Discovery BoxPsalms 49:7-8
Context49:7 Certainly a man cannot rescue his brother; 1
he cannot pay God an adequate ransom price 2
49:8 (the ransom price for a human life 3 is too high,
and people go to their final destiny), 4
Psalms 49:1
ContextFor the music director, a psalm by the Korahites.
49:1 Listen to this, all you nations!
Pay attention, all you inhabitants of the world! 6
Colossians 1:20
Context1:20 and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross – through him, 7 whether things on earth or things in heaven.
Colossians 1:23
Context1:23 if indeed you remain in the faith, established and firm, 8 without shifting 9 from the hope of the gospel that you heard. This gospel has also been preached in all creation under heaven, and I, Paul, have become its servant.
[49:7] 1 tn Heb “a brother, he surely does not ransom, a man.” The sequence אִישׁ...אָח (’akh...’ish, “a brother…a man”) is problematic, for the usual combination is אָח...אָח (“a brother…a brother”) or אִישׁ...אִישׁ (“a man…a man”). When אִישׁ and אָח are combined, the usual order is אָח...אִישׁ (“a man…a brother”), with “brother” having a third masculine singular suffix, “his brother.” This suggests that “brother” is the object of the verb and “man” the subject. (1) Perhaps the altered word order and absence of the suffix can be explained by the text’s poetic character, for ellipsis is a feature of Hebrew poetic style. (2) Another option, supported by a few medieval Hebrew
[49:7] 2 tn Heb “he cannot pay to God his ransom price.” Num 35:31 may supply the legal background for the metaphorical language used here. The psalmist pictures God as having a claim on the soul of the individual. When God comes to claim the life that ultimately belongs to him, he demands a ransom price that is beyond the capability of anyone to pay. The psalmist’s point is that God has ultimate authority over life and death; all the money in the world cannot buy anyone a single day of life beyond what God has decreed.
[49:8] 3 tn Heb “their life.” Some emend the text to “his life,” understanding the antecedent of the pronoun as “brother” in v. 7. However, the man and brother of v. 7 are representative of the human race in general, perhaps explaining why a plural pronoun appears in v. 8. Of course, the plural pronoun could refer back to “the rich” mentioned in v. 6. Another option (the one assumed in the translation) is that the suffixed mem is enclitic. In this case the “ransom price for human life” is referred to an abstract, general way.
[49:8] 4 tn Heb “and one ceases forever.” The translation assumes an indefinite subject which in turn is representative of the entire human race (“one,” that refers to human beings without exception). The verb חָדַל (khadal, “cease”) is understood in the sense of “come to an end; fail” (i.e., die). Another option is to translate, “and one ceases/refrains forever.” In this case the idea is that the living, convinced of the reality of human mortality, give up all hope of “buying off” God and refrain from trying to do so.
[49:1] 5 sn Psalm 49. In this so-called wisdom psalm (see v. 3) the psalmist states that he will not fear the rich enemies who threaten him, for despite their wealth, they are mere men who will die like everyone else. The psalmist is confident the Lord will vindicate the godly and protect them from the attacks of their oppressors.
[49:1] 6 tn The rare noun חָלֶד (kheled, “world”) occurs in Ps 17:14 and perhaps also in Isa 38:11 (see the note on “world” there).
[1:20] 7 tc The presence or absence of the second occurrence of the phrase δι᾿ αὐτοῦ (di’ autou, “through him”) is a difficult textual problem to solve. External evidence is fairly evenly divided. Many ancient and excellent witnesses lack the phrase (B D* F G I 0278 81 1175 1739 1881 2464 al latt sa), but equally important witnesses have it (Ì46 א A C D1 Ψ 048vid 33 Ï). Both readings have strong Alexandrian support, which makes the problem difficult to decide on external evidence alone. Internal evidence points to the inclusion of the phrase as original. The word immediately preceding the phrase is the masculine pronoun αὐτοῦ (autou); thus the possibility of omission through homoioteleuton in various witnesses is likely. Scribes might have deleted the phrase because of perceived redundancy or awkwardness in the sense: The shorter reading is smoother and more elegant, so scribes would be prone to correct the text in that direction. As far as style is concerned, repetition of key words and phrases for emphasis is not foreign to the corpus Paulinum (see, e.g., Rom 8:23, Eph 1:13, 2 Cor 12:7). In short, it is easier to account for the shorter reading arising from the longer reading than vice versa, so the longer reading is more likely original.
[1:23] 8 tn BDAG 276 s.v. ἑδραῖος suggests “firm, steadfast.”
[1:23] 9 tn BDAG 639 s.v. μετακινέω suggests “without shifting from the hope” here.
