Discovery BoxProverbs 12:18
Context12:18 Speaking recklessly 1 is like the thrusts of a sword,
but the words 2 of the wise bring 3 healing. 4
Proverbs 15:4
Context15:4 Speech 5 that heals 6 is like 7 a life-giving tree, 8
but a perverse tongue 9 breaks the spirit.
Job 4:3-4
Context4:3 Look, 10 you have instructed 11 many;
you have strengthened 12 feeble hands. 13
4:4 Your words have supported 14 those
who stumbled, 15
and you have strengthened the knees
that gave way. 16
Job 23:12
Context23:12 I have not departed from the commands of his lips;
I have treasured the words of his mouth more than my allotted portion. 17
Job 29:21-22
Context29:21 “People 18 listened to me and waited silently; 19
they kept silent for my advice.
29:22 After I had spoken, they did not respond;
my words fell on them drop by drop. 20
Psalms 37:30
Context37:30 The godly speak wise words
and promote justice. 21
Ecclesiastes 12:9-10
Context12:9 Not only was the Teacher wise, 22
but he also taught knowledge to the people;
he carefully evaluated 23 and arranged 24 many proverbs.
12:10 The Teacher sought to find delightful 25 words,
and to write 26 accurately truthful sayings. 27
Jeremiah 3:15
Context3:15 I will give you leaders 28 who will be faithful to me. 29 They will lead you with knowledge and insight.
Jeremiah 15:16
Context15:16 As your words came to me I drank them in, 30
and they filled my heart with joy and happiness
because I belong to you. 31
John 21:15-17
Context21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, 32 do you love me more than these do?” 33 He replied, 34 “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” 35 Jesus 36 told him, “Feed my lambs.” 21:16 Jesus 37 said 38 a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He replied, 39 “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus 40 told him, “Shepherd my sheep.” 21:17 Jesus 41 said 42 a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed 43 that Jesus 44 asked 45 him a third time, “Do you love me?” and said, 46 “Lord, you know everything. You know that I love you.” Jesus 47 replied, 48 “Feed my sheep.
John 21:1
Context21:1 After this 49 Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias. 50 Now this is how he did so. 51
John 5:2
Context5:2 Now there is 52 in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate 53 a pool called Bethzatha 54 in Aramaic, 55 which has five covered walkways. 56
[12:18] 1 tn The term בּוֹטֶה (boteh) means “to speak rashly [or, thoughtlessly]” (e.g., Lev 5:4; Num 30:7).
[12:18] 2 tn Heb “the tongue” (so NAB, NIV, NRSV). The term לָשׁוֹן (lashon, “tongue”) functions as a metonymy of cause for what is said.
[12:18] 3 tn The term “brings” does not appear in the Hebrew but is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity and smoothness.
[12:18] 4 sn Healing is a metonymy of effect. Healing words are the opposite of the cutting, irresponsible words. What the wise say is faithful and true, gentle and kind, uplifting and encouraging; so their words bring healing.
[15:4] 5 tn Heb “a tongue.” The term “tongue” is a metonymy of cause for what is produced: speech.
[15:4] 6 tn Heb “a tongue of healing.” A healing tongue refers to speech that is therapeutic or soothing. It is a source of vitality.
[15:4] 7 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.
[15:4] 8 tn Heb “tree of life.”
[15:4] 9 tn Heb “perversion in it.” The referent must be the tongue, so this has been supplied in the translation for clarity. A tongue that is twisted, perverse, or deceitful is a way of describing deceitful speech. Such words will crush the spirit (e.g., Isa 65:14).
[4:3] 9 tn The deictic particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “behold”) summons attention; it has the sense of “consider, look.”
[4:3] 10 tn The verb יָסַר (yasar) in the Piel means “to correct,” whether by words with the sense of teach, or by chastening with the sense of punish, discipline. The double meaning of “teach” and “discipline” is also found with the noun מוּסָר (musar).
[4:3] 11 tn The parallelism again uses a perfect verb in the first colon and an imperfect in the second; but since the sense of the line is clearly what Job has done in the past, the second verb may be treated as a preterite, or a customary imperfect – what Job repeatedly did in the past (GKC 315 §107.e). The words in this verse may have double meanings. The word יָסַר (yasar, “teach, discipline”) may have the idea of instruction and correction, but also the connotation of strength (see Y. Hoffmann, “The Use of Equivocal Words in the First Speech of Eliphaz [Job IV–V],” VT 30 [1980]: 114-19).
