Discovery BoxRevelation 11:17
Context11:17 with these words: 1
“We give you thanks, Lord God, the All-Powerful, 2
the one who is and who was,
because you have taken your great power
and begun to reign. 3
Job 9:19
Context9:19 If it is a matter of strength, 4
most certainly 5 he is the strong one!
And if it is a matter of justice,
he will say, ‘Who will summon me?’ 6
Psalms 62:11
Context62:11 God has declared one principle;
two principles I have heard: 7
God is strong, 8
Isaiah 27:1
Context27:1 At that time 9 the Lord will punish
with his destructive, 10 great, and powerful sword
Leviathan the fast-moving 11 serpent,
Leviathan the squirming serpent;
he will kill the sea monster. 12
Jeremiah 50:31
Context50:31 “Listen! I am opposed to you, you proud city,” 13
says the Lord God who rules over all. 14
“Indeed, 15 your day of reckoning 16 has come,
the time when I will punish you. 17
Jeremiah 50:34
Context50:34 But the one who will rescue them 18 is strong.
He is known as the Lord who rules over all. 19
He will strongly 20 champion their cause.
As a result 21 he will bring peace and rest to the earth,
but trouble and turmoil 22 to the people who inhabit Babylonia. 23
Jeremiah 50:1
Context50:1 The Lord spoke concerning Babylon and the land of Babylonia 24 through the prophet Jeremiah. 25
Colossians 1:22
Context1:22 but now he has reconciled you 26 by his physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before him –
[11:17] 2 tn On this word BDAG 755 s.v. παντοκράτωρ states, “the Almighty, All-Powerful, Omnipotent (One) only of God…(ὁ) κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ π. …Rv 1:8; 4:8; 11:17; 15:3; 16:7; 21:22.”
[11:17] 3 tn The aorist verb ἐβασίλευσας (ebasileusa") has been translated ingressively.
[9:19] 4 tn The MT has only “if of strength.”
[9:19] 5 tn “Most certainly” translates the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh).
[9:19] 6 tn The question could be taken as “who will summon me?” (see Jer 49:19 and 50:44). This does not make immediate sense. Some have simply changed the suffix to “who will summon him.” If the MT is retained, then supplying something like “he will say” could make the last clause fit the whole passage. Another option is to take it as “Who will reveal it to me?” – i.e., Job could be questioning his friends’ qualifications for being God’s emissaries to bring God’s charges against him (cf. KJV, NKJV; and see 10:2 where Job uses the same verb in the Hiphil to request that God reveal what his sin has been that has led to his suffering).
[62:11] 7 tn Heb “one God spoke, two which I heard.” This is a numerical saying utilizing the “x” followed by “x + 1” pattern to facilitate poetic parallelism. (See W. M. W. Roth, Numerical Sayings in the Old Testament [VTSup], 55-56.) As is typical in such sayings, a list corresponding to the second number (in this case “two”) follows. Another option is to translate, “God has spoken once, twice [he has spoken] that which I have heard.” The terms אַחַת (’akhat, “one; once”) and שְׁתַּיִם (shÿtayim, “two; twice”) are also juxtaposed in 2 Kgs 6:10 (where they refer to an action that was done more than “once or twice”) and in Job 33:14 (where they refer to God speaking “one way” and then in “another manner”).
[62:11] 8 tn Heb “that strength [belongs] to God.”
[27:1] 9 tn Heb “in that day” (so KJV).
[27:1] 10 tn Heb “hard, severe”; cf. NAB, NRSV “cruel”; KJV “sore”; NLT “terrible.”
[27:1] 11 tn Heb “fleeing” (so NAB, NASB, NRSV). Some translate “slippery” or “slithering.”
