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 15:3
Konteks15:3 Abram added, 60 “Since 61 you have not given me a descendant, then look, one born in my house will be my heir!” 62
Kejadian 32:29
Konteks32:29 Then Jacob asked, “Please tell me your name.” 63 “Why 64 do you ask my name?” the man replied. 65 Then he blessed 66 Jacob 67 there.
Yudas 1:6
Konteks1:6 You also know that 68 the angels who did not keep within their proper domain 69 but abandoned their own place of residence, he has kept 70 in eternal chains 71 in utter 72 darkness, locked up 73 for the judgment of the great Day.
Yudas 1:17
Konteks1:17 But you, dear friends – recall the predictions 74 foretold by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. 75
Amsal 30:4
Konteks30:4 Who has ascended into heaven, and then descended? 76
Who has gathered up the winds in his fists? 77
Who has bound up the waters in his cloak? 78
Who has established all the ends of the earth? 79
What is his name, and what is his son’s name? 80 – if you know!
Yesaya 7:14
Konteks7:14 For this reason the sovereign master himself will give you a confirming sign. 81 Look, this 82 young woman 83 is about to conceive 84 and will give birth to a son. You, young woman, will name him 85 Immanuel. 86
Yesaya 9:6
Konteks9:6 For a child has been 87 born to us,
a son has been given to us.
He shoulders responsibility
and is called: 88
Extraordinary Strategist, 89
Mighty God, 90
Everlasting Father, 91
Prince of Peace. 92
Yeremia 23:6
Konteks23:6 Under his rule 93 Judah will enjoy safety 94
and Israel will live in security. 95
This is the name he will go by:
‘The Lord has provided us with justice.’ 96
Matius 1:21
Konteks1:21 She will give birth to a son and you will name him 97 Jesus, 98 because he will save his people from their sins.”
Matius 1:23
Konteks1:23 “Look! The virgin will conceive and bear a son, and they will call him 99 Emmanuel,” 100 which means 101 “God with us.” 102
[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.”
[15:3] 60 tn Heb “And Abram said.”
[15:3] 61 tn The construction uses הֵן (hen) to introduce the foundational clause (“since…”), and וְהִנֵּה (vÿhinneh) to introduce the main clause (“then look…”).
[15:3] 62 tn Heb “is inheriting me.”
[32:29] 63 sn Tell me your name. In primitive thought to know the name of a deity or supernatural being would enable one to use it for magical manipulation or power (A. S. Herbert, Genesis 12-50 [TBC], 108). For a thorough structural analysis of the passage discussing the plays on the names and the request of Jacob, see R. Barthes, “The Struggle with the Angel: Textual Analysis of Genesis 32:23-33,” Structural Analysis and Biblical Exegesis (PTMS), 21-33.
[32:29] 64 tn The question uses the enclitic pronoun “this” to emphasize the import of the question.
[32:29] 65 tn Heb “and he said, ‘Why is it that you ask my name?’” The referent of the pronoun “he” (the man who wrestled with 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.
[32:29] 66 tn The verb here means that the
[32:29] 67 tn Heb “him”; the referent (Jacob) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:6] 68 tn Grk “and.” Verse 6 is a continuation of the same sentence begun in v. 5. Due to the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.
[1:6] 69 tn Grk “who did not keep their own domain.”
[1:6] sn The idea is that certain angels acted improperly, going outside the bounds prescribed by God (their proper domain).
[1:6] 70 sn There is an interesting play on words used in this verse. Because the angels did not keep their proper place, Jesus has kept them chained up in another place. The same verb keep is used in v. 1 to describe believers’ status before God and Christ.
[1:6] 71 sn In 2 Pet 2:4 a less common word for chains is used.
[1:6] 72 tn The word ζόφος (zofos, “utter, deepest darkness”) is used only five times in the NT: two in 2 Peter, two in Jude, and one in Hebrews. Jude 6 parallels 2 Pet 2:4; Jude 13 parallels 2 Pet 2:17.
[1:6] 73 tn The words “locked up” are not in Greek, but is expressed in English as a resumptive point after the double prepositional phrase (“in eternal chains in utter darkness”).
[1:17] 74 tn Grk “words.” In conjunction with προεῖπον (proeipon), however, the meaning of the construction is that the apostles uttered prophecies.
