Kejadian 14:1-24
Konteks14:1 At that time 1 Amraphel king of Shinar, 2 Arioch king of Ellasar, Kedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations 3 14:2 went to war 4 against Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar). 5 14:3 These last five kings 6 joined forces 7 in the Valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea). 8 14:4 For twelve years 9 they had served Kedorlaomer, but in the thirteenth year 10 they rebelled. 11 14:5 In the fourteenth year, Kedorlaomer and the kings who were his allies came and defeated 12 the Rephaites in Ashteroth Karnaim, the Zuzites in Ham, the Emites in Shaveh Kiriathaim, 14:6 and the Horites in their hill country of Seir, as far as El Paran, which is near the desert. 13 14:7 Then they attacked En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh) again, 14 and they conquered all the territory of the Amalekites, as well as the Amorites who were living in Hazazon Tamar.
14:8 Then the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) went out and prepared for battle. In the Valley of Siddim they met 15 14:9 Kedorlaomer king of Elam, Tidal king of nations, 16 Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar. Four kings fought against 17 five. 14:10 Now the Valley of Siddim was full of tar pits. 18 When the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, they fell into them, 19 but some survivors 20 fled to the hills. 21 14:11 The four victorious kings 22 took all the possessions and food of Sodom and Gomorrah and left. 14:12 They also took Abram’s nephew 23 Lot and his possessions when 24 they left, for Lot 25 was living in Sodom. 26
14:13 A fugitive 27 came and told Abram the Hebrew. 28 Now Abram was living by the oaks 29 of Mamre the Amorite, the brother 30 of Eshcol and Aner. (All these were allied by treaty 31 with Abram.) 32 14:14 When Abram heard that his nephew 33 had been taken captive, he mobilized 34 his 318 trained men who had been born in his household, and he pursued the invaders 35 as far as Dan. 36 14:15 Then, during the night, 37 Abram 38 divided his forces 39 against them and defeated them. He chased them as far as Hobah, which is north 40 of Damascus. 14:16 He retrieved all the stolen property. 41 He also brought back his nephew Lot and his possessions, as well as the women and the rest of 42 the people.
14:17 After Abram 43 returned from defeating Kedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet Abram 44 in the Valley of Shaveh (known as the King’s Valley). 45 14:18 Melchizedek king of Salem 46 brought out bread and wine. (Now he was the priest of the Most High God.) 47 14:19 He blessed Abram, saying,
“Blessed be Abram by 48 the Most High God,
Creator 49 of heaven and earth. 50
14:20 Worthy of praise is 51 the Most High God,
who delivered 52 your enemies into your hand.”
Abram gave Melchizedek 53 a tenth of everything.
14:21 Then the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the people and take the possessions for yourself.” 14:22 But Abram replied to the king of Sodom, “I raise my hand 54 to the Lord, the Most High God, Creator of heaven and earth, and vow 55 14:23 that I will take nothing 56 belonging to you, not even a thread or the strap of a sandal. That way you can never say, ‘It is I 57 who made Abram rich.’ 14:24 I will take nothing 58 except compensation for what the young men have eaten. 59 As for the share of the men who went with me – Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre – let them take their share.”
Kejadian 26:1
Konteks26:1 There was a famine in the land, subsequent to the earlier famine that occurred 60 in the days of Abraham. 61 Isaac went to Abimelech king of the Philistines at Gerar.
Mazmur 38:13-14
Konteks38:13 But I am like a deaf man – I hear nothing;
I am like a mute who cannot speak. 62
38:14 I am like a man who cannot hear
and is incapable of arguing his defense. 63
Yesaya 53:7
Konteks53:7 He was treated harshly and afflicted, 64
but he did not even open his mouth.
Like a lamb led to the slaughtering block,
like a sheep silent before her shearers,
he did not even open his mouth. 65
Markus 15:3-5
Konteks15:3 Then 66 the chief priests began to accuse him repeatedly. 15:4 So Pilate asked him again, 67 “Have you nothing to say? See how many charges they are bringing against you!” 15:5 But Jesus made no further reply, so that Pilate was amazed.
