Genesis 11:7-9

11:7 Come, let’s go down and confuse ¹  their language so they won’t be able to understand each other.” ² 

11:8 So the Lord scattered them from there across the face of the entire earth, and they stopped building ³  the city. 11:9 That is why its name was called ⁴  Babel ⁵  – because there the Lord confused the language of the entire world, and from there the Lord scattered them across the face of the entire earth.

Genesis 11:2

11:2 When the people ⁶  moved eastward, ⁷  they found a plain in Shinar ⁸  and settled there.

Genesis 15:1

The Cutting of the Covenant

15:1 After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram! I am your shield ⁹  and the one who will reward you in great abundance.” ¹⁰ 

Genesis 17:1-14

The Sign of the Covenant

17:1 When Abram was 99 years old, ¹¹  the Lord appeared to him and said, ¹²  “I am the sovereign God. ¹³  Walk ¹⁴  before me ¹⁵  and be blameless. ¹⁶  17:2 Then I will confirm my covenant ¹⁷  between me and you, and I will give you a multitude of descendants.” ¹⁸ 

17:3 Abram bowed down with his face to the ground, ¹⁹  and God said to him, ²⁰  17:4 “As for me, ²¹  this ²²  is my covenant with you: You will be the father of a multitude of nations. 17:5 No longer will your name be ²³  Abram. Instead, your name will be Abraham ²⁴  because I will make you ²⁵  the father of a multitude of nations. 17:6 I will make you ²⁶  extremely ²⁷  fruitful. I will make nations of you, and kings will descend from you. ²⁸  17:7 I will confirm ²⁹  my covenant as a perpetual ³⁰  covenant between me and you. It will extend to your descendants after you throughout their generations. I will be your God and the God of your descendants after you. ³¹  17:8 I will give the whole land of Canaan – the land where you are now residing ³²  – to you and your descendants after you as a permanent ³³  possession. I will be their God.”

17:9 Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep ³⁴  the covenantal requirement ³⁵  I am imposing on you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. 17:10 This is my requirement that you and your descendants after you must keep: ³⁶  Every male among you must be circumcised. ³⁷  17:11 You must circumcise the flesh of your foreskins. This will be a reminder ³⁸  of the covenant between me and you. 17:12 Throughout your generations every male among you who is eight days old ³⁹  must be circumcised, whether born in your house or bought with money from any foreigner who is not one of your descendants. 17:13 They must indeed be circumcised, ⁴⁰  whether born in your house or bought with money. The sign of my covenant ⁴¹  will be visible in your flesh as a permanent ⁴²  reminder. 17:14 Any uncircumcised male ⁴³  who has not been circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin will be cut off ⁴⁴  from his people – he has failed to carry out my requirement.” ⁴⁵ 

John 7:45-53

Lack of Belief

7:45 Then the officers ⁴⁶  returned ⁴⁷  to the chief priests and Pharisees, ⁴⁸  who said to them, “Why didn’t you bring him back with you?” ⁴⁹  7:46 The officers replied, “No one ever spoke like this man!” 7:47 Then the Pharisees answered, ⁵⁰  “You haven’t been deceived too, have you? ⁵¹  7:48 None of the rulers ⁵²  or the Pharisees have believed in him, have they? ⁵³  7:49 But this rabble ⁵⁴  who do not know the law are accursed!”

7:50 Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus ⁵⁵  before and who was one of the rulers, ⁵⁶  said, ⁵⁷  7:51 “Our law doesn’t condemn ⁵⁸  a man unless it first hears from him and learns ⁵⁹  what he is doing, does it?” ⁶⁰  7:52 They replied, ⁶¹  “You aren’t from Galilee too, are you? ⁶²  Investigate carefully and you will see that no prophet ⁶³  comes from Galilee!”

A Woman Caught in Adultery

7:53 ⁶⁴ [[And each one departed to his own house.

