Proverbs 11:30

11:30 The fruit of the righteous is like ¹  a tree producing life, ² 

and the one who wins souls ³  is wise. ⁴ 

Romans 11:14

11:14 if somehow I could provoke my people to jealousy and save some of them.

Romans 11:1

Israel’s Rejection not Complete nor Final

11:1 So I ask, God has not rejected his people, has he? Absolutely not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin.

Colossians 1:22

1:22 but now he has reconciled you ⁵  by his physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him –

Colossians 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ⁶  an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

Colossians 4:16

4:16 And after ⁷  you have read this letter, have it read ⁸  to the church of Laodicea. In turn, read the letter from Laodicea ⁹  as well.

Philemon 1:19

1:19 I, Paul, have written ¹⁰  this letter ¹¹  with my own hand: ¹²  I will repay it. I could also mention that you owe ¹³  me your very self.

[11:30]  ¹ tn The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied for the sake of clarity.

[11:30]  ² tn Heb “tree of life” (so KJV, NAB, NIV, NRSV). The noun חַיִּים (khayyim, “life”) is genitive of product. What the righteous produce (“fruit”) is like a tree of life – a long and healthy life as well as a life-giving influence and provision for others.

[11:30]  ³ tc The Leningrad Codex mistakenly vocalized ש (sin or shin) as שׂ (sin) instead of שׁ (shin) in the term נְפָשׂוֹת (nefashot) which is vocalized as נְפָשׁוֹת (nefasot, “souls”) in the other medieval Hebrew mss and early printed editions of the Masoretic Text.

[11:30]  ⁴ tc The MT reads חָכָם (khakham, “wise”) and seems to refer to capturing (לָקַח, laqakh; “to lay hold of; to seize; to capture”) people with influential ideas (e.g., 2 Sam 15:6). An alternate textual tradition reads חָמָס (khamas) “violent” (reflected in the LXX and Syriac) and refers to taking away lives: “but the one who takes away lives (= kills people) is violent” (cf. NAB, NRSV, TEV). The textual variant was caused by orthographic confusion of ס (samek) and כ (kaf), and metathesis of מ (mem) between the 2nd and 3rd consonants. If the parallelism is synonymous, the MT reading fits; if the parallelism is antithetical, the alternate tradition fits. See D. C. Snell, “‘Taking Souls’ in Proverbs 11:30,” VT 33 (1083): 362-65.

[1:22]  ⁵ 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.

[1:1]  ⁶ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[4:16]  ⁷ tn Grk “when.”

[4:16]  ⁸ tn The construction beginning with the imperative ποιήσατε ἵνα…ἀναγνωσθῇ (poihsate Jina…anagnwsqh) should be translated as “have it read” where the conjunction ἵνα functions to mark off its clause as the direct object of the imperative ποιήσατε. The content of the clause (“reading the letter”) is what Paul commands with the imperative ποιήσατε. Thus the translation “have it read” has been used here.

[4:16]  ⁹ sn This letter is otherwise unknown, but some have suggested that it is the letter known today as Ephesians.

[1:19]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “I wrote” Here ἔγραψα (egraya) is functioning as an epistolary aorist. Paul puts it in the past tense because from Philemon’s perspective when he reads the letter it will, of course, already have been written.

[1:19]  ¹¹ tn The phrase “this letter” does not appear in the Greek text, but is supplied in the English translation to clarify the meaning.

[1:19]  ¹² sn With my own hand. Paul may have considered this letter so delicate that he wrote the letter himself as opposed to using an amanuensis or secretary.

[1:19]  ¹³ sn The statement you owe me your very self means that Paul was responsible for some sort of blessing in the life of Philemon; though a monetary idea may be in mind, it is perhaps better to understand Paul as referring to the spiritual truth (i.e., the gospel) he had taught Philemon.