Yohanes 19:9-11
Konteks19:9 and he went back into the governor’s residence 68 and said to Jesus, “Where do you come from?” But Jesus gave him no answer. 19:10 So Pilate said, 69 “Do you refuse to speak to me? Don’t you know I have the authority 70 to release you, and to crucify you?” 71 19:11 Jesus replied, “You would have no authority 72 over me at all, unless it was given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you 73 is guilty of greater sin.” 74
Kisah Para Rasul 8:32
Konteks8:32 Now the passage of scripture the man 75 was reading was this:
“He was led like a sheep to slaughter,
and like a lamb before its shearer is silent,
so he did 76 not open his mouth.
Kisah Para Rasul 8:1
Konteks8:1 And Saul agreed completely with killing 77 him.
Now on that day a great 78 persecution began 79 against the church in Jerusalem, 80 and all 81 except the apostles were forced to scatter throughout the regions 82 of Judea and Samaria.
Pengkhotbah 2:23
Konteks2:23 For all day long 83 his work produces pain and frustration, 84
and even at night his mind cannot relax! 85
This also is futile!
[14:1] 1 tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator וַיְהִי (vayÿhi) followed by “in the days of.”
[14:1] 2 sn Shinar (also in v. 9) is the region of Babylonia.
[14:1] 3 tn Or “king of Goyim.” The Hebrew term גּוֹיִם (goyim) means “nations,” but a number of modern translations merely transliterate the Hebrew (cf. NEB “Goyim”; NIV, NRSV “Goiim”).
[14:2] sn Went to war. The conflict here reflects international warfare in the Early and Middle Bronze periods. The countries operated with overlords and vassals. Kings ruled over city states, or sometimes a number of city states (i.e., nations). Due to their treaties, when one went to war, those confederate with him joined him in battle. It appears here that it is Kedorlaomer’s war, because the western city states have rebelled against him (meaning they did not send products as tribute to keep him from invading them).
[14:2] 5 sn On the geographical background of vv. 1-2 see J. P. Harland, “Sodom and Gomorrah,” The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 1:41-75; and D. N. Freedman, “The Real Story of the Ebla Tablets, Ebla and the Cities of the Plain,” BA 41 (1978): 143-64.
[14:3] 6 tn Heb “all these,” referring only to the last five kings named. The referent has been specified as “these last five kings” in the translation for clarity.
[14:3] 7 tn The Hebrew verb used here means “to join together; to unite; to be allied.” It stresses close associations, especially of friendships, marriages, or treaties.
[14:3] 8 sn The Salt Sea is the older name for the Dead Sea.
[14:4] 9 tn The sentence simply begins with “twelve years”; it serves as an adverbial accusative giving the duration of their bondage.
[14:4] 10 tn This is another adverbial accusative of time.
[14:4] 11 sn The story serves as a foreshadowing of the plight of the kingdom of Israel later. Eastern powers came and forced the western kingdoms into submission. Each year, then, they would send tribute east – to keep them away. Here, in the thirteenth year, they refused to send the tribute (just as later Hezekiah rebelled against Assyria). And so in the fourteenth year the eastern powers came to put them down again. This account from Abram’s life taught future generations that God can give victory over such threats – that people did not have to live in servitude to tyrants from the east.
[14:5] 12 tn The Hebrew verb נָכָה (nakhah) means “to attack, to strike, to smite.” In this context it appears that the strike was successful, and so a translation of “defeated” is preferable.
[14:6] 13 sn The line of attack ran down the eastern side of the Jordan Valley into the desert, and then turned and came up the valley to the cities of the plain.