Acts 23:6-10

23:6 Then when Paul noticed ⁶⁵  that part of them were Sadducees ⁶⁶  and the others Pharisees, ⁶⁷  he shouted out in the council, ⁶⁸  “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. I am on trial concerning the hope of the resurrection ⁶⁹  of the dead!” 23:7 When he said this, ⁷⁰  an argument ⁷¹  began ⁷²  between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. 23:8 (For the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.) ⁷³  23:9 There was a great commotion, ⁷⁴  and some experts in the law ⁷⁵  from the party of the Pharisees stood up ⁷⁶  and protested strongly, ⁷⁷  “We find nothing wrong ⁷⁸  with this man. What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?” 23:10 When the argument became ⁷⁹  so great the commanding officer ⁸⁰  feared that they would tear Paul to pieces, ⁸¹  he ordered the detachment ⁸²  to go down, take him away from them by force, ⁸³  and bring him into the barracks. ⁸⁴ 

[11:7]  ¹ tn The cohortatives mirror the cohortatives of the people. They build to ascend the heavens; God comes down to destroy their language. God speaks here to his angelic assembly. See the notes on the word “make” in 1:26 and “know” in 3:5, as well as Jub. 10:22-23, where an angel recounts this incident and says “And the Lord our God said to us…. And the Lord went down and we went down with him. And we saw the city and the tower which the sons of men built.” On the chiastic structure of the story, see G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:235.

[11:7]  ² tn Heb “they will not hear, a man the lip of his neighbor.”

[11:8]  ³ tn The infinitive construct לִבְנֹת (livnot, “building”) here serves as the object of the verb “they ceased, stopped,” answering the question of what they stopped doing.

[11:9]  ⁴ tn The verb has no expressed subject and so can be rendered as a passive in the translation.

[11:9]  ⁵ sn Babel. Here is the climax of the account, a parody on the pride of Babylon. In the Babylonian literature the name bab-ili meant “the gate of God,” but in Hebrew it sounds like the word for “confusion,” and so retained that connotation. The name “Babel” (בָּבֶל, bavel) and the verb translated “confused” (בָּלַל, balal) form a paronomasia (sound play). For the many wordplays and other rhetorical devices in Genesis, see J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis (SSN).

[11:2]  ⁶ tn Heb “they”; the referent (the people) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[11:2]  ⁷ tn Or perhaps “from the east” (NRSV) or “in the east.”

[11:2]  ⁸ tn Heb “in the land of Shinar.”

[15:1]  ⁹ sn The noun “shield” recalls the words of Melchizedek in 14:20. If God is the shield, then God will deliver. Abram need not fear reprisals from those he has fought.

[15:1]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “your reward [in] great abundance.” When the phrase הַרְבּה מְאֹדֵ (harbeh mÿod) follows a noun it invariably modifies the noun and carries the nuance “very great” or “in great abundance.” (See its use in Gen 41:49; Deut 3:5; Josh 22:8; 2 Sam 8:8; 12:2; 1 Kgs 4:29; 10:10-11; 2 Chr 14:13; 32:27; Jer 40:12.) Here the noun “reward” is in apposition to “shield” and refers by metonymy to God as the source of the reward. Some translate here “your reward will be very great” (cf. NASB, NRSV), taking the statement as an independent clause and understanding the Hiphil infinitive absolute as a substitute for a finite verb. However, the construction הַרְבּה מְאֹדֵ is never used this way elsewhere, where it either modifies a noun (see the texts listed above) or serves as an adverb in relation to a finite verb (see Josh 13:1; 1 Sam 26:21; 2 Sam 12:30; 2 Kgs 21:16; 1 Chr 20:2; Neh 2:2).

[17:1]  ¹¹ tn Heb “the son of ninety-nine years.”

[17:1]  ¹² tn Heb “appeared to Abram and said to him.” The proper name has been replaced by the pronoun (“him”) and the final phrase “to him” has been left untranslated for stylistic reasons.

