Jeremiah 48:13

48:13 The people of Moab will be disappointed by their god Chemosh.

They will be as disappointed as the people of Israel were

when they put their trust in the calf god at Bethel. ¹ 

Jeremiah 48:46

48:46 Moab, you are doomed! ² 

You people who worship Chemosh will be destroyed.

Your sons will be taken away captive.

Your daughters will be carried away into exile. ³ 

Jeremiah 43:12

43:12 He will set fire ⁴  to the temples of the gods of Egypt. He will burn their gods or carry them off as captives. ⁵  He will pick Egypt clean like a shepherd picks the lice from his clothing. ⁶  He will leave there unharmed. ⁷ 

Numbers 21:29

21:29 Woe to you, Moab.

You are ruined, O people of Chemosh! ⁸ 

He has made his sons fugitives,

and his daughters the prisoners of King Sihon of the Amorites.

Jude 1:24

Final Blessing

1:24 Now to the one who is able to keep you from falling, ⁹  and to cause you to stand, rejoicing, ¹⁰  without blemish ¹¹  before his glorious presence, ¹² 

Jude 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Jude, ¹³  a slave ¹⁴  of Jesus Christ and brother of James, ¹⁵  to those who are called, wrapped in the love of ¹⁶  God the Father and kept for ¹⁷  Jesus Christ.

Jude 1:7

1:7 So also ¹⁸  Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring towns, ¹⁹  since they indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire ²⁰  in a way similar to ²¹  these angels, ²²  are now displayed as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire.

Jude 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Jude, ²³  a slave ²⁴  of Jesus Christ and brother of James, ²⁵  to those who are called, wrapped in the love of ²⁶  God the Father and kept for ²⁷  Jesus Christ.

Isaiah 46:1-2

The Lord Carries His People

46:1 Bel ²⁸  kneels down,

Nebo ²⁹  bends low.

Their images weigh down animals and beasts. ³⁰ 

Your heavy images are burdensome to tired animals. ³¹ 

46:2 Together they bend low and kneel down;

they are unable to rescue the images; ³² 

they themselves ³³  head off into captivity. ³⁴ 

[48:13]  ¹ tn Heb “Moab will be ashamed because of Chemosh as the house of Israel was ashamed because of Bethel, their [source of] confidence.” The “shame” is, of course, the disappointment, disillusionment because of the lack of help from these gods in which they trusted (for this nuance of the verb see BDB 101 s.v. בּוֹשׁ Qal.2 and compare usage in Jer 2:13; Isa 20:5). Because of the parallelism, some see the reference to Bethel to be a reference to a West Semitic god worshiped by the people of Israel (see J. P. Hyatt, “Bethel [Deity],” IDB 1:390 for the arguments). However, there is no evidence in the OT that such a god was worshiped in Israel, and there is legitimate evidence that northern Israel placed its confidence in the calf god that Jeroboam set up in Bethel (cf. 1 Kgs 12:28-32; Hos 10:5; 8:5-6; Amos 7:10-17).

[48:46]  ² tn Heb “Woe to you, Moab.” For the usage of this expression see 4:13, 31; 13:17 and the translator’s note on 4:13 and 10:19.

[48:46]  ³ tn Heb “Your sons will be taken away into captivity, your daughters into exile.”

[43:12]  ⁴ tc The translation follows the Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions. The Hebrew text reads: “I will set fire to.” While it would be possible to explain the first person subject here in the same way as in the two verbs in v. 12b, the corruption of the Hebrew text is easy to explain here as a metathesis of two letters, י (yod) and ת (tav). The Hebrew reads הִצַּתִּי (hitsatti) and the versions presuppose הִצִּית (hitsit).

[43:12]  ⁵ tn Heb “burn them or carry them off as captives.” Some of the commentaries and English versions make a distinction between the objects of the verbs, i.e., burn the temples and carry off the gods. However, the burning down of the temples is referred to later in v. 13.

