Discovery BoxProverbs 6:16-19
Context6:16 There are six things that the Lord hates,
even 1 seven 2 things that are an abomination to him: 3
6:17 haughty eyes, 4 a lying tongue, 5
and hands that shed innocent blood, 6
6:18 a heart that devises wicked plans, 7
feet that are swift to run 8 to evil,
6:19 a false witness who pours out lies, 9
and a person who spreads discord 10 among family members. 11
Proverbs 30:10
Context30:10 Do not slander 12 a servant to his master,
lest he curse you, and you are found guilty. 13
Galatians 1:8-9
Context1:8 But even if we (or an angel from heaven) should preach 14 a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, 15 let him be condemned to hell! 16 1:9 As we have said before, and now I say again, if any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be condemned to hell! 17
Galatians 5:12
Context5:12 I wish those agitators 18 would go so far as to 19 castrate themselves! 20
Galatians 5:2
Context5:2 Listen! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you at all!
Galatians 4:14
Context4:14 and though my physical condition put you to the test, you did not despise or reject me. 21 Instead, you welcomed me as though I were an angel of God, 22 as though I were Christ Jesus himself! 23
[6:16] 1 tn The conjunction has the explicative use here (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 71, §434).
[6:16] 2 sn This saying involves a numerical ladder, paralleling six things with seven things (e.g., also 30:15, 18, 21, 24, 29). The point of such a numerical arrangement is that the number does not exhaust the list (W. M. Roth, “The Numerical Sequence x / x +1 in the Old Testament,” VT 12 [1962]: 300-311; and his “Numerical Sayings in the Old Testament,” VT 13 [1965]: 86).
[6:17] 4 sn The expression “high/ lofty [רָמוֹת, ramot] eyes” refers to a proud look suggesting arrogant ambition (cf. NCV “a proud look”). The use of “eyes” is a metonymy of adjunct, the look in the eyes accompanying the attitude. This term “high” is used in Num 15:30 for the sin of the “high hand,” i.e., willful rebellion or defiant sin. The usage of “haughty eyes” may be illustrated by its use with the pompous Assyrian invader (Isa 10:12-14) and the proud king of the book of Daniel (11:12). God does not tolerate anyone who thinks so highly of himself and who has such ambition.
[6:17] 5 tn Heb “a tongue of deception.” The genitive noun functions attributively. The term “tongue” functions as a metonymy. The term is used of false prophets who deceive (Jer 14:14), and of a deceiver who betrays (Ps 109:2). The
[6:17] 6 sn The hands are the instruments of murder (metonymy of cause), and God hates bloodshed. Gen 9:6 prohibited shedding blood because people are the image of God. Even David being a man of blood (in war mostly) was not permitted to build the Temple (1 Chr 22:8). But shedding innocent blood was a greater crime – it usually went with positions of power, such as King Manasseh filling the streets with blood (2 Kgs 21:16), or princes doing it for gain (Ezek 22:27).
[6:18] 7 tn Heb “heart that devises plans of wickedness.” The latter term is an attributive genitive. The heart (metonymy of subject) represents the will; here it plots evil schemes. The heart is capable of evil schemes (Gen 6:5); the heart that does this is deceitful (Prov 12:20; 14:22).
[6:18] 8 tc The MT reads “make haste to run,” that is, be eager to seize the opportunity. The LXX omits “run,” that is, feet hastening to do evil. It must have appeared to the LXX translator that the verb was unnecessary; only one verb occurs in the other cola.
[6:19] 9 sn The
[6:19] 10 sn Dissension is attributed in Proverbs to contentious people (21:9; 26:21; 25:24) who have a short fuse (15:8).
[6:19] 11 tn Heb “brothers,” although not limited to male siblings only. Cf. NRSV, CEV “in a family”; TEV “among friends.”