[17:1]  ¹³ tn The name אֵל שַׁדַּי (’el shadday, “El Shaddai”) has often been translated “God Almighty,” primarily because Jerome translated it omnipotens (“all powerful”) in the Latin Vulgate. There has been much debate over the meaning of the name. For discussion see W. F. Albright, “The Names Shaddai and Abram,” JBL 54 (1935): 173-210; R. Gordis, “The Biblical Root sdy-sd,” JTS 41 (1940): 34-43; and especially T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God, 69-72. Shaddai/El Shaddai is the sovereign king of the world who grants, blesses, and judges. In the Book of Genesis he blesses the patriarchs with fertility and promises numerous descendants. Outside Genesis he both blesses/protects and takes away life/happiness. The patriarchs knew God primarily as El Shaddai (Exod 6:3). While the origin and meaning of this name are uncertain (see discussion below) its significance is clear. The name is used in contexts where God appears as the source of fertility and life. In Gen 17:1-8 he appeared to Abram, introduced himself as El Shaddai, and announced his intention to make the patriarch fruitful. In the role of El Shaddai God repeated these words (now elevated to the status of a decree) to Jacob (35:11). Earlier Isaac had pronounced a blessing on Jacob in which he asked El Shaddai to make Jacob fruitful (28:3). Jacob later prayed that his sons would be treated with mercy when they returned to Egypt with Benjamin (43:14). The fertility theme is not as apparent here, though one must remember that Jacob viewed Benjamin as the sole remaining son of the favored and once-barren Rachel (see 29:31; 30:22-24; 35:16-18). It is quite natural that he would appeal to El Shaddai to preserve Benjamin’s life, for it was El Shaddai’s miraculous power which made it possible for Rachel to give him sons in the first place. In 48:3 Jacob, prior to blessing Joseph’s sons, told him how El Shaddai appeared to him at Bethel (see Gen 28) and promised to make him fruitful. When blessing Joseph on his deathbed Jacob referred to Shaddai (we should probably read “El Shaddai,” along with a few Hebrew mss, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX, and Syriac) as the one who provides abundant blessings, including “blessings of the breast and womb” (49:25). (The direct association of the name with “breasts” suggests the name might mean “the one of the breast” [i.e., the one who gives fertility], but the juxtaposition is probably better explained as wordplay. Note the wordplay involving the name and the root שָׁדַד, shadad, “destroy”] in Isa 13:6 and in Joel 1:15.) Outside Genesis the name Shaddai (minus the element “El” [“God”]) is normally used when God is viewed as the sovereign king who blesses/protects or curses/brings judgment. The name appears in the introduction to two of Balaam’s oracles (Num 24:4, 16) of blessing upon Israel. Naomi employs the name when accusing the Lord of treating her bitterly by taking the lives of her husband and sons (Ruth 1:20-21). In Ps 68:14; Isa 13:6; and Joel 1:15 Shaddai judges his enemies through warfare, while Ps 91:1 depicts him as the protector of his people. (In Ezek 1:24 and 10:5 the sound of the cherubs’ wings is compared to Shaddai’s powerful voice. The reference may be to the mighty divine warrior’s battle cry which accompanies his angry judgment.) Finally, the name occurs 31 times in the Book of Job. Job and his “friends” assume that Shaddai is the sovereign king of the world (11:7; 37:23a) who is the source of life (33:4b) and is responsible for maintaining justice (8:3; 34:10-12; 37:23b). He provides abundant blessings, including children (22:17-18; 29:4-6), but he can also discipline, punish, and destroy (5:17; 6:4; 21:20; 23:16). It is not surprising to see the name so often in this book, where the theme of God’s justice is primary and even called into question (24:1; 27:2). The most likely proposal is that the name means “God, the one of the mountain” (an Akkadian cognate means “mountain,” to which the Hebrew שַׁד, shad, “breast”] is probably related). For a discussion of proposed derivations see T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God, 70-71. The name may originally have depicted God as the sovereign judge who, in Canaanite style, ruled from a sacred mountain. Isa 14:13 and Ezek 28:14, 16 associate such a mountain with God, while Ps 48:2 refers to Zion as “Zaphon,” the Canaanite Olympus from which the high god El ruled. (In Isa 14 the Canaanite god El may be in view. Note that Isaiah pictures pagan kings as taunting the king of Babylon, suggesting that pagan mythology may provide the background for the language and imagery.)

[17:1]  ¹⁴ tn Or “Live out your life.” The Hebrew verb translated “walk” is the Hitpael; it means “to walk back and forth; to walk about; to live out one’s life.”

[17:1]  ¹⁵ tn Or “in my presence.”