[43:12]  ⁶ tn Or “he will take over Egypt as easily as a shepherd wraps his cloak around him.” The translation follows the interpretation of HALOT 769 s.v. II ָעטָה Qal, the Greek translation, and a number of the modern commentaries (e.g., J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 671). The only other passage where that translation is suggested for this verb is Isa 22:17 according to HAL. The alternate translation follows the more normal meaning of עָטָה (’atah; cf. BDB 741 s.v. I עָטָה Qal which explains “so completely will it be in his power”). The fact that the subject is “a shepherd” lends more credence to the former view though there may be a deliberate double meaning playing on the homonyms (cf. W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah [Hermeneia], 2:302).

[43:12]  ⁷ tn Heb “in peace/wholeness/well-being/safety [shalom].”

[21:29]  ⁸ sn The note of holy war emerges here as the victory is a victory over the local gods as well as over the people.

[1:24]  ⁹ tn The construction in Greek is a double accusative object-complement. “You” is the object and “free from falling” is the adjectival complement.

[1:24]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “with rejoicing.” The prepositional clause is placed after “his glorious presence” in Greek, but most likely goes with “cause you to stand.”

[1:24]  ¹¹ tn The construction in Greek is a double accusative object-complement. “You” is the object and “without blemish” is the adjectival complement.

[1:24]  ¹² tn Or “in the presence of his glory,” “before his glory.”

[1:1]  ¹³ tn Grk “Judas,” traditionally “Jude” in English versions to distinguish him from the one who betrayed Jesus. The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ¹⁴ tn Though δοῦλος (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). At the same time, perhaps “servant” is apt in that the δοῦλος of Jesus Christ took on that role voluntarily, unlike a slave. The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

[1:1]  ¹⁵ sn Although Jude was half-brother of Jesus, he humbly associates himself with James, his full brother. By first calling himself a slave of Jesus Christ, it is evident that he wants no one to place stock in his physical connections. At the same time, he must identify himself further: Since Jude was a common name in the 1st century (two of Jesus’ disciples were so named, including his betrayer), more information was needed, that is to say, brother of James.

[1:1]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “loved in.” The perfect passive participle suggests that the audience’s relationship to God is not recent; the preposition ἐν (en) before πατρί (patri) could be taken as sphere or instrument (agency is unlikely, however). Another possible translation would be “dear to God.”

[1:1]  ¹⁷ tn Or “by.” Datives of agency are quite rare in the NT (and other ancient Greek), almost always found with a perfect verb. Although this text qualifies, in light of the well-worn idiom of τηρέω (threw) in eschatological contexts, in which God or Christ keeps the believer safe until the parousia (cf. 1 Thess 5:23; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 3:10; other terms meaning “to guard,” “to keep” are also found in similar eschatological contexts [cf. 2 Thess 3:3; 2 Tim 1:12; 1 Pet 1:5; Jude 24]), it is probably better to understand this verse as having such an eschatological tinge. It is at the same time possible that Jude’s language was intentionally ambiguous, implying both ideas (“kept by Jesus Christ [so that they might be] kept for Jesus Christ”). Elsewhere he displays a certain fondness for wordplays; this may be a hint of things to come.

[1:7]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “as.”

[1:7]  ¹⁹ tn Grk “the towns [or cities] surrounding them.”