[4:3] 12 tn The “feeble hands” are literally “hands hanging down.” This is a sign of weakness, helplessness, or despondency (see 2 Sam 4:1; Isa 13:7).
[4:4] 13 tn Both verbs in this line are imperfects, and probably carry the same nuance as the last verb in v. 3, namely, either customary imperfect or preterite. The customary has the aspect of stressing that this was what Job used to do.
[4:4] 14 tn The form is the singular active participle, interpreted here collectively. The verb is used of knees that give way (Isa 35:3; Ps 109:24).
[4:4] 15 tn The expression is often translated as “feeble knees,” but it literally says “the bowing [or “tottering”] knees.” The figure is one who may be under a heavy load whose knees begin to shake and buckle (see also Heb 12:12).
[23:12] 17 tc The form in the MT (מֵחֻקִּי, mekhuqqi) means “more than my portion” or “more than my law.” An expanded meaning results in “more than my necessary food” (see Ps 119:11; cf. KJV, NASB, ESV). HALOT 346 s.v. חֹק 1 indicates that חֹק (khoq) has the meaning of “portion” and is here a reference to “what is appointed for me.” The LXX and the Latin versions, along with many commentators, have בְּחֵקִי (bÿkheqi, “in my bosom”).
[29:21] 21 tn “People” is supplied; the verb is plural.
[29:21] 22 tc The last verb of the first half, “wait, hope,” and the first verb in the second colon, “be silent,” are usually reversed by the commentators (see G. R. Driver, “Problems in the Hebrew text of Job,” VTSup 3 [1955]: 86). But if “wait” has the idea of being silent as they wait for him to speak, then the second line would say they were silent for the reason of his advice. The reading of the MT is not impossible.
[29:22] 25 tn The verb simply means “dropped,” but this means like the rain. So the picture of his words falling on them like the gentle rain, drop by drop, is what is intended (see Deut 32:2).
[37:30] 29 tn Heb “The mouth of the godly [one] utters wisdom, and his tongue speaks justice.” The singular form is used in a representative sense; the typical godly individual is in view. The imperfect verbal forms draw attention to the characteristic behavior of the godly.
[12:9] 33 sn Eccl 12:9-12 fits the pattern of a concluding colophon that draws from a conventional stock of ancient Near Eastern scribal practices and vocabulary. See M. A. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 29–31.
[12:9] 34 tn Heb “he weighed and studied.” The verbs וְאִזֵּן וְחִקֵּר (vÿ’izzen vekhiqqer, “he weighed and he explored”) form a hendiadys (a figurative expression in which two separate terms used in combination to convey a single idea): “he studiously weighed” or “carefully evaluated.” The verb וְאִזֵּן (conjunction + Piel perfect 3rd person masculine singular from II אָזַן (’azan) “to weigh; to balance”) is related to the noun מֹאזֵן (mo’zen) “balances; scales” used for weighing money or commercial items (e.g., Jer 32:10; Ezek 5:1). This is the only use of the verb in the OT. In this context, it means “to weigh” = “to test; to prove” (BDB 24 s.v. מאזן) or “to balance” (HALOT 27 II אָזַן). Cohen suggests, “He made an examination of the large number of proverbial sayings which had been composed, testing their truth and worth, to select those which he considered deserving of circulation” (A. Cohen, The Five Megilloth [SoBB], 189).
[12:9] 35 tn The verb תָּקַן (taqan, “to make straight”) connotes “to put straight” or “to arrange in order” (HALOT 1784 s.v. תקן; BDB 1075 s.v. תָּקַן).This may refer to Qoheleth’s activity in compiling a collection of wisdom sayings in an orderly manner, or writing the wisdom sayings in a straightforward, direct manner.
[12:10] 37 tn In the construct phrase דִּבְרֵי־חֵפֶץ (divre-khefets, “words of delight”) the noun חֵפֶץ (“delight”) functions as an attributive genitive (“delightful words”) or a genitive of estimation or worth (“words viewed as delightful by Qoheleth” or “words that he took delight in”). For another example of a genitive of estimation of worth, see זִבְחֵי אֱלֹהִים (zivkhe ’elohim) “sacrifices of God” = “sacrifices viewed as acceptable to God” (Ps 51:19). In other words, Qoheleth wrote his proverbs so effectively that he was able to take moral and aesthetic delight in his words.
