Texts Notes Verse List
 
Results 201 - 220 of 272 verses for gave (0.001 seconds)
Jump to page: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Order by: Relevance | Book
  Discovery Box
(0.27248527826087) (Deu 6:16)

sn The place name Massah (מַסָּה, massah) derives from a root (נָסָה, nasah) meaning “to test; to try.” The reference here is to the experience in the Sinai desert when Moses struck the rock to obtain water (Exod 17:1-2). The complaining Israelites had, thus, “tested” the Lord, a wickedness that gave rise to the naming of the place (Exod 17:7; cf. Deut 9:22; 33:8).

(0.27248527826087) (Deu 34:6)

tc Smr and some LXX mss read “they buried him,” that is, the Israelites. The MT reads “he buried him,” meaning in the context that “the Lord buried him.” This understanding, combined with the statement at the end of the verse that Moses’ burial place is unknown, gave rise to traditions during the intertestamental period that are reflected in the NT in Jude 9 and in OT pseudepigraphic works like the Assumption of Moses.

(0.27248527826087) (Rut 4:8)

tc The LXX adds “and gave it to him” (cf. TEV, CEV), which presupposes the reading ויתן לו. This seems to be a clarifying addition (see v. 7), but it is possible the scribe’s eye jumped from the final vav (ו) on נַעֲלוֹ (naalo, “his sandal”) to the final vav (ו) on לוֹ (lo, “to him”), accidentally omitting the intervening letters.

(0.27248527826087) (1Ki 14:5)

sn Tell her so-and-so. Certainly the Lord gave Ahijah a specific message to give to Jeroboam’s wife (see vv. 6-16), but the author of Kings here condenses the Lord’s message with the words “so-and-so.” For dramatic effect he prefers to have us hear the message from Ahijah’s lips as he speaks to the king’s wife.

(0.27248527826087) (Job 1:21)

tn The two verbs are simple perfects. (1) They can be given the nuance of gnomic imperfect, expressing what the sovereign God always does. This is the approach taken in the present translation. Alternatively (2) they could be referring specifically to Job’s own experience: “Yahweh gave [definite past, referring to his coming into this good life] and Yahweh has taken away” [present perfect, referring to his great losses]. Many English versions follow the second alternative.

(0.27248527826087) (Psa 90:2)

tn Heb “and you gave birth to the earth and world.” The Polel verbal form in the Hebrew text pictures God giving birth to the world. The LXX and some other ancient textual witnesses assume a polal (passive) verbal form here. In this case the earth becomes the subject of the verb and the verb is understood as third feminine singular rather than second masculine singular.

(0.27248527826087) (Psa 127:3)

tn Some prefer to translate this term with the gender neutral “children,” but “sons” are plainly in view here, as the following verses make clear. Daughters are certainly wonderful additions to a family, but in ancient Israelite culture sons were the “arrows” that gave a man security in his old age, for they could defend the family interests at the city gate, where the legal and economic issues of the community were settled.

(0.27248527826087) (Ecc 1:13)

tn Heb “I gave my heart” or “I set my mind.” The term לִבִּי (libbi, “my heart”) is an example of synecdoche of part (heart) for the whole (myself). Qoheleth uses this figurative expression frequently in the book. On the other hand, in Hebrew mentality, the term “heart” is frequently associated with one’s thoughts and reasoning; thus, this might be a metonymy of association (heart = thoughts). The equivalent English idiom would be “I applied my mind.”

(0.27248527826087) (Ecc 2:3)

tn Heb “and my heart was leading along in wisdom.” The vav + noun, וְלִבִּי (vÿlibbi) introduces a disjunctive, parenthetical clause designed to qualify the speaker’s remarks lest he be misunderstood: “Now my heart/mind….” He emphasizes that he never lost control of his senses in this process. It was a purely mental, cognitive endeavor; he never actually gave himself over to wanton self-indulgence in wine or folly.

(0.27248527826087) (Isa 42:24)

tn Heb “Who gave to the robber Jacob, and Israel to the looters?” In the first line the consonantal text (Kethib) has מְשׁוֹסֶה (mÿshoseh), a Polel participle from שָׁסָה (shasah, “plunder”). The marginal reading (Qere) is מְשִׁיסָּה (mÿshissah), a noun meaning “plunder.” In this case one could translate “Who handed Jacob over as plunder?”

