Ezra 8:16

8:16 So I sent for Eliezer, Ariel, Shemaiah, Elnathan, Jarib, Elnathan, ¹  Nathan, Zechariah, and Meshullam, who were leaders, and Joiarib and Elnathan, who were teachers.

Proverbs 24:3

24:3 By ²  wisdom a house is built, ³ 

and through understanding it is established;

Jeremiah 3:15

3:15 I will give you leaders ⁴  who will be faithful to me. ⁵  They will lead you with knowledge and insight.

Daniel 1:20

1:20 In every matter of wisdom and ⁶  insight the king asked them about, he found them to be ten times ⁷  better than any of the magicians and astrologers that were in his entire empire.

Daniel 1:1

Daniel Finds Favor in Babylon

1:1 In the third ⁸  year of the reign of King Jehoiakim of Judah, King Nebuchadnezzar ⁹  of Babylon advanced against Jerusalem ¹⁰  and laid it under siege. ¹¹ 

Colossians 1:20

1:20 and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross – through him, ¹²  whether things on earth or things in heaven.

[8:16]  ¹ tc The name “Elnathan” occurs twice in this list. Some, assuming an accidental repetition, would include it only once (cf. NAB).

[24:3]  ² tn The preposition בְּ (bet, “by; through”) in these two lines indicates means.

[24:3]  ³ sn The twentieth saying, vv. 3-4, concerns the use of wisdom for domestic enterprises. In Prov 9:1 wisdom was personified as a woman who builds a house; but here the emphasis is primarily on the building – it is a sign of security and prosperity (C. H. Toy, Proverbs [ICC], 442). One could still make a secondary application from this line for a household or “family” (cf. NCV, which sees this as a reference to the family).

[3:15]  ⁴ tn Heb “shepherds.”

[3:15]  ⁵ tn Heb “after/according to my [own] heart.”

[1:20]  ⁶ tc The MT lacks the conjunction, reading the first word in the phrase as a construct (“wisdom of insight”). While this reading is not impossible, it seems better to follow Theodotion, the Syriac, the Vulgate, and the Sahidic Coptic, all of which have the conjunction.

[1:20]  ⁷ tn Heb “hands.”

[1:1]  ⁸ sn The third year of the reign of Jehoiakim would be ca. 605 B.C. At this time Daniel would have been a teenager. The reference to Jehoiakim’s third year poses a serious crux interpretum, since elsewhere these events are linked to his fourth year (Jer 25:1; cf. 2 Kgs 24:1; 2 Chr 36:5-8). Apparently Daniel is following an accession year chronology, whereby the first partial year of a king’s reign was reckoned as the accession year rather than as the first year of his reign. Jeremiah, on the other hand, is following a nonaccession year chronology, whereby the accession year is reckoned as the first year of the king’s reign. In that case, the conflict is only superficial. Most modern scholars, however, have concluded that Daniel is historically inaccurate here.

[1:1]  ⁹ sn King Nebuchadnezzar ruled Babylon from ca. 605-562 B.C.

[1:1]  ¹⁰ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[1:1]  ¹¹ sn This attack culminated in the first of three major deportations of Jews to Babylon. The second one occurred in 597 B.C. and included among many other Jewish captives the prophet Ezekiel. The third deportation occurred in 586 B.C., at which time the temple and the city of Jerusalem were thoroughly destroyed.

[1:20]  ¹² tc The presence or absence of the second occurrence of the phrase δι᾿ αὐτοῦ (di’ autou, “through him”) is a difficult textual problem to solve. External evidence is fairly evenly divided. Many ancient and excellent witnesses lack the phrase (B D* F G I 0278 81 1175 1739 1881 2464 al latt sa), but equally important witnesses have it (Ì⁴⁶ א A C D¹ Ψ 048^vid 33 Ï). Both readings have strong Alexandrian support, which makes the problem difficult to decide on external evidence alone. Internal evidence points to the inclusion of the phrase as original. The word immediately preceding the phrase is the masculine pronoun αὐτοῦ (autou); thus the possibility of omission through homoioteleuton in various witnesses is likely. Scribes might have deleted the phrase because of perceived redundancy or awkwardness in the sense: The shorter reading is smoother and more elegant, so scribes would be prone to correct the text in that direction. As far as style is concerned, repetition of key words and phrases for emphasis is not foreign to the corpus Paulinum (see, e.g., Rom 8:23, Eph 1:13, 2 Cor 12:7). In short, it is easier to account for the shorter reading arising from the longer reading than vice versa, so the longer reading is more likely original.