[27:1] 12 tn The description of Leviathan should be compared with the following excerpts from Ugaritic mythological texts: (1) “Was not the dragon (Ugaritic tnn, cognate with Hebrew תַנִּין [tannin, translated “sea monster” here]) vanquished and captured? I did destroy the wriggling (Ugaritic ’qltn, cognate to Hebrew עֲקַלָּתוֹן [’aqallaton, translated “squirming” here]) serpent, the tyrant with seven heads (cf. Ps 74:14).” (See CTA 3 iii 38-39.) (2) “for all that you smote Leviathan the slippery (Ugaritic brh, cognate to Hebrew בָּרִחַ [bariakh, translated “fast-moving” here]) serpent, [and] made an end of the wriggling serpent, the tyrant with seven heads” (See CTA 5 i 1-3.)
[50:31] 13 tn Heb “Behold, I am against you, proud one.” The word “city” is not in the text but it is generally agreed that the word is being used as a personification of the city which had “proudly defied” the
[50:31] 14 tn Heb “oracle of the Lord Yahweh of armies.” For the rendering of this title and an explanation of its significance see the study note on 2:19.
[50:31] 15 tn The particle כִּי (ki) is probably asseverative here (so J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 739, n. 13, and cf. BDB 472 s.v. כִּי 1.e for other examples). This has been a common use of this particle in the book of Jeremiah.
[50:31] 16 tn The words “of reckoning” are not in the text but are implicit from the context. They are supplied in the translation for clarity.
[50:34] 18 sn Heb “their redeemer.” The Hebrew term “redeemer” referred in Israelite family law to the nearest male relative who was responsible for securing the freedom of a relative who had been sold into slavery. For further discussion of this term as well as its metaphorical use to refer to God as the one who frees Israel from bondage in Egypt and from exile in Assyria and Babylonia see the study note on 31:11.
[50:34] 19 tn Heb “Yahweh of armies is his name.” For the rendering of this title see the study note on 2:19.
[50:34] 20 tn Or “he will certainly champion.” The infinitive absolute before the finite verb here is probably functioning to intensify the verb rather than to express the certainty of the action (cf. GKC 333 §112.n and compare usage in Gen 43:3 and 1 Sam 20:6 listed there).
[50:34] 21 tn This appears to be another case where the particle לְמַעַן (lÿma’an) introduces a result rather than giving the purpose or goal. See the translator’s note on 25:7 for a listing of other examples in the book of Jeremiah and also the translator’s note on 27:10.
[50:34] 22 tn Heb “he will bring rest to the earth and will cause unrest to.” The terms “rest” and “unrest” have been doubly translated to give more of the idea underlying these two concepts.
[50:34] 23 tn This translation again reflects the problem often encountered in these prophecies where the
[50:1] 24 tn Heb “the land of the Chaldeans.” See the study note on 21:4 for explanation.
[50:1] 25 tn Heb “The word which the
[1:22] 26 tc Some of the better representatives of the Alexandrian and Western texts have a passive verb here instead of the active ἀποκατήλλαξεν (apokathllaxen, “he has reconciled”): ἀποκατηλλάγητε (apokathllaghte) in (Ì46) B, ἀποκατήλλακται [sic] (apokathllaktai) in 33, and ἀποκαταλλαγέντες (apokatallagente") in D* F G. Yet the active verb is strongly supported by א A C D2 Ψ 048 075 [0278] 1739 1881 Ï lat sy. Internally, the passive creates an anacoluthon in that it looks back to the accusative ὑμᾶς (Juma", “you”) of v. 21 and leaves the following παραστῆσαι (parasthsai) dangling (“you were reconciled…to present you”). The passive reading is certainly the harder reading. As such, it may well explain the rise of the other readings. At the same time, it is possible that the passive was produced by scribes who wanted some symmetry between the ποτε (pote, “at one time”) of v. 21 and the νυνὶ δέ (nuni de, “but now”) of v. 22: Since a passive periphrastic participle is used in v. 21, there may have a temptation to produce a corresponding passive form in v. 22, handling the ὑμᾶς of v. 21 by way of constructio ad sensum. Since παραστῆσαι occurs ten words later, it may not have been considered in this scribal modification. Further, the Western reading (ἀποκαταλλαγέντες) hardly seems to have arisen from ἀποκατηλλάγητε (contra TCGNT 555). As difficult as this decision is, the preferred reading is the active form because it is superior externally and seems to explain the rise of all forms of the passive readings.