[14:7] 14 tn Heb “they returned and came to En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh).” The two verbs together form a verbal hendiadys, the first serving as the adverb: “they returned and came” means “they came again.” Most English translations do not treat this as a hendiadys, but translate “they turned back” or something similar. Since in the context, however, “came again to” does not simply refer to travel but an assault against the place, the present translation expresses this as “attacked…again.”
[14:9] 16 tn Or “Goyim.” See the note on the word “nations” in 14:1.
[14:9] 17 tn The Hebrew text has simply “against.” The word “fought” is supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[14:10] 18 tn Heb “Now the Valley of Siddim [was] pits, pits of tar.” This parenthetical disjunctive clause emphasizes the abundance of tar pits in the area through repetition of the noun “pits.”
[14:10] sn The word for “tar” (or “bitumen”) occurs earlier in the story of the building of the tower in Babylon (see Gen 11:3).
[14:10] 19 tn Or “they were defeated there.” After a verb of motion the Hebrew particle שָׁם (sham) with the directional heh (שָׁמָּה, shammah) can mean “into it, therein” (BDB 1027 s.v. שָׁם).
[14:10] 21 sn The reference to the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah must mean the kings along with their armies. Most of them were defeated in the valley, but some of them escaped to the hills.
[14:11] 22 tn Heb “they”; the referent (the four victorious kings, see v. 9) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
[14:12] 23 tn Heb “Lot the son of his brother.”
[14:12] 25 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Lot) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:12] 26 tn This disjunctive clause is circumstantial/causal, explaining that Lot was captured because he was living in Sodom at the time.
[14:13] 27 tn Heb “the fugitive.” The article carries a generic force or indicates that this fugitive is definite in the mind of the speaker.
[14:13] 28 sn E. A. Speiser (Genesis [AB], 103) suggests that part of this chapter came from an outside source since it refers to Abram the Hebrew. That is not impossible, given that the narrator likely utilized traditions and genealogies that had been collected and transmitted over the years. The meaning of the word “Hebrew” has proved elusive. It may be related to the verb “to cross over,” perhaps meaning “immigrant.” Or it might be derived from the name of Abram’s ancestor Eber (see Gen 11:14-16).
[14:13] 29 tn Or “terebinths.”
[14:13] 30 tn Or “a brother”; or “a relative”; or perhaps “an ally.”
[14:13] 31 tn Heb “possessors of a treaty with.” Since it is likely that the qualifying statement refers to all three (Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner) the words “all these” have been supplied in the translation to make this clear.
[14:13] 32 tn This parenthetical disjunctive clause explains how Abram came to be living in their territory, but it also explains why they must go to war with Abram.
[14:14] 33 tn Heb “his brother,” by extension, “relative.” Here and in v. 16 the more specific term “nephew” has been used in the translation for clarity. Lot was the son of Haran, Abram’s brother (Gen 11:27).
[14:14] 34 tn The verb וַיָּרֶק (vayyareq) is a rare form, probably related to the word רֵיק (req, “to be empty”). If so, it would be a very figurative use: “he emptied out” (or perhaps “unsheathed”) his men. The LXX has “mustered” (cf. NEB). E. A. Speiser (Genesis [AB], 103-4) suggests reading with the Samaritan Pentateuch a verb diq, cognate with Akkadian deku, “to mobilize” troops. If this view is accepted, one must assume that a confusion of the Hebrew letters ד (dalet) and ר (resh) led to the error in the traditional Hebrew text. These two letters are easily confused in all phases of ancient Hebrew script development. The present translation is based on this view.
[14:14] 35 tn The words “the invaders” have been supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:14] 36 sn The use of the name Dan reflects a later perspective. The Danites did not migrate to this northern territory until centuries later (see Judg 18:29). Furthermore Dan was not even born until much later. By inserting this name a scribe has clarified the location of the region.
[14:15] 37 tn The Hebrew text simply has “night” as an adverbial accusative.
[14:15] 38 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:15] 39 tn Heb “he divided himself…he and his servants.”
[14:15] 40 tn Heb “left.” Directions in ancient Israel were given in relation to the east rather than the north.