[1:17] 75 sn This verse parallels 2 Pet 3:2 both conceptually and in much of the verbiage. There is one important difference, however: In 2 Pet 3:2 the prophets and apostles speak; here, just the apostles speak. This makes good sense if Jude is using 2 Peter as his main source and is urging his readers to go back to the authoritative writings, both OT and now especially NT.
[30:4] 76 sn To make his point Agur includes five questions. These, like Job 38–41, or Proverbs 8:24-29, focus on the divine acts to show that it is absurd for a mere mortal to think that he can explain God’s work or compare himself to God. These questions display mankind’s limitations and God’s incomparable nature. The first question could be open to include humans, but may refer to God alone (as the other questions do).
[30:4] 77 sn The questions are filled with anthropomorphic language. The questioner is asking what humans have ever done this, but the meaning is that only God has done this. “Gathering the wind in his fists” is a way of expressing absolute sovereign control over the forces of nature.
[30:4] 78 sn The question is comparing the clouds of the heavens to garments (e.g., Job 26:8). T. T. Perowne writes, “Men bind up water in skins or bottles; God binds up the rain-floods in the thin, gauzy texture of the changing clouds, which yet by his power does not rend under its burden of waters.”
[30:4] 79 sn The ends of the earth is an expression often used in scripture as a metonymy of subject referring to the people who live in the ends of the earth, the far off and remote lands and islands. While that is possible here as well, this may simply be a synecdoche saying that God created the whole world, even the most remote and distant places.
[30:4] 80 sn The reference to “son” in this passage has prompted many suggestions down through the years: It was identified as Israel in the Jewish Midrashim, the Logos or demiurge by some of the philosophers and allegorical writers, as simple poetic parallelism without a separate identity by some critical scholars, and as Jesus by Christian commentators. Parallels with Ugaritic are interesting, because Baal is referred to as a son; but that is bound up within the pantheon where there was a father god. Some of the Jewish commentators exhibit a strange logic in expressing what Christians would say is only their blindness to the full revelation: There is little cogency in this being a reference to Jesus because if there had been such a person at any time in the past he would have left some tradition about it through his descendants (J. H. Greenstone, Proverbs, 317). But Judaism has taught from the earliest times that Messiah was preexistent (especially in view of Micah 5 and Daniel 7); and the claims of Jesus in the Gospels bear this out. It seems best to say that there is a hint here of the nature of the Messiah as Son, a hint that will later be revealed in full through the incarnation.
[7:14] 81 tn The Hebrew term אוֹת (’ot, “sign”) can refer to a miraculous event (see v. 11), but it does not carry this sense inherently. Elsewhere in Isaiah the word usually refers to a natural occurrence or an object/person vested with special significance (see 8:18; 19:20; 20:3; 37:30; 55:13; 66:19). Only in 38:7-8, 22 does it refer to a miraculous deed that involves suspending or overriding natural laws. The sign outlined in vv. 14-17 involves God’s providential control over events and their timing, but not necessarily miraculous intervention.
[7:14] 82 tn Heb “the young woman.” The Hebrew article has been rendered as a demonstrative pronoun (“this”) in the translation to bring out its force. It is very likely that Isaiah pointed to a woman who was present at the scene of the prophet’s interview with Ahaz. Isaiah’s address to the “house of David” and his use of second plural forms suggests other people were present, and his use of the second feminine singular verb form (“you will name”) later in the verse is best explained if addressed to a woman who is present.
[7:14] 83 tn Traditionally, “virgin.” Because this verse from Isaiah is quoted in Matt 1:23 in connection with Jesus’ birth, the Isaiah passage has been regarded since the earliest Christian times as a prophecy of Christ’s virgin birth. Much debate has taken place over the best way to translate this Hebrew term, although ultimately one’s view of the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ is unaffected. Though the Hebrew word used here (עַלְמָה, ’almah) can sometimes refer to a woman who is a virgin (Gen 24:43), it does not carry this meaning inherently. The word is simply the feminine form of the corresponding masculine noun עֶלֶם (’elem, “young man”; cf. 1 Sam 17:56; 20:22). The Aramaic and Ugaritic cognate terms are both used of women who are not virgins. The word seems to pertain to age, not sexual experience, and would normally be translated “young woman.” The LXX translator(s) who later translated the Book of Isaiah into Greek sometime between the second and first century
[7:14] 84 tn Elsewhere the adjective הָרָה (harah), when used predicatively, refers to a past pregnancy (from the narrator’s perspective, 1 Sam 4:19), to a present condition (Gen 16:11; 38:24; 2 Sam 11:5), and to a conception that is about to occur in the near future (Judg 13:5, 7). (There is some uncertainty about the interpretation of Judg 13:5, 7, however. See the notes to those verses.) In Isa 7:14 one could translate, “the young woman is pregnant.” In this case the woman is probably a member of the royal family. Another option, the one followed in the present translation, takes the adjective in an imminent future sense, “the young woman is about to conceive.” In this case the woman could be a member of the royal family, or, more likely, the prophetess with whom Isaiah has sexual relations shortly after this (see 8:3).
