Discovery BoxGenesis 3:4-6
Context3:4 The serpent said to the woman, “Surely you will not die, 1 3:5 for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will open 2 and you will be like divine beings who know 3 good and evil.” 4
3:6 When 5 the woman saw that the tree produced fruit that was good for food, 6 was attractive 7 to the eye, and was desirable for making one wise, 8 she took some of its fruit and ate it. 9 She also gave some of it to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. 10
Job 2:10
Context2:10 But he replied, 11 “You’re talking like one of the godless 12 women would do! Should we receive 13 what is good from God, and not also 14 receive 15 what is evil?” 16 In all this Job did not sin by what he said. 17
Matthew 4:10
Context4:10 Then Jesus said to him, “Go away, 18 Satan! For it is written: ‘You are to worship the Lord your God and serve only him.’” 19
Luke 4:8
Context4:8 Jesus 20 answered him, 21 “It is written, ‘You are to worship 22 the Lord 23 your God and serve only him.’” 24
Luke 4:1
Context4:1 Then 25 Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan River 26 and was led by the Spirit 27 in 28 the wilderness, 29
Colossians 1:5
Context1:5 Your faith and love have arisen 30 from the hope laid up 31 for you in heaven, which you have heard about in the message of truth, the gospel 32
[3:4] 1 tn The response of the serpent includes the infinitive absolute with a blatant negation equal to saying: “Not – you will surely die” (לֹא מוֹת תִּמֻתען, lo’ mot tÿmutun). The construction makes this emphatic because normally the negative particle precedes the finite verb. The serpent is a liar, denying that there is a penalty for sin (see John 8:44).
[3:5] 2 tn Or “you will have understanding.” This obviously refers to the acquisition of the “knowledge of good and evil,” as the next statement makes clear.
[3:5] 3 tn Or perhaps “like God, knowing.” It is unclear how the plural participle translated “knowing” is functioning. On the one hand, יֹדְעֵי (yodÿ’e) could be taken as a substantival participle functioning as a predicative adjective in the sentence. In this case one might translate: “You will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil.” On the other hand, it could be taken as an attributive adjective modifying אֱלֹהִים (’elohim). In this case אֱלֹהִים has to be taken as a numerical plural referring to “gods,” “divine beings,” for if the one true God were the intended referent, a singular form of the participle would almost certainly appear as a modifier. Following this line of interpretation, one could translate, “You will be like divine beings who know good and evil.” The following context may favor this translation, for in 3:22 God says to an unidentified group, “Look, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” It is probable that God is addressing his heavenly court (see the note on the word “make” in 1:26), the members of which can be called “gods” or “divine beings” from the ancient Israelite perspective. (We know some of these beings as messengers or “angels.”) An examination of parallel constructions shows that a predicative understanding (“you will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil,” cf. NIV, NRSV) is possible, but rare (see Gen 27:23, where “hairy” is predicative, complementing the verb “to be”). The statistical evidence strongly suggests that the participle is attributive, modifying “divine beings” (see Ps 31:12; Isa 1:30; 13:14; 16:2; 29:5; 58:11; Jer 14:9; 20:9; 23:9; 31:12; 48:41; 49:22; Hos 7:11; Amos 4:11). In all of these texts, where a comparative clause and accompanying adjective/participle follow a copulative (“to be”) verb, the adjective/participle is attributive after the noun in the comparative clause.
[3:5] 4 sn You will be like divine beings who know good and evil. The serpent raises doubts about the integrity of God. He implies that the only reason for the prohibition was that God was protecting the divine domain. If the man and woman were to eat, they would enter into that domain. The temptation is to overstep divinely established boundaries. (See D. E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God [PTMS], 25.)
[3:6] 5 tn Heb “And the woman saw.” The clause can be rendered as a temporal clause subordinate to the following verb in the sequence.
[3:6] 6 tn Heb “that the tree was good for food.” The words “produced fruit that was” are not in the Hebrew text, but are implied.
[3:6] 7 tn The Hebrew word תַּאֲוָה (ta’avah, translated “attractive” here) actually means “desirable.” This term and the later term נֶחְמָד (nekhmad, “desirable”) are synonyms.