[17:1]  ¹⁶ tn There are two imperatives here: “walk…and be blameless [or “perfect”].” The second imperative may be purely sequential (see the translation) or consequential: “walk before me and then you will be blameless.” How one interprets the sequence depends on the meaning of “walk before”: (1) If it simply refers in a neutral way to serving the Lord, then the second imperative is likely sequential. (2) But if it has a positive moral connotation (“serve me faithfully”), then the second imperative probably indicates purpose (or result). For other uses of the idiom see 1 Sam 2:30, 35 and 12:2 (where it occurs twice).

[17:2]  ¹⁷ tn Following the imperative, the cohortative indicates consequence. If Abram is blameless, then the Lord will ratify the covenant. Earlier the Lord ratified part of his promise to Abram (see Gen 15:18-21), guaranteeing him that his descendants would live in the land. But the expanded form of the promise, which includes numerous descendants and eternal possession of the land, remains to be ratified. This expanded form of the promise is in view here (see vv. 2b, 4-8). See the note at Gen 15:18 and R. B. Chisholm, “Evidence from Genesis,” A Case for Premillennialism, 35-54.

[17:2]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “I will multiply you exceedingly, exceedingly.” The repetition is emphatic.

[17:3]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “And Abram fell on his face.” This expression probably means that Abram sank to his knees and put his forehead to the ground, although it is possible that he completely prostrated himself. In either case the posture indicates humility and reverence.

[17:3]  ²⁰ tn Heb “God spoke to him, saying.” This is redundant in contemporary English and has been simplified in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[17:4]  ²¹ tn Heb “I.”

[17:4]  ²² tn Heb “is” (הִנֵּה, hinneh).

[17:5]  ²³ tn Heb “will your name be called.”

[17:5]  ²⁴ sn Your name will be Abraham. The renaming of Abram was a sign of confirmation to the patriarch. Every time the name was used it would be a reminder of God’s promise. “Abram” means “exalted father,” probably referring to Abram’s father Terah. The name looks to the past; Abram came from noble lineage. The name “Abraham” is a dialectical variant of the name Abram. But its significance is in the wordplay with אַב־הֲמוֹן (’av-hamon, “the father of a multitude,” which sounds like אַבְרָהָם, ’avraham, “Abraham”). The new name would be a reminder of God’s intention to make Abraham the father of a multitude. For a general discussion of renaming, see O. Eissfeldt, “Renaming in the Old Testament,” Words and Meanings, 70-83.

[17:5]  ²⁵ tn The perfect verbal form is used here in a rhetorical manner to emphasize God’s intention.

[17:6]  ²⁶ tn This verb starts a series of perfect verbal forms with vav (ו) consecutive to express God’s intentions.

[17:6]  ²⁷ tn Heb “exceedingly, exceedingly.” The repetition is emphatic.

[17:6]  ²⁸ tn Heb “and I will make you into nations, and kings will come out from you.”

[17:7]  ²⁹ tn The verb קוּם (qum, “to arise, to stand up”) in the Hiphil verbal stem means “to confirm, to give effect to, to carry out” (i.e., a covenant or oath; see BDB 878-79 s.v. קוּם).

[17:7]  ³⁰ tn Or “as an eternal.”

[17:7]  ³¹ tn Heb “to be to you for God and to your descendants after you.”

[17:8]  ³² tn The verbal root is גּוּר (gur, “to sojourn, to reside temporarily,” i.e., as a resident alien). It is the land in which Abram resides, but does not yet possess as his very own.

[17:8]  ³³ tn Or “as an eternal.”

[17:9]  ³⁴ tn The imperfect tense could be translated “you shall keep” as a binding command; but the obligatory nuance (“must”) captures the binding sense better.

[17:9]  ³⁵ tn Heb “my covenant.” The Hebrew word בְּרִית (bÿrit) can refer to (1) the agreement itself between two parties (see v. 7), (2) the promise made by one party to another (see vv. 2-3, 7), (3) an obligation placed by one party on another, or (4) a reminder of the agreement. In vv. 9-10 the word refers to a covenantal obligation which God gives to Abraham and his descendants.

[17:10]  ³⁶ tn Heb “This is my covenant that you must keep between me and you and your descendants after you.”

[17:10]  ³⁷ sn For a discussion of male circumcision as the sign of the covenant in this passage see M. V. Fox, “The Sign of the Covenant: Circumcision in the Light of the Priestly ‘ot Etiologies,” RB 81 (1974): 557-96.