[30:10] 12 tn The form תַּלְשֵׁן (talshen) is the Hiphil jussive (with the negative אַל, ’al); it is a denominative verb from the noun “tongue” (Heb “wag the tongue”). It means “to defame; to slander,” if the accusation is untrue. Some have suggested that the word might have the force of “denouncing” a slave to his master, accusing him before authorities (e.g., Deut 23:15-16). This proverb would then be a warning against meddling in the affairs of someone else.
[30:10] 13 tn If what was said were true, then there would be no culpability. But the implication here is that it was slander. And the effect of that will be a curse – the person who is the target of the slander will “curse” the person who slandered him (קָלַל [qalal] in the Piel means “to treat lightly [or, with contempt]; to curse”), and culpability will result (the verb וֹשׁם means “to be guilty; to make a guilt offering [or, reparation offering]”). This word for guilt suggests a connection to the Levitical teaching that the guilty had to make reparation for damages done (Lev 5). Cf. NAB “you will have to pay the penalty”; NIV, NLT “you will pay for it.”
[1:8] 14 tc ‡ Most witnesses have ὑμῖν (Jumin, “to you”) either after (א2 A [D* ὑμᾶς] 6 33 326 614 945 1881 Ï Tertpt Ambst) or before (Ì51vid B H 0278 630 1175 [1739* ἡμῖν]) εὐαγγελίζηται (euaggelizhtai, “should preach” [or some variation on the form of this verb]). But the fact that it floats suggests its inauthenticity, especially since it appears to be a motivated reading for purposes of clarification. The following witnesses lack the pronoun: א* F G Ψ ar b g Cyp McionT Tertpt Lcf. The external evidence admittedly is not as weighty as evidence for the pronoun, but coupled with strong internal evidence the shorter reading should be considered original. Although it is possible that scribes may have deleted the pronoun to make Paul’s statement seem more universal, the fact that the pronoun floats suggests otherwise. NA27 has the pronoun in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.
[1:8] 15 tn Or “other than the one we preached to you.”
[1:8] 16 tn Grk “let him be accursed” (ἀνάθεμα, anaqema). The translation gives the outcome which is implied by this dreadful curse.
[1:9] 17 tn See the note on this phrase in the previous verse.
[5:12] 18 tn Grk “the ones who are upsetting you.” The same verb is used in Acts 21:38 to refer to a person who incited a revolt. Paul could be alluding indirectly to the fact that his opponents are inciting the Galatians to rebel against his teaching with regard to circumcision and the law.
[5:12] 19 tn Grk “would even.”
[5:12] 20 tn Or “make eunuchs of themselves”; Grk “cut themselves off.” This statement is rhetorical hyperbole on Paul’s part. It does strongly suggest, however, that Paul’s adversaries in this case (“those agitators”) were men. Some interpreters (notably Erasmus and the Reformers) have attempted to soften the meaning to a figurative “separate themselves” (meaning the opponents would withdraw from fellowship) but such an understanding dramatically weakens the rhetorical force of Paul’s argument. Although it has been argued that such an act of emasculation would be unthinkable for Paul, it must be noted that Paul’s statement is one of biting sarcasm, obviously not meant to be taken literally. See further G. Stählin, TDNT 3:853-55.
[4:14] 21 tn Grk “your trial in my flesh you did not despise or reject.”
[4:14] 22 tn Or “the angel of God.” Linguistically, “angel of God” is the same in both testaments (and thus, he is either “an angel of God” or “the angel of God” in both testaments). For arguments and implications, see ExSyn 252; M. J. Davidson, “Angels,” DJG, 9; W. G. MacDonald argues for “an angel” in both testaments: “Christology and ‘The Angel of the Lord’,” Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation, 324-35.
[4:14] 23 tn Grk “as an angel of God…as Christ Jesus.” This could be understood to mean either “you welcomed me like an angel of God would,” or “you welcomed me as though I were an angel of God.” In context only the second is accurate, so the translation has been phrased to indicate this.
