Psalms 2:2

2:2 The kings of the earth ¹  form a united front; ² 

the rulers collaborate ³ 

against the Lord and his anointed king. ⁴ 

Proverbs 21:30

21:30 There is no wisdom and there is no understanding,

and there is no counsel against ⁵  the Lord. ⁶ 

Isaiah 7:5-7

7:5 Syria has plotted with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah to bring about your demise. ⁷  7:6 They say, “Let’s attack Judah, terrorize it, and conquer it. ⁸  Then we’ll set up the son of Tabeel as its king.” ⁹  7:7 For this reason the sovereign master, ¹⁰  the Lord, says:

“It will not take place;

it will not happen.

Isaiah 8:9-10

8:9 You will be broken, ¹¹  O nations;

you will be shattered! ¹² 

Pay attention, all you distant lands of the earth!

Get ready for battle, and you will be shattered!

Get ready for battle, and you will be shattered! ¹³ 

8:10 Devise your strategy, but it will be thwarted!

Issue your orders, but they will not be executed! ¹⁴ 

For God is with us! ¹⁵ 

John 11:47-53

11:47 So the chief priests and the Pharisees ¹⁶  called the council ¹⁷  together and said, “What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs. 11:48 If we allow him to go on in this way, ¹⁸  everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary ¹⁹  and our nation.”

11:49 Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, ²⁰  “You know nothing at all! 11:50 You do not realize ²¹  that it is more to your advantage to have one man ²²  die for the people than for the whole nation to perish.” ²³  11:51 (Now he did not say this on his own, ²⁴  but because he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, ²⁵  11:52 and not for the Jewish nation ²⁶  only, ²⁷  but to gather together ²⁸  into one the children of God who are scattered.) ²⁹  11:53 So from that day they planned together to kill him.

Acts 23:12-13

The Plot to Kill Paul

23:12 When morning came, ³⁰  the Jews formed ³¹  a conspiracy ³²  and bound themselves with an oath ³³  not to eat or drink anything ³⁴  until they had killed Paul. 23:13 There were more than forty of them who formed this conspiracy. ³⁵ 

Revelation 17:13

17:13 These kings ³⁶  have a single intent, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.

Revelation 19:19

19:19 Then ³⁷  I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies assembled to do battle with the one who rode the horse and with his army.

[2:2]  ¹ sn The expression kings of the earth refers somewhat hyperbolically to the kings who had been conquered by and were subject to the Davidic king.

[2:2]  ² tn Or “take their stand.” The Hebrew imperfect verbal form describes their action as underway.

[2:2]  ³ tn Or “conspire together.” The verbal form is a Niphal from יָסַד (yasad). BDB 413-14 s.v. יָסַד defines the verb as “establish, found,” but HALOT 417 s.v. II יסד proposes a homonym meaning “get together, conspire” (an alternate form of סוּד, sud).

[2:2]  ⁴ tn Heb “and against his anointed one.” The Davidic king is the referent (see vv. 6-7).

[21:30]  ⁵ tn The form לְנֶגֶד (lÿneged) means “against; over against; in opposition to.” The line indicates they cannot in reality be in opposition, for human wisdom is nothing in comparison to the wisdom of God (J. H. Greenstone, Proverbs, 232).

[21:30]  ⁶ sn The verse uses a single sentence to state that all wisdom, understanding, and advice must be in conformity to the will of God to be successful. It states it negatively – these things cannot be in defiance of God (e.g., Job 5:12-13; Isa 40:13-14).

[7:5]  ⁷ tn This sentence opens with the conjunction יַעַן כִּי (ya’an ki, “because”). Consequently some take vv. 5-6 with what precedes, as another reason why Ahaz might be tempted to fear (see v. 4). However, it is more likely that vv. 5-6 give the basis for the Lord’s announcement in vv. 7-9. The conjunction יַעַן כִּי here introduces the basis for judgment (as in 3:16; 8:6; 29:13), which is then followed by the formal announcement of judgment.

[7:6]  ⁸ tn Heb “and let us break it open for ourselves”; NASB “make for ourselves a breach in its walls”; NLT “fight our way into.”

[7:6]  ⁹ tn Heb “and we will make the son of Tabeel king in its midst.”