[17:11]  ³⁸ tn Or “sign.”

[17:12]  ³⁹ tn Heb “the son of eight days.”

[17:13]  ⁴⁰ tn The emphatic construction employs the Niphal imperfect tense (collective singular) and the Niphal infinitive.

[17:13]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “my covenant.” Here in v. 13 the Hebrew word בְּרִית (bÿrit) refers to the outward, visible sign, or reminder, of the covenant. For the range of meaning of the term, see the note on the word “requirement” in v. 9.

[17:13]  ⁴² tn Or “an eternal.”

[17:14]  ⁴³ tn The disjunctive clause calls attention to the “uncircumcised male” and what will happen to him.

[17:14]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “that person will be cut off.” The words “that person” have not been included in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[17:14]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “he has broken my covenant.” The noun בְּרִית (bÿrit) here refers to the obligation required by God in conjunction with the covenantal agreement. For the range of meaning of the term, see the note on the word “requirement” in v. 9.

[7:45]  ⁴⁶ tn Or “servants.” The “chief priests and Pharisees” is a comprehensive term for the groups represented in the ruling council (the Sanhedrin) as in John 7:45; 18:3; Acts 5:22, 26. As “servants” or “officers” of the Sanhedrin, their representatives should be distinguished from the Levites serving as temple police (perhaps John 7:30 and 44; also John 8:20; 10:39; 19:6; Acts 4:3). Even when performing ‘police’ duties such as here, their “officers” are doing so only as part of their general tasks (See K. H. Rengstorf, TDNT 8:540).

[7:45]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “came.”

[7:45]  ⁴⁸ sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.

[7:45]  ⁴⁹ tn Grk “Why did you not bring him?” The words “back with you” are implied.

[7:47]  ⁵⁰ tn Grk “answered them.”

[7:47]  ⁵¹ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “have you?”).

[7:48]  ⁵² sn The chief priests and Pharisees (John 7:45) is a comprehensive term for the groups represented in the ruling council (the Sanhedrin) as in John 7:45; 18:3; Acts 5:22, 26. Likewise the term ruler here denotes a member of the Sanhedrin, the highest legal, legislative, and judicial body among the Jews. Note the same word (“ruler”) is used to describe Nicodemus in John 3:1, and Nicodemus also speaks up in this episode (John 7:50).

[7:48]  ⁵³ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “have they?”).

[7:49]  ⁵⁴ tn Grk “crowd.” “Rabble” is a good translation here because the remark by the Pharisees is so derogatory.

[7:50]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[7:50]  ⁵⁶ tn Grk “who was one of them”; the referent (the rulers) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[7:50]  ⁵⁷ tn Grk “said to them.”

[7:51]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “judge.”

[7:51]  ⁵⁹ tn Grk “knows.”

[7:51]  ⁶⁰ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “does it?”).

[7:52]  ⁶¹ tn Grk “They answered and said to him.”

[7:52]  ⁶² tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “are you?”).

[7:52]  ⁶³ tc At least one early and important ms (Ì^66*) places the article before “prophet” (ὁ προφήτης, Jo profhths), making this a reference to the “prophet like Moses” mentioned in Deut 18:15.