[7:14] 85 tn Heb “and you will call his name.” The words “young lady” are supplied in the translation to clarify the identity of the addressee. The verb is normally taken as an archaic third feminine singular form here, and translated, “she will call.” However the form (קָרָאת, qara’t) is more naturally understood as second feminine singular, in which case the words would be addressed to the young woman mentioned just before this. In the three other occurrences of the third feminine singular perfect of I קָרָא (qara’, “to call”), the form used is קָרְאָה (qar’ah; see Gen 29:35; 30:6; 1 Chr 4:9). A third feminine singular perfect קָרָאת does appear in Deut 31:29 and Jer 44:23, but the verb here is the homonym II קָרָא (“to meet, encounter”). The form קָרָאת (from I קָרָא, “to call”) appears in three other passages (Gen 16:11; Isa 60:18; Jer 3:4 [Qere]) and in each case is second feminine singular.
[7:14] 86 sn The name Immanuel means “God [is] with us.”
[9:6] 87 tn The Hebrew perfect (translated “has been born” and “has been given”) is used here as the prophet takes a rhetorical stance in the future. See the note at 9:1.
[9:6] 88 tn Or “and dominion was on his shoulders and he called his name.” The prefixed verbs with vav (ו) consecutive are used with the same rhetorical sense as the perfects in v. 6a. See the preceding note. There is great debate over the syntactical structure of the verse. No subject is indicated for the verb “he called.” If all the titles that follow are ones given to the king, then the subject of the verb must be indefinite, “one calls.” However, some have suggested that one to three of the titles that follow refer to God, not the king. For example, the traditional punctuation of the Hebrew text suggests the translation, “and the Extraordinary Strategist, the Mighty God calls his name, ‘Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.’”
[9:6] 89 tn Some have seen two titles here (“Wonderful” and “Counselor,” cf. KJV, ASV). However, the pattern of the following three titles (each contains two elements) and the use of the roots פָּלַא (pala’) and יָעַץ (ya’ats) together in Isa 25:1 (cf. כִּי עָשִׂיתָ פֶּלֶא עֵצוֹת מֵרָחוֹק אֱמוּנָה אֹמֶן) and 28:29 (cf. הִפְלִיא עֵצָה) suggest otherwise. The term יוֹעֵץ (yo’ets) could be taken as appositional (genitive or otherwise) of species (“a wonder, i.e., a wonder as a counselor,” cf. NAB “Wonder-Counselor”) or as a substantival participle for which פָּלַא provides the direct object (“one who counsels wonders”). יוֹעֵץ is used as a royal title elsewhere (cf. Mic 4:9). Here it probably refers to the king’s ability to devise military strategy, as suggested by the context (cf. vv. 3-4 and the following title אֵל גִּבּוֹר, ’el gibor). In Isa 11:2 (also a description of this king) עֵצָה (’etsah) is linked with גְּבוּרָה (gÿvurah, the latter being typically used of military might, cf. BDB 150 s.v.). Note also עֵצָה וּגְבוּרָה לַמִּלְחָמָה in Isa 36:5. פֶּלֶא (pele’) is typically used of God (cf. however Lam 1:9). Does this suggest the deity of the messianic ruler? The NT certainly teaches he is God, but did Isaiah necessarily have this in mind over 700 years before his birth? Since Isa 11:2 points out that this king will receive the spirit of the Lord, which will enable him to counsel, it is possible to argue that the king’s counsel is “extraordinary” because it finds its source in the divine spirit. Thus this title does not necessarily suggest that the ruler is deity.
