Numbers 12:8

12:8 With him I will speak face to face, ¹  openly, ²  and not in riddles; and he will see the form ³  of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?”

Genesis 32:30

32:30 So Jacob named the place Peniel, ⁴  explaining, ⁵  “Certainly ⁶  I have seen God face to face ⁷  and have survived.” ⁸ 

Exodus 33:11

33:11 The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, ⁹  the way a person speaks ¹⁰  to a friend. Then Moses ¹¹  would return to the camp, but his servant, Joshua son of Nun, a young man, did not leave the tent. ¹² 

Deuteronomy 5:4

5:4 The Lord spoke face to face with you at the mountain, from the middle of the fire.

Deuteronomy 34:10

34:10 No prophet ever again arose in Israel like Moses, who knew the Lord face to face. ¹³ 

John 1:18

1:18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, ¹⁴  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with ¹⁵  the Father, has made God ¹⁶  known. ¹⁷ 

John 14:9

14:9 Jesus replied, ¹⁸  “Have I been with you for so long, and you have not known ¹⁹  me, Philip? The person who has seen me has seen the Father! How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

John 14:1

Jesus’ Parting Words to His Disciples

14:1 “Do not let your hearts be distressed. ²⁰  You believe in God; ²¹  believe also in me.

Colossians 1:12

1:12 giving thanks to the Father who has qualified you to share ²²  in the saints’ ²³  inheritance in the light.

Colossians 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ²⁴  an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

Colossians 3:2

3:2 Keep thinking about things above, not things on the earth,

[12:8]  ¹ tn The emphasis of the line is clear enough – it begins literally “mouth to mouth” I will speak with him. In human communication this would mean equality of rank, but Moses is certainly not equal in rank with the Lord. And yet God is here stating that Moses has an immediacy and directness with communication with God. It goes beyond the idea of friendship, almost to that of a king’s confidant.

[12:8]  ² tn The word מַרְאֶה (mar’eh) refers to what is seen, a vision, an appearance. Here it would have the idea of that which is clearly visible, open, obvious.

[12:8]  ³ tn The word “form” (תְּמוּנָה, tÿmunah) means “shape, image, form.” The Greek text took it metaphorically and rendered it “the glory of the Lord.” This line expresses even more the uniqueness of Moses. The elders saw God on one special occasion (Exod 24:10), and the people never (Deut 4:12, 15), but Moses has direct and familiar contact with God.

[32:30]  ⁴ sn The name Peniel means “face of God.” Since Jacob saw God face to face here, the name is appropriate.

[32:30]  ⁵ tn The word “explaining” is supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[32:30]  ⁶ tn Or “because.”

[32:30]  ⁷ sn I have seen God face to face. See the note on the name “Peniel” earlier in the verse.

[32:30]  ⁸ tn Heb “and my soul [= life] has been preserved.”

[33:11]  ⁹ tn “Face to face” is circumstantial to the action of the verb, explaining how they spoke (see GKC 489-90 §156.c). The point of this note of friendly relationship with Moses is that Moses was “at home” in this tent speaking with God. Moses would derive courage from this when he interceded for the people (B. Jacob, Exodus, 966).

[33:11]  ¹⁰ tn The verb in this clause is a progressive imperfect.

[33:11]  ¹¹ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[33:11]  ¹² sn Moses did not live in the tent. But Joshua remained there most of the time to guard the tent, it seems, lest any of the people approach it out of curiosity.

[34:10]  ¹³ sn See Num 12:8; Deut 18:15-18.

[1:18]  ¹⁴ tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh" qeo", “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh" Juio", “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C³ Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 Ï lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. Ì⁷⁵ א¹ 33 pc have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in Ì⁶⁶ א* B C* L pc. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (Jo wn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (qeo" hn Jo logo") means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8, 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.

[1:18]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “in the bosom of” (an idiom for closeness or nearness; cf. L&N 34.18; BDAG 556 s.v. κόλπος 1).

[1:18]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “him”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:18]  ¹⁷ sn Has made God known. In this final verse of the prologue, the climactic and ultimate statement of the earthly career of the Logos, Jesus of Nazareth, is reached. The unique One (John 1:14), the One who has taken on human form and nature by becoming incarnate (became flesh, 1:14), who is himself fully God (the Word was God, 1:1c) and is to be identified with the ever-living One of the Old Testament revelation (Exod 3:14), who is in intimate relationship with the Father, this One and no other has fully revealed what God is like. As Jesus said to Philip in John 14:9, “The one who has seen me has seen the Father.”

[14:9]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “Jesus said to him.”

[14:9]  ¹⁹ tn Or “recognized.”

[14:1]  ²⁰ sn The same verb is used to describe Jesus’ own state in John 11:33, 12:27, and 13:21. Jesus is looking ahead to the events of the evening and the next day, his arrest, trials, crucifixion, and death, which will cause his disciples extreme emotional distress.

[14:1]  ²¹ tn Or “Believe in God.” The translation of the two uses of πιστεύετε (pisteuete) is difficult. Both may be either indicative or imperative, and as L. Morris points out (John [NICNT], 637), this results in a bewildering variety of possibilities. To complicate matters further, the first may be understood as a question: “Do you believe in God? Believe also in me.” Morris argues against the KJV translation which renders the first πιστεύετε as indicative and the second as imperative on the grounds that for the writer of the Fourth Gospel, faith in Jesus is inseparable from faith in God. But this is precisely the point that Jesus is addressing in context. He is about to undergo rejection by his own people as their Messiah. The disciples’ faith in him as Messiah and Lord would be cast into extreme doubt by these events, which the author makes clear were not at this time foreseen by the disciples. After the resurrection it is this identification between Jesus and the Father which needs to be reaffirmed (cf. John 20:24-29). Thus it seems best to take the first πιστεύετε as indicative and the second as imperative, producing the translation “You believe in God; believe also in me.”

[1:12]  ²² tn BDAG 473 s.v. ἱκανόω states, “τινὰ εἴς τι someone for someth. Col 1:12.” The point of the text is that God has qualified the saints for a “share” or “portion” in the inheritance of the saints.

[1:12]  ²³ tn Grk “the inheritance of the saints.” The genitive noun τῶν ἁγίων (twn Jagiwn) is a possessive genitive: “the saints’ inheritance.”

[1:1]  ²⁴ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.