[7:53]  ⁶⁴ tc This entire section, 7:53-8:11, traditionally known as the pericope adulterae, is not contained in the earliest and best mss and was almost certainly not an original part of the Gospel of John. Among modern commentators and textual critics, it is a foregone conclusion that the section is not original but represents a later addition to the text of the Gospel. B. M. Metzger summarizes: “the evidence for the non-Johannine origin of the pericope of the adulteress is overwhelming” (TCGNT 187). External evidence is as follows. For the omission of 7:53-8:11: Ì^66,75 א B L N T W Δ Θ Ψ 0141 0211 33 565 1241 1424* 2768 al. In addition codices A and C are defective in this part of John, but it appears that neither contained the pericope because careful measurement shows that there would not have been enough space on the missing pages to include the pericope 7:53-8:11 along with the rest of the text. Among the mss that include 7:53-8:11 are D Ï lat. In addition E S Λ 1424^mg al include part or all of the passage with asterisks or obeli, 225 places the pericope after John 7:36, ˹ places it after John 21:25, {115} after John 8:12, ˹³ after Luke 21:38, and the corrector of 1333 includes it after Luke 24:53. (For a more complete discussion of the locations where this “floating” text has ended up, as well as a minority opinion on the authenticity of the passage, see M. A. Robinson, “Preliminary Observations regarding the Pericope Adulterae Based upon Fresh Collations of nearly All Continuous-Text Manuscripts and All Lectionary Manuscripts containing the Passage,” Filologia Neotestamentaria 13 [2000]: 35-59, especially 41-42.) In evaluating this ms evidence, it should be remembered that in the Gospels A is considered to be of Byzantine texttype (unlike in the epistles and Revelation, where it is Alexandrian), as are E F G (mss with the same designation are of Western texttype in the epistles). This leaves D as the only major Western uncial witness in the Gospels for the inclusion. Therefore the evidence could be summarized by saying that almost all early mss of the Alexandrian texttype omit the pericope, while most mss of the Western and Byzantine texttype include it. But it must be remembered that “Western mss” here refers only to D, a single witness (as far as Greek mss are concerned). Thus it can be seen that practically all of the earliest and best mss extant omit the pericope; it is found only in mss of secondary importance. But before one can conclude that the passage was not originally part of the Gospel of John, internal evidence needs to be considered as well. Internal evidence in favor of the inclusion of 8:1-11 (7:53-8:11): (1) 7:53 fits in the context. If the “last great day of the feast” (7:37) refers to the conclusion of the Feast of Tabernacles, then the statement refers to the pilgrims and worshipers going home after living in “booths” for the week while visiting Jerusalem. (2) There may be an allusion to Isa 9:1-2 behind this text: John 8:12 is the point when Jesus describes himself as the Light of the world. But the section in question mentions that Jesus returned to the temple at “early dawn” (῎Ορθρου, Orqrou, in 8:2). This is the “dawning” of the Light of the world (8:12) mentioned by Isa 9:2. (3) Furthermore, note the relationship to what follows: Just prior to presenting Jesus’ statement that he is the Light of the world, John presents the reader with an example that shows Jesus as the light. Here the woman “came to the light” while her accusers shrank away into the shadows, because their deeds were evil (cf. 3:19-21). Internal evidence against the inclusion of 8:1-11 (7:53-8:11): (1) In reply to the claim that the introduction to the pericope, 7:53, fits the context, it should also be noted that the narrative reads well without the pericope, so that Jesus’ reply in 8:12 is directed against the charge of the Pharisees in 7:52 that no prophet comes from Galilee. (2) The assumption that the author “must” somehow work Isa 9:1-2 into the narrative is simply that – an assumption. The statement by the Pharisees in 7:52 about Jesus’ Galilean origins is allowed to stand without correction by the author, although one might have expected him to mention that Jesus was really born in Bethlehem. And 8:12 does directly mention Jesus’ claim to be the Light of the world. The author may well have presumed familiarity with Isa 9:1-2 on the part of his readers because of its widespread association with Jesus among early Christians. (3) The fact that the pericope deals with the light/darkness motif does not inherently strengthen its claim to authenticity, because the motif is so prominent in the Fourth Gospel that it may well have been the reason why someone felt that the pericope, circulating as an independent tradition, fit so well here. (4) In general the style of the pericope is not Johannine either in vocabulary or grammar (see D. B. Wallace, “Reconsidering ‘The Story of the Woman Taken in Adultery Reconsidered’,” NTS 39 [1993]: 290-96). According to R. E. Brown it is closer stylistically to Lukan material (John [AB], 1:336). Interestingly one important family of mss (˹³) places the pericope after Luke 21:38. Conclusion: In the final analysis, the weight of evidence in this case must go with the external evidence. The earliest and best mss do not contain the pericope. It is true with regard to internal evidence that an attractive case can be made for inclusion, but this is by nature subjective (as evidenced by the fact that strong arguments can be given against such as well). In terms of internal factors like vocabulary and style, the pericope does not stand up very well. The question may be asked whether this incident, although not an original part of the Gospel of John, should be regarded as an authentic tradition about Jesus. It could well be that it is ancient and may indeed represent an unusual instance where such a tradition survived outside of the bounds of the canonical literature. However, even that needs to be nuanced (see B. D. Ehrman, “Jesus and the Adulteress,” NTS 34 [1988]: 24–44).