[9:6] 90 tn גִּבּוֹר (gibbor) is probably an attributive adjective (“mighty God”), though one might translate “God is a warrior” or “God is mighty.” Scholars have interpreted this title is two ways. A number of them have argued that the title portrays the king as God’s representative on the battlefield, whom God empowers in a supernatural way (see J. H. Hayes and S. A. Irvine, Isaiah, 181-82). They contend that this sense seems more likely in the original context of the prophecy. They would suggest that having read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king’s deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God’s representative on earth. Ancient Near Eastern art and literature picture gods training kings for battle, bestowing special weapons, and intervening in battle. According to Egyptian propaganda, the Hittites described Rameses II as follows: “No man is he who is among us, It is Seth great-of-strength, Baal in person; Not deeds of man are these his doings, They are of one who is unique” (See Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2:67). According to proponents of this view, Isa 9:6 probably envisions a similar kind of response when friends and foes alike look at the Davidic king in full battle regalia. When the king’s enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself. The other option is to regard this title as a reference to God, confronting Isaiah’s readers with the divinity of this promised “child.” The use of this same title that clearly refers to God in a later passage (Isa 10:21) supports this interpretation. Other passages depict Yahweh as the great God and great warrior (Deut 10:17; Jer. 32:18). Although this connection of a child who is born with deity is unparalleled in any earlier biblical texts, Isaiah’s use of this title to make this connection represents Isaiah’s attempt (at God’s behest) to advance Israel in their understanding of the ideal Davidic king for whom they long.
[9:6] 91 tn This title must not be taken in an anachronistic Trinitarian sense. (To do so would be theologically problematic, for the “Son” is the messianic king and is distinct in his person from God the “Father.”) Rather, in its original context the title pictures the king as the protector of his people. For a similar use of “father” see Isa 22:21 and Job 29:16. This figurative, idiomatic use of “father” is not limited to the Bible. In a Phoenician inscription (ca. 850-800
[9:6] 92 tn This title pictures the king as one who establishes a safe socio-economic environment for his people. It hardly depicts him as a meek individual, for he establishes peace through military strength (as the preceding context and the first two royal titles indicate). His people experience safety and prosperity because their invincible king destroys their enemies. See Pss 72 and 144 for parallels to these themes.
[23:6] 93 tn Heb “In his days [= during the time he rules].”
[23:6] 94 tn Parallelism and context (cf. v. 4) suggest this nuance for the word often translated “be saved.” For this nuance elsewhere see Ps 119:117; Prov 28:18 for the verb (יָשַׁע [yasha’] in the Niphal); and Ps 12:6; Job 5:4, 11 for the related noun (יֶשַׁע, yesha’).
[23:6] 95 sn It should be noted that this brief oracle of deliverance implies the reunification of Israel and Judah under the future Davidic ruler. Jeremiah has already spoken about this reunification earlier in 3:18 and will have more to say about it in 30:3; 31:27, 31. This same ideal was espoused in the prophecies of Hosea (1:10-11 [2:1-2 HT]), Isaiah (11:1-4, 10-12), and Ezekiel (37:15-28) all of which have messianic and eschatological significance.
[23:6] 96 tn Heb “his name will be called ‘The
[23:6] sn The Hebrew word translated “justice” here is very broad in its usage, and it is hard to catch all the relevant nuances for this word in this context. It is used for “vindication” in legal contexts (see, e.g., Job 6:29), for “deliverance” or “salvation” in exilic contexts (see, e.g., Isa 58:8), and in the sense of ruling, judging with “justice” (see, e.g., Lev 19:15; Isa 32:1). Here it probably sums up the justice that the
[1:21] 97 tn Grk “you will call his name.”
[1:21] 98 sn The Greek form of the name Ihsous, which was translated into Latin as Jesus, is the same as the Hebrew Yeshua (Joshua), which means “Yahweh saves” (Yahweh is typically rendered as “Lord” in the OT). It was a fairly common name among Jews in 1st century Palestine, as references to a number of people by this name in the LXX and Josephus indicate.
[1:23] 99 tn Grk “they will call his name.”
[1:23] 100 sn A quotation from Isa 7:14.
[1:23] 101 tn Grk “is translated.”
[1:23] 102 sn An allusion to Isa 8:8, 10 (LXX).