[12:10] 38 tc The consonantal form וכתוב has been revocalized in three ways: (1) The Masoretes read וְכָתוּב (vÿkhatuv, conjunction + Qal passive participle ms from כָּתַב, katav, “to write”): “Qoheleth sought to find pleasant words, what was written uprightly, namely, words of truth.” This is supported by the LXX’s καὶ γεγραμμένον (kai gegrammenon, conjunction + masculine accusative singular perfect passive participle from γράφω, grafw, “to write). (2) The BHS editors suggest the vocalization וְכָתוֹב (vÿkhatov, conjunction + Qal infinitive absolute). The infinitive וְכָתוֹב (“and to write”) in the B-line would parallel the infinitive of purpose לִמְצֹא (limtso’, “to find”) in the A-line: “Qoheleth sought to find pleasant words, and to write accurately words of truth.” (3) Several medieval Hebrew
[12:10] 39 tn The construct phrase דִּבְרֵי אֱמֶת (divre ’emet, “words of truth”) is a genitive of content (“words containing truth”) or an attributive genitive (“truthful words”). Depending upon the vocalization of וכתוב, the phrase functions in one of two ways: (1) as direct object of וְכָתוֹב יֹשֶׁר (vÿkhatov yosher) “and he accurately wrote truthful words”; or (2) in apposition to וְכָתוּב יֹשֶׁר (vÿkhatuv yosher) “and what is written uprightly, namely, truthful words.”
[3:15] 42 tn Heb “after/according to my [own] heart.”
[15:16] 45 sn Heb “Your words were found and I ate them.” This along with Ezek 2:8–3:3 is a poetic picture of inspiration. The prophet accepted them, assimilated them, and made them such a part of himself that he spoke with complete assurance what he knew were God’s words.
[15:16] 46 tn Heb “Your name is called upon me.”
[21:15] 49 tc The majority of
[21:15] 50 tn To whom (or what) does “these” (τούτων, toutwn) refer? Three possibilities are suggested: (1) τούτων should be understood as neuter, “these things,” referring to the boats, nets, and fishing gear nearby. In light of Peter’s statement in 21:3, “I am going fishing,” some have understood Peter to have renounced his commission in light of his denials of Jesus. Jesus, as he restores Peter and forgives him for his denials, is asking Peter if he really loves his previous vocation more than he loves Jesus. Three things may be said in evaluation of this view: (a) it is not at all necessary to understand Peter’s statement in 21:3 as a renouncement of his discipleship, as this view of the meaning of τούτων would imply; (b) it would probably be more likely that the verb would be repeated in such a construction (see 7:31 for an example where the verb is repeated); and (c) as R. E. Brown has observed (John [AB], 2:1103) by Johannine standards the choice being offered to Peter between material things and the risen Jesus would seem rather ridiculous, especially after the disciples had realized whom it was they were dealing with (the Lord, see v. 12). (2) τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than you love these other disciples?” The same objection mentioned as (c) under (1) would apply here: Could the author, in light of the realization of who Jesus is which has come to the disciples after the resurrection, and which he has just mentioned in 21:12, seriously present Peter as being offered a choice between the other disciples and the risen Jesus? This leaves option (3), that τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than these other disciples do?” It seems likely that there is some irony here: Peter had boasted in 13:37, “I will lay down my life for you,” and the synoptics present Peter as boasting even more explicitly of his loyalty to Jesus (“Even if they all fall away, I will not,” Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29). Thus the semantic force of what Jesus asks Peter here amounts to something like “Now, after you have denied me three times, as I told you you would, can you still affirm that you love me more than these other disciples do?” The addition of the auxiliary verb “do” in the translation is used to suggest to the English reader the third interpretation, which is the preferred one.
[21:15] 51 tn Grk “He said to him.”