[1:7]  ²⁰ tn Grk “strange flesh.” This phrase has been variously interpreted. It could refer to flesh of another species (such as angels lusting after human flesh). This would aptly describe the sin of the angels, but not easily explain the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. It could refer to the homosexual practices of the Sodomites, but a difficulty arises from the use of ἕτερος ({etero"; “strange,” “other”). When this is to be distinguished from ἄλλος (allos, “another”) it suggests “another of a different kind.” If so, would that properly describe homosexual behavior? In response, the language could easily be compact: “pursued flesh other than what was normally pursued.” However, would this find an analogy in the lust of angels (such would imply that angels normally had sexual relations of some sort, but cf. Matt 22:30)? Another alternative is that the focus of the parallel is on the activity of the surrounding cities and the activity of the angels. This is especially plausible since the participles ἐκπορνεύσασαι (ekporneusasai, “having indulged in sexual immorality”) and ἀπελθοῦσαι (apelqousai, “having pursued”) have concord with “cities” (πόλεις, poleis), a feminine plural noun, rather than with Sodom and Gomorrah (both masculine nouns). If so, then their sin would not necessarily have to be homosexuality. However, most likely the feminine participles are used because of constructio ad sensum (construction according to sense). That is, since both Sodom and Gomorrah are cities, the feminine is used to imply that all the cities are involved. The connection with angels thus seems to be somewhat loose: Both angels and Sodom and Gomorrah indulged in heinous sexual immorality. Thus, whether the false teachers indulge in homosexual activity is not the point; mere sexual immorality is enough to condemn them.

[1:7]  ²¹ tn Or “in the same way as.”

[1:7]  ²² tn “Angels” is not in the Greek text; but the masculine demonstrative pronoun most likely refers back to the angels of v. 6.

[1:1]  ²³ tn Grk “Judas,” traditionally “Jude” in English versions to distinguish him from the one who betrayed Jesus. The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:1]  ²⁴ tn Though δοῦλος (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). At the same time, perhaps “servant” is apt in that the δοῦλος of Jesus Christ took on that role voluntarily, unlike a slave. The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

[1:1]  ²⁵ sn Although Jude was half-brother of Jesus, he humbly associates himself with James, his full brother. By first calling himself a slave of Jesus Christ, it is evident that he wants no one to place stock in his physical connections. At the same time, he must identify himself further: Since Jude was a common name in the 1st century (two of Jesus’ disciples were so named, including his betrayer), more information was needed, that is to say, brother of James.

[1:1]  ²⁶ tn Grk “loved in.” The perfect passive participle suggests that the audience’s relationship to God is not recent; the preposition ἐν (en) before πατρί (patri) could be taken as sphere or instrument (agency is unlikely, however). Another possible translation would be “dear to God.”

[1:1]  ²⁷ tn Or “by.” Datives of agency are quite rare in the NT (and other ancient Greek), almost always found with a perfect verb. Although this text qualifies, in light of the well-worn idiom of τηρέω (threw) in eschatological contexts, in which God or Christ keeps the believer safe until the parousia (cf. 1 Thess 5:23; 1 Pet 1:4; Rev 3:10; other terms meaning “to guard,” “to keep” are also found in similar eschatological contexts [cf. 2 Thess 3:3; 2 Tim 1:12; 1 Pet 1:5; Jude 24]), it is probably better to understand this verse as having such an eschatological tinge. It is at the same time possible that Jude’s language was intentionally ambiguous, implying both ideas (“kept by Jesus Christ [so that they might be] kept for Jesus Christ”). Elsewhere he displays a certain fondness for wordplays; this may be a hint of things to come.

[46:1]  ²⁸ sn Bel was the name of a Babylonian god. The name was originally associated with Enlil, but later was applied to Marduk. See HALOT 132 s.v. בֵּל.

[46:1]  ²⁹ sn Nebo is a variation of the name of the Babylonian god Nabu.

[46:1]  ³⁰ tn Heb “their images belong to animals and beasts”; NIV “their idols are borne by beasts of burden”; NLT “are being hauled away.”

[46:1]  ³¹ tn Heb “your loads are carried [as] a burden by a weary [animal].”

[46:2]  ³² tn Heb “[the] burden,” i.e., their images, the heavy burden carried by the animals.

[46:2]  ³³ tn נַפְשָׁם (nafsham, “their souls/lives”) is equivalent here to a third masculine plural suffix, but the third feminine singular verb הָלָכָה (halakhah, “they go”) agrees with the feminine noun נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh, “soul, life”).

[46:2]  ³⁴ sn The downfall of Babylon is depicted here. The idols are carried off by the victorious enemy; the gods are likened to defeated captives who cower before the enemy and are taken into exile.