(0.27248527826087) (Jer 2:7)

tn Heb “my inheritance.” Or “the land [i.e., inheritance] I gave you,” reading the pronoun as indicating source rather than possession. The parallelism and the common use in Jeremiah of the term to refer to the land or people as the Lord’s (e.g., 12:7, 8, 9; 16:18; 50:11) make the possessive use more likely here.

(0.27248527826087) (Jer 48:17)

tn Heb “How is the strong staff broken, the beautiful rod.” “How” introduces a lament which is here rendered by “Alas.” The staff and rod refer to the support that Moab gave to others not to the fact that she ruled over others which was never the case. According to BDB 739 s.v. עוֹז 1 the “strong staff” is figurative of political power.

(0.27248527826087) (Hos 13:11)

tn The prefix-conjugation verb אֶתֶּן (’eten, “I gave”) refers to past-time action, specifying a definite past event (the enthronement of Saul); therefore, this should be classified as a preterite. While imperfects are occasionally used in reference to past-time events, they depict repeated action in the past. See IBHS 502-4 §31.2 and 510-14 §31.6.

(0.27248527826087) (Mar 5:13)

sn Many have discussed why Jesus gave them permission, since the animals were destroyed. However, this is another example of a miracle that is a visual lesson. The demons are destructive: They were destroying the man. They destroyed the pigs. They destroy whatever they touch. The point was to take demonic influence seriously, as well as Jesus’ power over it as a picture of the larger battle for human souls. There would be no doubt how the man’s transformation had taken place.

(0.27248527826087) (Luk 8:32)

sn Many have discussed why Jesus gave them permission, since the animals were destroyed. However, this is another example of a miracle that is a visual lesson. The demons are destructive: They were destroying the man. They destroyed the pigs. They destroy whatever they touch. The point was to take demonic influence seriously, as well as Jesus’ power over it as a picture of the larger battle for human souls. There would be no doubt how the man’s transformation had taken place.

(0.27248527826087) (Luk 22:47)

tc Many mss (D Θ Ë13 700 pm as well as several versional mss) add here, “for this is the sign he gave to them: Whoever I kiss is [the one].” This addition is almost certainly not original, since most of the important mss lack it. It may be a copyist’s attempt to clarify the text, or the accidental inclusion of a marginal gloss.

(0.27248527826087) (Joh 4:11)

sn Where then do you get this living water? The woman’s reply is an example of the “misunderstood statement,” a technique appearing frequently in John’s Gospel. Jesus was speaking of living water which was spiritual (ultimately a Johannine figure for the Holy Spirit, see John 7:38-39), but the woman thought he was speaking of flowing (fresh drinkable) water. Her misunderstanding gave Jesus the opportunity to explain what he really meant.

(0.27248527826087) (Act 4:16)

tn Here σημεῖον (shmeion) has been translated as “miraculous sign” rather than simply “sign” or “miracle” since both components appear to be present in the context. It is clear that the healing of the lame man was a miracle, but for the Sanhedrin it was the value of the miraculous healing as a sign that concerned them because it gave attestation to the message of Peter and John. The sign “speaks” as Peter claimed in 3:11-16.

(0.27248527826087) (Gal 2:9)

tn Grk “so,” with the ἵνα (Jina) indicating the result of the “pillars” extending the “right hand of fellowship,” but the translation “they gave…the right hand of fellowship so that we would go” could be misunderstood as purpose here. The implication of the scene is that an agreement, outlined at the end of v. 10, was reached between Paul and Barnabas on the one hand and the “pillars” of the Jerusalem church on the other.

(0.25040817391304) (Gen 2:17)

tn Or “in the very day, as soon as.” If one understands the expression to have this more precise meaning, then the following narrative presents a problem, for the man does not die physically as soon as he eats from the tree. In this case one may argue that spiritual death is in view. If physical death is in view here, there are two options to explain the following narrative: (1) The following phrase “You will surely die” concerns mortality which ultimately results in death (a natural paraphrase would be, “You will become mortal”), or (2) God mercifully gave man a reprieve, allowing him to live longer than he deserved.



TIP #26: Strengthen your daily devotional life with NET Bible Daily Reading Plan. [ALL]
created in 0.05 seconds
powered by
bible.org - YLSA