Psalms 111:5

111:5 He gives ¹  food to his faithful followers; ² 

he always remembers his covenant. ³ 

Psalms 111:2

111:2 The Lord’s deeds are great,

eagerly awaited ⁴  by all who desire them.

Psalms 23:5

23:5 You prepare a feast before me ⁵ 

in plain sight of my enemies.

You refresh ⁶  my head with oil;

my cup is completely full. ⁷ 

Psalms 23:1

Psalm 23 ⁸ 

A psalm of David.

23:1 The Lord is my shepherd, ⁹ 

I lack nothing. ¹⁰ 

Psalms 16:1

Psalm 16 ¹¹ 

A prayer ¹²  of David.

16:1 Protect me, O God, for I have taken shelter in you. ¹³ 

Isaiah 55:3

55:3 Pay attention and come to me!

Listen, so you can live! ¹⁴ 

Then I will make an unconditional covenantal promise to ¹⁵  you,

just like the reliable covenantal promises I made to David. ¹⁶ 

Jeremiah 33:20-21

33:20 “I, Lord, make the following promise: ¹⁷  ‘I have made a covenant with the day ¹⁸  and with the night that they will always come at their proper times. Only if you people ¹⁹  could break that covenant 33:21 could my covenant with my servant David and my covenant with the Levites ever be broken. So David will by all means always have a descendant to occupy his throne as king and the Levites will by all means always have priests who will minister before me. ²⁰ 

Galatians 3:15-17

Inheritance Comes from Promises and not Law

3:15 Brothers and sisters, ²¹  I offer an example from everyday life: ²²  When a covenant ²³  has been ratified, ²⁴  even though it is only a human contract, no one can set it aside or add anything to it. 3:16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his descendant. ²⁵  Scripture ²⁶  does not say, “and to the descendants,” ²⁷  referring to many, but “and to your descendant,” ²⁸  referring to one, who is Christ. 3:17 What I am saying is this: The law that came four hundred thirty years later does not cancel a covenant previously ratified by God, ²⁹  so as to invalidate the promise.

Hebrews 13:20

Benediction and Conclusion

13:20 Now may the God of peace who by the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep, our Lord Jesus Christ,

[111:5]  ¹ tn Or “gave,” if the events of the exodus and conquest period (see v. 6, 9) are primarily in view.

[111:5]  ² tn Heb “those who fear him.”

[111:5]  ³ tn Or “he remembers his covenant forever” (see Ps 105:8).

[111:2]  ⁴ tn Heb “sought out.”

[23:5]  ⁵ sn In v. 5 the metaphor switches. (It would be very odd for a sheep to have its head anointed and be served wine.) The background for the imagery is probably the royal banquet. Ancient Near Eastern texts describe such banquets in similar terms to those employed by the psalmist. (See M. L. Barre and J. S. Kselman, “New Exodus, Covenant, and Restoration in Psalm 23,” The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, 97-127.) The reality behind the imagery is the Lord’s favor. Through his blessings and protection he demonstrates to everyone, including dangerous enemies, that the psalmist has a special relationship with him.

[23:5]  ⁶ tn The imperfect verbal form in v. 5a carries on the generalizing mood of vv. 1-4. However, in v. 5b the psalmist switches to a perfect (דִּשַּׁנְתָּ, dishanta), which may have a generalizing force as well. But then again the perfect is conspicuous here and may be present perfect in sense, indicating that the divine host typically pours oil on his head prior to seating him at the banquet table. The verb דָשַׁן (dashan; the Piel is factitive) is often translated “anoint,” but this is misleading, for it might suggest a symbolic act of initiation into royal status. One would expect the verb מָשָׁח (mashan) in this case; דָשַׁן here describes an act of hospitality extended to guests and carries the nuance “refresh.” In Prov 15:30 it stands parallel to “make happy” and refers to the effect that good news has on the inner being of its recipient.

[23:5]  ⁷ tn The rare noun רְַָויָה (rÿvayah) is derived from the well-attested verb רָוָה (ravah, “be saturated, drink one’s fill”). In this context, where it describes a cup, it must mean “filled up,” but not necessarily to overflowing.

[23:1]  ⁸ sn Psalm 23. In vv. 1-4 the psalmist pictures the Lord as a shepherd who provides for his needs and protects him from danger. The psalmist declares, “The Lord is my shepherd,” and then extends and develops that metaphor, speaking as if he were a sheep. In vv. 5-6 the metaphor changes as the psalmist depicts a great royal banquet hosted by the Lord. The psalmist is a guest of honor and recipient of divine favor, who enjoys unlimited access to the divine palace and the divine presence.

[23:1]  ⁹ sn The LORD is my shepherd. The opening metaphor suggests the psalmist is assuming the role of a sheep. In vv. 1b-4 the psalmist extends the metaphor and explains exactly how the LORD is like a shepherd to him. At the surface level the language can be understood in terms of a shepherd’s relationship to his sheep. The translation of vv. 1-4 reflects this level. But, of course, each statement also points to an underlying reality.