[14:16] 41 tn The word “stolen” is supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:16] 42 tn The phrase “the rest of “ has been supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:17] 43 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:17] 44 tn Heb “him”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:17] 45 sn The King’s Valley is possibly a reference to what came to be known later as the Kidron Valley.
[14:18] 46 sn Salem is traditionally identified as the Jebusite stronghold of old Jerusalem. Accordingly, there has been much speculation about its king. Though some have identified him with the preincarnate Christ or with Noah’s son Shem, it is far more likely that Melchizedek was a Canaanite royal priest whom God used to renew the promise of the blessing to Abram, perhaps because Abram considered Melchizedek his spiritual superior. But Melchizedek remains an enigma. In a book filled with genealogical records he appears on the scene without a genealogy and then disappears from the narrative. In Psalm 110 the
[14:18] 47 tn The parenthetical disjunctive clause significantly identifies Melchizedek as a priest as well as a king.
[14:18] sn It is his royal priestly status that makes Melchizedek a type of Christ: He was identified with Jerusalem, superior to the ancestor of Israel, and both a king and a priest. Unlike the normal Canaanites, this man served “God Most High” (אֵל עֶלְיוֹן, ’el ’elyon) – one sovereign God, who was the creator of all the universe. Abram had in him a spiritual brother.
[14:19] 48 tn The preposition לְ (lamed) introduces the agent after the passive participle.
[14:19] 49 tn Some translate “possessor of heaven and earth” (cf. NASB). But cognate evidence from Ugaritic indicates that there were two homonymic roots ָקנָה (qanah), one meaning “to create” (as in Gen 4:1) and the other “to obtain, to acquire, to possess.” While “possessor” would fit here, “creator” is the more likely due to the collocation with “heaven and earth.”
[14:19] 50 tn The terms translated “heaven” and “earth” are both objective genitives after the participle in construct.
[14:20] 51 tn Heb “blessed be.” For God to be “blessed” means that is praised. His reputation is enriched in the world as his name is praised.
[14:20] 52 sn Who delivered. The Hebrew verb מִגֵּן (miggen, “delivered”) foreshadows the statement by God to Abram in Gen 15:1, “I am your shield” (מָגֵן, magen). Melchizedek provided a theological interpretation of Abram’s military victory.
[14:20] 53 tn Heb “him”; the referent (Melchizedek) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:22] 54 tn Abram takes an oath, raising his hand as a solemn gesture. The translation understands the perfect tense as having an instantaneous nuance: “Here and now I raise my hand.”
[14:22] 55 tn The words “and vow” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:23] 56 tn The oath formula is elliptical, reading simply: “…if I take.” It is as if Abram says, “[May the
[14:23] 57 tn The Hebrew text adds the independent pronoun (“I”) to the verb form for emphasis.
[14:24] 58 tn The words “I will take nothing” have been supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[14:24] 59 tn Heb “except only what the young men have eaten.”
[26:1] 60 tn Heb “in addition to the first famine which was.”
[26:1] 61 sn This account is parallel to two similar stories about Abraham (see Gen 12:10-20; 20:1-18). Many scholars do not believe there were three similar incidents, only one that got borrowed and duplicated. Many regard the account about Isaac as the original, which then was attached to the more important person, Abraham, with supernatural elements being added. For a critique of such an approach, see R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 47-62. It is more likely that the story illustrates the proverb “like father, like son” (see T. W. Mann, The Book of the Torah, 53). In typical human fashion the son follows his father’s example of lying to avoid problems. The appearance of similar events reported in a similar way underscores the fact that the blessing has now passed to Isaac, even if he fails as his father did.
[38:13] 62 sn I am like a deaf man…like a mute. The psalmist is like a deaf mute; he is incapable of defending himself and is vulnerable to his enemies’ deception (see v. 14).
[38:14] 63 tn Heb “and there is not in his mouth arguments.”