[23:6]  ⁶⁵ tn BDAG 200 s.v. γινώσκω 4 has “to be aware of someth., perceive, notice, realize”; this is further clarified by section 4.c: “w. ὅτι foll….Ac 23:6.”

[23:6]  ⁶⁶ sn See the note on Sadducees in 4:1.

[23:6]  ⁶⁷ sn See the note on Pharisee in 5:34.

[23:6]  ⁶⁸ tn Grk “the Sanhedrin” (the Sanhedrin was the highest legal, legislative, and judicial body among the Jews).

[23:6]  ⁶⁹ tn That is, concerning the hope that the dead will be resurrected. Grk “concerning the hope and resurrection.” BDAG 320 s.v. ἐλπίς 1.b.α states, “Of Israel’s messianic hope Ac 23:6 (ἐ. καὶ ἀνάστασις for ἐ. τῆς ἀν. [obj. gen] as 2 Macc 3:29 ἐ. καὶ σωτηρία).” With an objective genitive construction, the resurrection of the dead would be the “object” of the hope.

[23:7]  ⁷⁰ tn The participle εἰπόντος (eiponto") has been translated temporally.

[23:7]  ⁷¹ tn Or “a dispute” (BDAG 940 s.v. στάσις 3).

[23:7]  ⁷² tn Grk “there came about an argument.” This has been simplified to “an argument began”

[23:8]  ⁷³ tn BDAG 55 s.v. ἀμφότεροι 2 has “all, even when more than two are involved…Φαρισαῖοι ὁμολογοῦσιν τὰ ἀ. believe in them all 23:8.” On this belief see Josephus, J. W. 2.8.14 (2.163); Ant. 18.1.3 (18.14).

[23:9]  ⁷⁴ tn Or “clamor” (cf. BDAG 565 s.v. κραυγή 1.a, which has “there arose a loud outcry” here, and Exod 12:30).

[23:9]  ⁷⁵ tn Or “and some scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 4:5.

[23:9]  ⁷⁶ tn Grk “standing up.” The participle ἀναστάντες (anastante") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[23:9]  ⁷⁷ tn Grk “protested strongly, saying.” L&N 39.27 has “διαμάχομαι: to fight or contend with, involving severity and thoroughness – ‘to protest strongly, to contend with.’…‘some scribes from the party of the Pharisees protested strongly’ Ac 23:9.” The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant and has not been translated.

[23:9]  ⁷⁸ sn “We find nothing wrong with this man.” Here is another declaration of innocence. These leaders recognized the possibility that Paul might have the right to make his claim.

[23:10]  ⁷⁹ tn This genitive absolute construction with the participle γινομένης (ginomenhs) has been taken temporally (it could also be translated as causal).

[23:10]  ⁸⁰ tn Grk “the chiliarch” (an officer in command of a thousand soldiers). In Greek the term χιλίαρχος (ciliarco") literally described the “commander of a thousand,” but it was used as the standard translation for the Latin tribunus militum or tribunus militare, the military tribune who commanded a cohort of 600 men.

[23:10]  ⁸¹ tn Grk “that Paul would be torn to pieces by them.” BDAG 236 s.v. διασπάω has “of an angry mob μὴ διασπασθῇ ὁ Παῦλος ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν that Paul would be torn in pieces by them Ac 23:10.” The passive construction is somewhat awkward in English and has been converted to an equivalent active construction in the translation.

[23:10]  ⁸² tn Normally this term means “army,” but according to BDAG 947 s.v. στράτευμα, “Of a smaller detachment of soldiers, sing. Ac 23:10, 27.” In the plural it can be translated “troops,” but it is singular here.

[23:10]  ⁸³ tn Or “to go down, grab him out of their midst.”

[23:10]  ⁸⁴ tn Or “the headquarters.” BDAG 775 s.v. παρεμβολή 2 has “barracks/headquarters of the Roman troops in Jerusalem Ac 21:34, 37; 22:24; 23:10, 16, 32.”