[23:1]  ¹⁰ tn The imperfect verbal form is best understood as generalizing; the psalmist highlights his typical or ongoing experience as a result of having the LORD as his shepherd (habitual present use). The next verse explains more specifically what he means by this statement.

[16:1]  ¹¹ sn Psalm 16. The psalmist seeks divine protection because he has remained loyal to God. He praises God for his rich blessings, and is confident God will vindicate him and deliver him from death.

[16:1]  ¹² tn The precise meaning of the Hebrew term מִכְתָּם (mikhtam) is uncertain. HALOT 582-83 s.v. defines it as “inscription.”

[16:1]  ¹³ tn The Hebrew perfect verbal form probably refers here to a completed action with continuing results (see 7:1; 11:1).

[55:3]  ¹⁴ tn The jussive with vav (ו) conjunctive following the imperative indicates purpose/result.

[55:3]  ¹⁵ tn Or “an eternal covenant with.”

[55:3]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “the reliable expressions of loyalty of David.” The syntactical relationship of חַסְדֵי (khasde, “expressions of loyalty”) to the preceding line is unclear. If the term is appositional to בְּרִית (bÿrit, “covenant”), then the Lord here transfers the promises of the Davidic covenant to the entire nation. Another option is to take חַסְדֵי (khasde) as an adverbial accusative and to translate “according to the reliable covenantal promises.” In this case the new covenantal arrangement proposed here is viewed as an extension or perhaps fulfillment of the Davidic promises. A third option, the one reflected in the above translation, is to take the last line as comparative. In this case the new covenant being proposed is analogous to the Davidic covenant. Verses 4-5, which compare David’s international prominence to what Israel will experience, favors this view. In all three of these interpretations, “David” is an objective genitive; he is the recipient of covenantal promises. A fourth option would be to take David as a subjective genitive and understand the line as giving the basis for the preceding promise: “Then I will make an unconditional covenantal promise to you, because of David’s faithful acts of covenantal loyalty.”

[33:20]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “Thus says the Lord.” However, the Lord is speaking so the first person introduction has again been adopted. The content of the verse shows that it is a promise to David (vv. 21-22) and the Levites based on a contrary to fact condition (v. 20). See further the translator’s note at the end of the next verse for explanation of the English structure adopted here.

[33:20]  ¹⁸ tn The word יוֹמָם (yomam) is normally an adverb meaning “daytime, by day, daily.” However, here and in v. 25 and in Jer 15:9 it means “day, daytime” (cf. BDB 401 s.v. יוֹמָם 1).

[33:20]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “you.” The pronoun is plural as in 32:36, 43; 33:10.

[33:21]  ²⁰ tn The very complex and elliptical syntax of the original Hebrew of vv. 20-21 has been broken down to better conform with contemporary English style. The text reads somewhat literally (after the addition of a couple of phrases which have been left out by ellipsis): “Thus says the Lord, ‘If you can break my covenant with the day and my covenant with the night so that there is not to be daytime and night in their proper time then also my covenant can be broken with my servant David so that there is not to him a son reigning upon his throne [and also my covenant can be broken] with the Levites [so there are not] priests who minister to me.” The two phrases in brackets are elliptical, the first serving double duty for the prepositional phrase “with the Levites” as well as “with David” and the second serving double duty with the noun “priests” which parallels “a son.” The noun “priests” is not serving here as appositional because that phrase is always “the priests, the Levites,” never “the Levites, the priests.”

[3:15]  ²¹ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:11.

[3:15]  ²² tn Grk “I speak according to man,” referring to the illustration that follows.

[3:15]  ²³ tn The same Greek word, διαθήκη (diaqhkh), can mean either “covenant” or “will,” but in this context the former is preferred here because Paul is discussing in vv. 16-18 the Abrahamic covenant.

[3:15]  ²⁴ tn Or “has been put into effect.”

[3:16]  ²⁵ tn Grk “his seed,” a figurative extension of the meaning of σπέρμα (sperma) to refer to descendants (L&N 10.29).

[3:16]  ²⁶ tn Grk “It”; the referent (the scripture) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The understood subject of the verb λέγει (legei) could also be “He” (referring to God) as the one who spoke the promise to Abraham.

[3:16]  ²⁷ tn Grk “to seeds.” See the note on “descendant” earlier in this verse. Here the term is plural; the use of the singular in the OT text cited later in this verse is crucial to Paul’s argument.

[3:16]  ²⁸ tn See the note on “descendant” earlier in this verse.

[3:17]  ²⁹ tc Most mss (D F G I 0176 0278 Ï it sy) read “ratified by God in Christ” whereas the omission of “in Christ” is the reading in Ì⁴⁶ א A B C P Ψ 6 33 81 1175 1739 1881 2464 pc co. The shorter reading is strongly supported by the ms evidence, and it is probable that a copyist inserted the words as an interpretive gloss. However, this form of the “in Christ” expression is somewhat atypical in the corpus Paulinum (εἰς Χριστόν [ei" Criston] rather than ἐν Χριστῷ [en Cristw]), a fact which tempers one’s certainty about the shorter reading. Nevertheless, the expression is used more in Galatians than in any other of Paul’s letters (Gal 2:16; 3:24, 27), and may have been suggested by such texts to early copyists.