[21:15] 52 tn Is there a significant difference in meaning between the two words for love used in the passage, ἀγαπάω and φιλέω (agapaw and filew)? Aside from Origen, who saw a distinction in the meaning of the two words, most of the Greek Fathers like Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria, saw no real difference of meaning. Neither did Augustine nor the translators of the Itala (Old Latin). This was also the view of the Reformation Greek scholars Erasmus and Grotius. The suggestion that a distinction in meaning should be seen comes primarily from a number of British scholars of the 19th century, especially Trench, Westcott, and Plummer. It has been picked up by others such as Spicq, Lenski, and Hendriksen. But most modern scholars decline to see a real difference in the meaning of the two words in this context, among them Bernard, Moffatt, Bonsirven, Bultmann, Barrett, Brown, Morris, Haenchen, and Beasley-Murray. There are three significant reasons for seeing no real difference in the meaning of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses: (1) the author has a habit of introducing slight stylistic variations in repeated material without any significant difference in meaning (compare, for example, 3:3 with 3:5, and 7:34 with 13:33). An examination of the uses of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in the Fourth Gospel seems to indicate a general interchangeability between the two. Both terms are used of God’s love for man (3:16, 16:27); of the Father’s love for the Son (3:35, 5:20); of Jesus’ love for men (11:5, 11:3); of the love of men for men (13:34, 15:19); and of the love of men for Jesus (8:42, 16:27). (2) If (as seems probable) the original conversation took place in Aramaic (or possibly Hebrew), there would not have been any difference expressed because both Aramaic and Hebrew have only one basic word for love. In the LXX both ἀγαπάω and φιλέω are used to translate the same Hebrew word for love, although ἀγαπάω is more frequent. It is significant that in the Syriac version of the NT only one verb is used to translate vv. 15-17 (Syriac is very similar linguistically to Palestinian Aramaic). (3) Peter’s answers to the questions asked with ἀγαπάω are ‘yes’ even though he answers using the verb φιλέω. If he is being asked to love Jesus on a higher or more spiritual level his answers give no indication of this, and one would be forced to say (in order to maintain a consistent distinction between the two verbs) that Jesus finally concedes defeat and accepts only the lower form of love which is all that Peter is capable of offering. Thus it seems best to regard the interchange between ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses as a minor stylistic variation of the author, consistent with his use of minor variations in repeated material elsewhere, and not indicative of any real difference in meaning. Thus no attempt has been made to distinguish between the two Greek words in the translation.
[21:15] 53 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:16] 53 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:16] 54 tn Grk “said again.” The word “again” (when used in connection with the phrase “a second time”) is redundant and has not been translated.
[21:16] 55 tn Grk “He said to him.”
[21:16] 56 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 57 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 58 tn Grk “said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.
[21:17] 60 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 62 tn Grk “and said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.
[21:17] 63 tc ‡ Most witnesses, especially later ones (A Θ Ψ Ë13 Ï), read ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (Jo Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while B C have ᾿Ιησοῦς without the article and א D W Ë1 33 565 al lat lack both. Because of the rapid verbal exchange in this pericope, “Jesus” is virtually required for clarity, providing a temptation to scribes to add the name. Further, the name normally occurs with the article. Although it is possible that B C accidentally omitted the article with the name, it is just as likely that they added the simple name to the text for clarity’s sake, while other witnesses added the article as well. The omission of ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς thus seems most likely to be authentic. NA27 includes the words in brackets, indicating some doubts as to their authenticity.
[21:17] 64 tn Grk “Jesus said to him.”
[21:1] 61 tn The time reference indicated by μετὰ ταῦτα (meta tauta) is indefinite, in comparison with the specific “after eight days” (μεθ᾿ ἡμέρας ὀκτώ, meq’ Jhmera" oktw) between the two postresurrection appearances of Jesus in 20:26.
[21:1] 62 sn The Sea of Tiberias is another name for the Sea of Galilee (see 6:1).
[21:1] 63 tn Grk “how he revealed himself.”
[5:2] 65 tn Regarding the use of the present tense ἐστιν (estin) and its implications for the dating of the Gospel of John, see the article by D. B. Wallace, “John 5,2 and the Date of the Fourth Gospel,” Bib 71 (1990): 177-205.
[5:2] 66 tn The site of the miracle is also something of a problem: προβατικῇ (probatikh) is usually taken as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple. Some (R. E. Brown and others) would place the word κολυμβήθρα (kolumbhqra) with προβατικῇ to read “in Jerusalem, by the Sheep Pool, there is (another pool) with the Hebrew name.” This would imply that there is reference to two pools in the context rather than only one. This does not seem necessary (although it is a grammatical possibility). The gender of the words does not help since both are feminine (as is the participle ἐπιλεγομένη [epilegomenh]). Note however that Brown’s suggestion would require a feminine word to be supplied (for the participle ἐπιλεγομένη to modify). The traditional understanding of the phrase as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple appears more probably correct.
[5:2] 67 tc Some