[3:6] 8 tn Heb “that good was the tree for food, and that desirable it was to the eyes, and desirable was the tree to make one wise.” On the connection between moral wisdom and the “knowledge of good and evil,” see the note on the word “evil” in 2:9.
[3:6] 9 tn The pronoun “it” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied (here and also after “ate” at the end of this verse) for stylistic reasons.
[3:6] 10 sn This pericope (3:1-7) is a fine example of Hebrew narrative structure. After an introductory disjunctive clause that introduces a new character and sets the stage (3:1), the narrative tension develops through dialogue, culminating in the action of the story. Once the dialogue is over, the action is told in a rapid sequence of verbs – she took, she ate, she gave, and he ate.
[2:10] 11 tn Heb “he said to her.”
[2:10] 12 tn The word “foolish” (נָבָל, naval) has to do with godlessness more than silliness (Ps 14:1). To be foolish in this sense is to deny the nature and the work of God in life its proper place. See A. Phillips, “NEBALA – A Term for Serious Disorderly Unruly Conduct,” VT 25 (1975): 237-41; and W. M. W. Roth, “NBL,” VT 10 (1960): 394-409.
[2:10] 13 tn The verb קִבֵּל (qibbel) means “to accept, receive.” It is attested in the Amarna letters with the meaning “receive meekly, patiently.”
[2:10] 14 tn The adverb גָּם (gam, “also, even”) is placed here before the first clause, but belongs with the second. It intensifies the idea (see GKC 483 §153). See also C. J. Labuschagne, “The Emphasizing Particle GAM and Its Connotations,” Studia Biblica et Semitica, 193-203.
[2:10] 15 tn The two verbs in this sentence, Piel imperfects, are deliberative imperfects; they express the reasoning or deliberating in the interrogative sentences.
[2:10] 16 tn A question need not be introduced by an interrogative particle or adverb. The natural emphasis on the words is enough to indicate it is a question (GKC 473 §150.a).
[2:10] 17 tn Heb “sin with his lips,” an idiom meaning he did not sin by what he said.
[4:10] 18 tc The majority of later witnesses (C2 D L Z 33 Ï) have “behind me” (ὀπίσω μου; opisw mou) after “Go away.” But since this is the wording in Matt 16:23, where the text is certain, scribes most likely added the words here to conform to the later passage. Further, the shorter reading has superior support (א B C*vid K P W Δ 0233 Ë1,13 565 579* 700 al). Thus, both externally and internally, the shorter reading is strongly preferred.
[4:10] 19 sn A quotation from Deut 6:13. The word “only” is an interpretive expansion not found in either the Hebrew or Greek (LXX) text of the OT.
[4:8] 20 tn Grk “And Jesus.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.
[4:8] 21 tc Most
[4:8] 22 tn Or “You will prostrate yourself in worship before…” The verb προσκυνέω (proskunew) can allude not only to the act of worship but the position of the worshiper. See L&N 53.56.
[4:8] 23 tc Most later
[4:8] 24 sn A quotation from Deut 6:13. The word “only” is an interpretive expansion not found in either the Hebrew or Greek (LXX) text of the OT.
[4:1] 25 tn Here δέ (de) has been translated as “then” to indicate continuity with the previous topic.
[4:1] 26 tn “River” is not in the Greek text but is supplied for clarity.
[4:1] 27 sn The double mention of the Spirit in this verse makes it clear that the temptation was neither the fault of Jesus nor an accident.
[4:1] 28 tc Most
[1:5] 30 tn Col 1:3-8 form one long sentence in the Greek text and have been divided at the end of v. 4 and v. 6 and within v. 6 for clarity, in keeping with the tendency in contemporary English toward shorter sentences. Thus the phrase “Your faith and love have arisen from the hope” is literally “because of the hope.” The perfect tense “have arisen” was chosen in the English to reflect the fact that the recipients of the letter had acquired this hope at conversion in the past, but that it still remains and motivates them to trust in Christ and to love one another.
[1:5] 31 tn BDAG 113 s.v. ἀπόκειμαι 2 renders ἀποκειμένην (apokeimenhn) with the expression “reserved” in this verse.
[1:5] 32 tn The term “the gospel” (τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, tou euangeliou) is in apposition to “the word of truth” (τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἀληθείας, tw logw th" alhqeia") as indicated in the translation.