[7:7]  ¹⁰ tn The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here and in vv. 14, 19 is אֲדֹנָי (’adonay).

[8:9]  ¹¹ tn The verb רֹעוּ (ro’u) is a Qal imperative, masculine plural from רָעַע (ra’a’, “break”). Elsewhere both transitive (Job 34:24; Ps 2:9; Jer 15:12) and intransitive (Prov 25:19; Jer 11:16) senses are attested for the Qal of this verb. Because no object appears here, the form is likely intransitive: “be broken.” In this case the imperative is rhetorical (like “be shattered” later in the verse) and equivalent to a prediction, “you will be broken.” On the rhetorical use of the imperative in general, see IBHS 572 §34.4c; GKC 324 §110.c.

[8:9]  ¹² tn The imperatival form (Heb “be shattered”) is rhetorical and expresses the speaker’s firm conviction of the outcome of the nations’ attack. See the note on “be broken.”

[8:9]  ¹³ tn The initial imperative (“get ready for battle”) acknowledges the reality of the nations’ hostility; the concluding imperative (Heb “be shattered”) is rhetorical and expresses the speakers’ firm conviction of the outcome of the nations’ attack. (See the note on “be broken.”) One could paraphrase, “Okay, go ahead and prepare for battle since that’s what you want to do, but your actions will backfire and you’ll be shattered.” This rhetorical use of the imperatives is comparable to saying to a child who is bent on climbing a high tree, “Okay, go ahead, climb the tree and break your arm!” What this really means is: “Okay, go ahead and climb the tree since that’s what you really want to do, but your actions will backfire and you’ll break your arm.” The repetition of the statement in the final two lines of the verse gives the challenge the flavor of a taunt (ancient Israelite “trash talking,” as it were).

[8:10]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “speak a word, but it will not stand.”

[8:10]  ¹⁵ sn In these vv. 9-10 the tone shifts abruptly from judgment to hope. Hostile nations like Assyria may attack God’s people, but eventually they will be destroyed, for God is with his people, sometimes to punish, but ultimately to vindicate. In addition to being a reminder of God’s presence in the immediate crisis faced by Ahaz and Judah, Immanuel (whose name is echoed in this concluding statement) was a guarantee of the nation’s future greatness in fulfillment of God’s covenantal promises. Eventually God would deliver his people from the hostile nations (vv. 9-10) through another child, an ideal Davidic ruler who would embody God’s presence in a special way (see 9:6-7). Jesus the Messiah is the fulfillment of the Davidic ideal prophesied by Isaiah, the one whom Immanuel foreshadowed. Through the miracle of the incarnation he is literally “God with us.” Matthew realized this and applied Isaiah’s ancient prophecy of Immanuel’s birth to Jesus (Matt 1:22-23). The first Immanuel was a reminder to the people of God’s presence and a guarantee of a greater child to come who would manifest God’s presence in an even greater way. The second Immanuel is “God with us” in a heightened and infinitely superior sense. He “fulfills” Isaiah’s Immanuel prophecy by bringing the typology intended by God to realization and by filling out or completing the pattern designed by God. Of course, in the ultimate fulfillment of the type, the incarnate Immanuel’s mother must be a virgin, so Matthew uses a Greek term (παρθένος, parqenos), which carries that technical meaning (in contrast to the Hebrew word עַלְמָה [’almah], which has the more general meaning “young woman”). Matthew draws similar analogies between NT and OT events in 2:15, 18. The linking of these passages by analogy is termed “fulfillment.” In 2:15 God calls Jesus, his perfect Son, out of Egypt, just as he did his son Israel in the days of Moses, an historical event referred to in Hos 11:1. In so doing he makes it clear that Jesus is the ideal Israel prophesied by Isaiah (see Isa 49:3), sent to restore wayward Israel (see Isa 49:5, cf. Matt 1:21). In 2:18 Herod’s slaughter of the infants is another illustration of the oppressive treatment of God’s people by foreign tyrants. Herod’s actions are analogous to those of the Assyrians, who deported the Israelites, causing the personified land to lament as inconsolably as a mother robbed of her little ones (Jer 31:15).

[11:47]  ¹⁶ tn The phrase “chief priests and Pharisees” is a comprehensive name for the groups represented in the ruling council (the Sanhedrin) as in John 7:45; 18:3; Acts 5:22, 26.

