁴ tn Heb “heard.”

[6:6]  ⁵ tn Heb “Gashmu”; in Neh 2:19 this name appears as Geshem. Since it is important for the modern reader to recognize that this is the same individual, the form of the name used here in the translation is the same as that in v. 19.

[6:6]  ⁶ tn Heb “is saying.”

[6:6]  ⁷ tn Heb “words.” So also in v. 7.

[3:5]  ⁸ 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.

[3:6]  ⁹ tn Heb “to send a hand against”; KJV, NRSV “to lay hands on.”

[3:6]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “they had related to him.” For stylistic reasons this has been translated as a passive construction.

[3:6]  ¹¹ tc The entire first half of the verse is not included in the LXX.

[3:6]  ¹² tc This parenthetical phrase is not included in the LXX. Some scholars emend the MT reading עַם (’am, “people”) to עִם (’im, “with”), arguing that the phrase is awkwardly placed and syntactically inappropriate. While there is some truth to their complaint, the MT makes sufficient sense to be acceptable here, and is followed by most English versions.

[3:7]  ¹³ sn This year would be ca. 474 b.c. The reference to first month and twelfth month indicate that about a year had elapsed between this determination and the anticipated execution.

[3:7]  ¹⁴ tn The term פּוּר (pur, “lot”) is an Akkadian loanword; the narrator therefore explains it for his Hebrew readers (“that is, the lot”). It is from the plural form of this word (i.e., Purim) that the festival celebrating the deliverance of the Jews takes its name (cf. 9:24, 26, 28, 31).

[3:7]  ¹⁵ tc The LXX adds the following words: “in order to destroy in one day the race of Mordecai, and the lot fell on the fourteenth day of the month.” The LXX reading is included by NAB.

[3:7]  ¹⁶ tn Since v. 7 seems to interrupt the flow of the narrative, many scholars have suggested that it is a late addition to the text. But there is not enough evidence to warrant such a conclusion. Even though its placement is somewhat awkward, the verse supplies to the reader an important piece of chronological information.

[3:8]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “one people.” Note the subtle absence at this point of a specific mention of the Jewish people by name.

[3:8]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “peoples” (so NASB, NIV); NAB “nations”

[3:8]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “to cause them to rest”; NASB “to let them remain”; NAB, NIV, NRSV “to tolerate them.”

[6:4]  ²⁰ tn Aram “looking to find.”

[6:4]  ²¹ tn Aram “from the side of the kingdom.”

[6:4]  ²² tn Aram “pretext and corruption.”

[6:4]  ²³ tn Aram “no negligence or corruption was found in him.” The Greek version of Theodotion lacks the phrase “and no negligence or corruption was found in him.”

[6:5]  ²⁴ tn Aram “were saying.”

[6:5]  ²⁵ tn Aram “unless we find [it] against him.”

[6:6]  ²⁶ tn The Aramaic verb רְגַשׁ (rÿgash) occurs three times in this chapter (vv. 7, 12, 16). Its meaning is widely disputed by commentators, and the versions vary considerably in how they render the word. The suggestion that it means “to come thronging” (BDB 1112 s.v.; cf. NAB) seems inappropriate, since it is unlikely that subordinates would enter a royal court in such a reckless fashion. The ancient versions struggled with the word and are not in agreement in their understanding of its meaning. In this chapter the word apparently means to act in agreement with other parties in the pursuit of a duplicitous goal, namely the entrapment of Daniel. Cf. NIV, NCV “went as a group”; NRSV “conspired and came to the king.”

[6:6]  ²⁷ tn Aram “thus they were saying.”

[6:7]  ²⁸ tn Aram “prays a prayer.”

[6:8]  ²⁹ tn Aram “establish a written interdict and inscribe a written decree.”

[6:8]  ³⁰ tn Or “removed.”

[6:10]  ³¹ tn Aram “knew.”

[6:10]  ³² sn In later rabbinic thought this verse was sometimes cited as a proof text for the notion that one should pray only in a house with windows. See b. Berakhot 34b.

[6:10]  ³³ map For the location of Jerusalem see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[6:10]  ³⁴ sn This is apparently the only specific mention in the OT of prayer being regularly offered three times a day. The practice was probably not unique to Daniel, however.

[6:10]  ³⁵ tc Read with several medieval Hebrew MSS and printed editions הֲוָה (havah) rather than the MT הוּא (hu’).

[6:10]  ³⁶ tn Aram “kneeling on his knees” (so NASB).

[6:11]  ³⁷ tn Aram “those men”; the referent (the administrative officials who had earlier approached the king about the edict) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[6:12]  ³⁸ tc The MT also has “about the edict of the king,” but this phrase is absent in the LXX and the Syriac. The present translation deletes the expression.

[6:12]  ³⁹ tn Aram “the word is true.”

[6:13]  ⁴⁰ tn Aram “from the sons of the captivity [of].”

[6:13]  ⁴¹ tn Aram “prays his prayer.”

[17:6]  ⁴² tn See BDAG 977-78 s.v. σύρω on this verb. It was used in everyday speech of dragging in fish by a net, or dragging away someone’s (presumably) dead body (Paul in Acts 14:19).

[17:6]  ⁴³ tn L&N 37.93 defines πολιτάρχης (politarch") as “a public official responsible for administrative matters within a town or city and a member of the ruling council of such a political unit – ‘city official’” (see also BDAG 845 s.v.).

[17:6]  ⁴⁴ tn Or “rebellion.” BDAG 72 s.v. ἀναστατόω has “disturb, trouble, upset,” but in light of the references in the following verse to political insurrection, “stirred up rebellion” would also be appropriate.

[17:6]  ⁴⁵ tn Or “the empire.” This was a way of referring to the Roman empire (BDAG 699 s.v. οἰκουμένη 2.b).

[17:7]  ⁴⁶ tn Grk “whom.” Because of the awkwardness in English of having two relative clauses follow one another (“who have stirred up trouble…whom Jason has welcomed”) the relative pronoun here (“whom”) has been replaced by the conjunction “and,” creating a clause that is grammatically coordinate but logically subordinate in the translation.

[17:7]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “and they.” Because of the length of the Greek sentence, the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated here. Instead a new English sentence is begun.

[17:7]  ⁴⁸ tn Or “the emperor’s” (“Caesar” is a title for the Roman emperor).

[17:7]  ⁴⁹ tn The word “named” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied for clarity.

[17:7]  ⁵⁰ sn Acting…saying…Jesus. The charges are serious, involving sedition (Luke 23:2). If the political charges were true, Rome would have to react.