Discovery Box| (0.67957881081081) | (Rev 22:1) |
1 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence within the narrative. |
| (0.67957881081081) | (Rev 22:6) |
1 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence within the narrative. |
| (0.67957881081081) | (Rev 22:9) |
1 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to indicate the contrast present here. |
| (0.67359278378378) | (Luk 8:18) |
3 sn The phrase what he thinks he has is important, because it is not what a person thinks he has that is important but whether he actually has something or not. Jesus describes the person who does not heed his word as having nothing. The person who has nothing loses even that which he thought was something but was not. In other words, he has absolutely nothing at all. Jesus’ teaching must be taken seriously. |
| (0.662354) | (Rut 2:7) |
4 tn Heb “and she came and she has persisted.” The construction וַתָּבוֹא וַתַעֲמוֹד (vattavo’ vata’amod) forms a dependent temporal sequence: “since she came, she has persisted.” Because עָמַד (’amad, “to stand, remain, persist”; BDB 764 s.v. עָמַד; HALOT 840-42 s.v. עמד) has a broad range of meanings, וַתַעֲמוֹד has been understood in various ways: (1) Ruth had stood all morning waiting to receive permission from Boaz to glean in his field: “she has stood (here waiting)”; (2) Ruth had remained in the field all morning: “she has remained here” (NAB, NASB, NCV); and (3) Ruth had worked hard all morning: “she has worked steadily” (REB), “she has been working” (TEV, CEV), “she has been on her feet (all morning)” (JPS, NJPS, NRSV). For discussion, see F. W. Bush, Ruth, Esther (WBC), 118-19. |
| (0.65713383783784) | (Lam 2:9) |
2 tn Heb “he has destroyed and smashed her bars.” The two verbs אִבַּד וְשִׁבַּר (’ibbad vÿshibbar) form a verbal hendiadys that emphasizes the forcefulness of the destruction of the locking bars on the gates. The first verb functions adverbially and the second retains its full verbal sense: “he has smashed to pieces.” Several English versions render this expression literally and miss the rhetorical point: “he has ruined and broken” (RSV, NRSV), “he has destroyed and broken” (KJV, NASB), “he has broken and destroyed” (NIV). The hendiadys has been correctly noted by others: “smashed to pieces” (TEV, CEV) and “smashed to bits” (NJPS). |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Gen 17:1) |
2 tn Heb “appeared to Abram and said to him.” The proper name has been replaced by the pronoun (“him”) and the final phrase “to him” has been left untranslated for stylistic reasons. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Gen 22:12) |
2 tn Heb “and he said, ‘Do not extend…’”; the referent (the angel) has been specified in the context for clarity. The order of the introductory clause and the direct discourse has been rearranged in the translation for stylistic reasons. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Gen 30:16) |
1 tn Heb “must come in to me.” The imperfect verbal form has an obligatory nuance here. She has acquired him for the night and feels he is obligated to have sexual relations with her. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Gen 31:28) |
1 tn Heb “my sons and my daughters.” Here “sons” refers to “grandsons,” and has been translated “grandchildren” since at least one granddaughter, Dinah, was involved. The order has been reversed in the translation for stylistic reasons. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Gen 33:15) |
2 tn Heb “and he said, ‘Why this?’” The referent of the pronoun “he” (Jacob) has been specified for clarity, and the order of the introductory clause and the direct discourse has been rearranged in the translation for stylistic reasons. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Gen 37:13) |
3 tn Heb “and he said, ‘Here I am.’” The referent of the pronoun “he” (Joseph) has been specified in the translation for clarity, and the order of the introductory clause and the direct discourse has been rearranged for stylistic reasons. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Exo 29:9) |
1 tc Hebrew has both the objective pronoun “them” and the names “Aaron and his sons.” Neither the LXX nor Leviticus 8:13 has “Aaron and his sons,” suggesting that this may have been a later gloss in the text. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Exo 34:4) |
1 tn Heb “he”; the referent has been specified here and the name “Moses,” which occurs later in this verse, has been replaced with the pronoun (“he”), both for stylistic reasons. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Lev 14:3) |
2 tn Heb “And behold, the diseased infection has been healed from the diseased person.” The expression “diseased infection” has been translated as simply “infection” to avoid redundancy here in terms of English style. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Num 3:33) |
1 tn The Hebrew text has “these they the families of Merari.” The independent personal pronoun has an anaphoric use, somewhat equivalent to the copula “and” (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 23, §115). |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Num 23:21) |
2 sn The line could mean that God has regarded Israel as the ideal congregation without any blemish or flaw. But it could also mean that God has not looked on their iniquity, meaning, held it against them. |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Rut 1:21) |
2 tn Heb “but empty the |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Rut 1:21) |
3 tn The disjunctive clause structure (vav [ו] + subject + verb) here introduces either an attendant circumstance (“when the |
| (0.64757743243243) | (Rut 3:14) |
1 tc The consonantal text (Kethib) has the singular מַרְגְּלָתַו (margÿlatav, “his leg”), while the marginal reading (Qere) has the plural מַרְגְּלוֹתָיו (margÿlotayv, “his legs”). |