[11:47]  ¹⁷ tn Or “Sanhedrin” (the Sanhedrin was the highest legal, legislative, and judicial body among the Jews). The συνέδριον (sunedrion) which they gathered was probably an informal meeting rather than the official Sanhedrin. This is the only occurrence of the word συνέδριον in the Gospel of John, and the only anarthrous singular use in the NT. There are other plural anarthrous uses which have the general meaning “councils.” The fact that Caiaphas in 11:49 is referred to as “one of them” supports the unofficial nature of the meeting; in the official Sanhedrin he, being high priest that year, would have presided over the assembly. Thus it appears that an informal council was called to discuss what to do about Jesus and his activities.

[11:48]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “If we let him do thus.”

[11:48]  ¹⁹ tn Or “holy place”; Grk “our place” (a reference to the temple in Jerusalem).

[11:49]  ²⁰ tn Grk “said to them.” The indirect object αὐτοῖς (autois) has not been translated for stylistic reasons.

[11:50]  ²¹ tn Or “you are not considering.”

[11:50]  ²² tn Although it is possible to argue that ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") should be translated “person” here since it is not necessarily masculinity that is in view in Caiaphas’ statement, “man” was retained in the translation because in 11:47 “this man” (οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, outo" Jo anqrwpo") has as its referent a specific individual, Jesus, and it was felt this connection should be maintained.

[11:50]  ²³ sn In his own mind Caiaphas was no doubt giving voice to a common-sense statement of political expediency. Yet he was unconsciously echoing a saying of Jesus himself (cf. Mark 10:45). Caiaphas was right; the death of Jesus would save the nation from destruction. Yet Caiaphas could not suspect that Jesus would die, not in place of the political nation Israel, but on behalf of the true people of God; and he would save them, not from physical destruction, but from eternal destruction (cf. 3:16-17). The understanding of Caiaphas’ words in a sense that Caiaphas could not possibly have imagined at the time he uttered them serves as a clear example of the way in which the author understood that words and actions could be invested retrospectively with a meaning not consciously intended or understood by those present at the time.

[11:51]  ²⁴ tn Grk “say this from himself.”

[11:51]  ²⁵ tn The word “Jewish” is not in the Greek text, but is clearly implied by the context (so also NIV; TEV “the Jewish people”).

[11:52]  ²⁶ tn See the note on the word “nation” in the previous verse.

[11:52]  ²⁷ sn The author in his comment expands the prophecy to include the Gentiles (not for the Jewish nation only), a confirmation that the Fourth Gospel was directed, at least partly, to a Gentile audience. There are echoes of Pauline concepts here (particularly Eph 2:11-22) in the stress on the unity of Jew and Gentile.

[11:52]  ²⁸ tn Grk “that he might gather together.”

[11:52]  ²⁹ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[23:12]  ³⁰ tn Grk “when it was day.”

[23:12]  ³¹ tn Grk “forming a conspiracy, bound.” The participle ποιήσαντες (poihsantes) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[23:12]  ³² tn L&N 30.72 has ‘some Jews formed a conspiracy’ Ac 23:12”; BDAG 979 s.v. συστροφή 1 has “Judeans came together in a mob 23:12. But in the last pass. the word may also mean – 2. the product of a clandestine gathering, plot, conspiracy” (see also Amos 7:10; Ps 63:3).

[23:12]  ³³ tn Or “bound themselves under a curse.” BDAG 63 s.v. ἀναθεματίζω 1 has “trans. put under a curse τινά someone…pleonastically ἀναθέματι ἀ. ἑαυτόν Ac 23:14…ἀ. ἑαυτόν vss. 12, 21, 13 v.l.” On such oaths see m. Shevi’it 3:1-5. The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant in English and has not been translated.

[23:12]  ³⁴ tn The word “anything” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context, but must be supplied for the modern English reader.

[23:13]  ³⁵ tn L&N 30.73 defines συνωμοσία (sunwmosia) as “a plan for taking secret action someone or some institution, with the implication of an oath binding the conspirators – ‘conspiracy, plot.’ …‘there were more than forty of them who formed this conspiracy’ Ac 23:13.”

[17:13]  ³⁶ tn The word “kings” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to clarify the referent.

[19:19]  ³⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence within the narrative.