Mark 14:71

14:71 Then he began to curse, and he swore with an oath, “I do not know this man you are talking about!”

Acts 23:14

23:14 They ¹  went ²  to the chief priests ³  and the elders and said, “We have bound ourselves with a solemn oath ⁴  not to partake ⁵  of anything until we have killed Paul.

Romans 9:3

9:3 For I could wish ⁶  that I myself were accursed – cut off from Christ – for the sake of my people, ⁷  my fellow countrymen, ⁸ 

Romans 9:1

Israel’s Rejection Considered

9:1 ⁹ I am telling the truth in Christ (I am not lying!), for my conscience assures me ¹⁰  in the Holy Spirit –

Colossians 1:3

Paul’s Thanksgiving and Prayer for the Church

1:3 We always ¹¹  give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you,

Colossians 1:22

1:22 but now he has reconciled you ¹²  by his physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him –

[23:14]  ¹ tn Grk “who.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the relative pronoun (“whom”) was translated by the third person plural pronoun (“them”) and a new sentence begun in the translation.

[23:14]  ² tn Grk “going.” The participle προσελθόντες (proselqonte") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[23:14]  ³ sn They went to the chief priests. The fact that the high priest knew of this plot and did nothing shows the Jewish leadership would even become accomplices to murder to stop Paul. They would not allow Roman justice to take its course. Paul’s charge in v. 3 of superficially following the law is thus shown to be true.

[23:14]  ⁴ tn Or “bound ourselves under a curse.” BDAG 63 s.v. ἀναθεματίζω 1 has “trans. put under a curse τινά someone…pleonastically ἀναθέματι ἀ. ἑαυτόν Ac 23:14…ἀ. ἑαυτόν vss. 12, 21, 13 v.l.” The pleonastic use ἀναθέματι ἀνεθεματίσαμεν (literally “we have cursed ourselves with a curse”) probably serves as an intensifier following Semitic usage, and is represented in the translation by the word “solemn.” On such oaths see m. Nedarim 3:1, 3.

[23:14]  ⁵ tn This included both food and drink (γεύομαι [geuomai] is used of water turned to wine in John 2:9).

[9:3]  ⁶ tn Or “For I would pray.” The implied condition is “if this could save my fellow Jews.”

[9:3]  ⁷ tn Grk “brothers.” See BDAG 18-19 s.v. ἀδελφός 2.b.

[9:3]  ⁸ tn Grk “my kinsmen according to the flesh.”

[9:1]  ⁹ sn Rom 9:1–11:36. These three chapters are among the most difficult and disputed in Paul’s Letter to the Romans. One area of difficulty is the relationship between Israel and the church, especially concerning the nature and extent of Israel’s election. Many different models have been constructed to express this relationship. For a representative survey, see M. Barth, The People of God (JSNTSup), 22-27. The literary genre of these three chapters has been frequently identified as a diatribe, a philosophical discussion or conversation evolved by the Cynic and Stoic schools of philosophy as a means of popularizing their ideas (E. Käsemann, Romans, 261 and 267). But other recent scholars have challenged the idea that Rom 9–11 is characterized by diatribe. Scholars like R. Scroggs and E. E. Ellis have instead identified the material in question as midrash. For a summary and discussion of the rabbinic connections, see W. R. Stegner, “Romans 9.6-29 – A Midrash,” JSNT 22 (1984): 37-52.

[9:1]  ¹⁰ tn Or “my conscience bears witness to me.”

[1:3]  ¹¹ tn The adverb πάντοτε (pantote) is understood to modify the indicative εὐχαριστοῦμεν (eucaristoumen) because it precedes περὶ ὑμῶν (peri Jumwn) which probably modifies the indicative and not the participle προσευχόμενοι (proseucomenoi). But see 1:9 where the same expression occurs and περὶ ὑμῶν modifies the participle “praying” (προσευχόμενοι).

[1:22]  ¹² tc Some of the better representatives of the Alexandrian and Western texts have a passive verb here instead of the active ἀποκατήλλαξεν (apokathllaxen, “he has reconciled”): ἀποκατηλλάγητε (apokathllaghte) in (Ì⁴⁶) B, ἀποκατήλλακται [sic] (apokathllaktai) in 33, and ἀποκαταλλαγέντες (apokatallagente") in D* F G. Yet the active verb is strongly supported by א A C D² Ψ 048 075 [0278] 1739 1881 Ï lat sy. Internally, the passive creates an anacoluthon in that it looks back to the accusative ὑμᾶς (Juma", “you”) of v. 21 and leaves the following παραστῆσαι (parasthsai) dangling (“you were reconciled…to present you”). The passive reading is certainly the harder reading. As such, it may well explain the rise of the other readings. At the same time, it is possible that the passive was produced by scribes who wanted some symmetry between the ποτε (pote, “at one time”) of v. 21 and the νυνὶ δέ (nuni de, “but now”) of v. 22: Since a passive periphrastic participle is used in v. 21, there may have a temptation to produce a corresponding passive form in v. 22, handling the ὑμᾶς of v. 21 by way of constructio ad sensum. Since παραστῆσαι occurs ten words later, it may not have been considered in this scribal modification. Further, the Western reading (ἀποκαταλλαγέντες) hardly seems to have arisen from ἀποκατηλλάγητε (contra TCGNT 555). As difficult as this decision is, the preferred reading is the active form because it is superior externally and seems to explain the rise of all forms of the passive readings.