[53:7] 64 tn The translation assumes the Niphal is passive; another option is take the clause (note the subject + verb pattern) as concessive and the Niphal as reflexive, “though he humbled himself.”
[53:7] 65 sn This verse emphasizes the servant’s silent submission. The comparison to a sheep does not necessarily suggest a sacrificial metaphor. Sheep were slaughtered for food as well as for sacrificial rituals, and טֶבַח (tevakh) need not refer to sacrificial slaughter (see Gen 43:16; Prov 7:22; 9:2; Jer 50:27; note also the use of the related verb in Exod 21:37; Deut 28:31; 1 Sam 25:11).
[15:3] 66 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.
[15:4] 67 tn Grk “Pilate asked him again, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant and has not been translated.
[19:9] 68 tn Grk “into the praetorium.”
[19:10] 69 tn Grk “said to him.” The words “to him” are not translated because they are unnecessary in contemporary English style.
[19:10] 71 tn Grk “know that I have the authority to release you and the authority to crucify you.” Repetition of “the authority” is unnecessarily redundant English style.
[19:10] sn See the note on Crucify in 19:6.
[19:11] 73 tn Or “who delivered me over to you.”
[19:11] sn The one who handed me over to you appears to be a reference to Judas at first; yet Judas did not deliver Jesus up to Pilate, but to the Jewish authorities. The singular may be a reference to Caiaphas, who as high priest was representative of all the Jewish authorities, or it may be a generic singular referring to all the Jewish authorities directly. In either case the end result is more or less the same.
[19:11] 74 tn Grk “has the greater sin” (an idiom).
[19:11] sn Because Pilate had no authority over Jesus except what had been given to him from God, the one who handed Jesus over to Pilate was guilty of greater sin. This does not absolve Pilate of guilt; it simply means his guilt was less than those who handed Jesus over to him, because he was not acting against Jesus out of deliberate hatred or calculated malice, like the Jewish religious authorities. These were thereby guilty of greater sin.
[8:32] 75 tn Grk “he”; the referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[8:32] 76 tn Grk “does.” The present tense here was translated as a past tense to maintain consistency with the first line of the quotation (“he was led like a sheep to slaughter”), which has an aorist passive verb normally translated as a past tense in English.
[8:1] 77 tn The term ἀναίρεσις (anairesi") can refer to murder (BDAG 64 s.v.; 2 Macc 5:13; Josephus, Ant. 5.2.12 [5.165]).
[8:1] 79 tn Grk “Now there happened on that day a great persecution.” It is less awkward to say in English “Now on that day a great persecution began.”
[8:1] 80 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[8:1] 81 sn All. Given that the Jerusalem church is still active after this and that the Hellenists are the focus of Acts 6-8, it is possible to argue that only the Hellenistic Christians were forced to scatter.
[2:23] 83 tn Heb “all his days.”
[2:23] 84 tn The syntax of this verse has been interpreted in two different ways: (1) The phrase “all his days” (כָל־יָמָיו, khol-yamayv) is the subject of a verbless clause, and the noun “pain” (מַכְאֹבִים, makh’ovim) is a predicate nominative or a predicate of apposition (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 15-16, §71). Likewise, the noun “his work” (עִנְיָנוֹ, ’inyano) is the subject of a second verbless clause, and the vexation” (כַעַס, kha’as) is a predicate nominative: “All his days are pain, and his work is vexation.” (2) The noun “his work” (עִנְיָנוֹ) is the subject of both nouns, “pain and vexation” (וָכַעַס מַכְאֹבִים, makh’ovim vakha’as), which are predicate nominatives, while the phrase “all his days” (כָל־יָמָיו) is an adverbial accusative functioning temporally: “All day long, his work is pain and vexation.” The latter option is supported by the parallelism between “even at night” and “all day long.” This verse draws out an ironic contrast/comparison between his physical toil/labor during the day and his emotional anxiety at night. Even at night, he has no break!
