Daniel 3:13

3:13 Then Nebuchadnezzar in a fit of rage ¹  demanded that they bring ²  Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego before him. So they brought them ³  before the king.

Ayub 5:2

5:2 For ⁴  wrath kills the foolish person, ⁵ 

and anger ⁶  slays the silly one.

Mazmur 76:10

76:10 Certainly ⁷  your angry judgment upon men will bring you praise; ⁸ 

you reveal your anger in full measure. ⁹ 

Amsal 16:14

16:14 A king’s wrath ¹⁰  is like ¹¹  a messenger of death, ¹² 

but a wise person appeases it. ¹³ 

Amsal 19:12

19:12 A king’s wrath is like ¹⁴  the roar of a lion, ¹⁵ 

but his favor is like dew on the grass. ¹⁶ 

Amsal 20:2

20:2 The king’s terrifying anger ¹⁷  is like the roar of a lion;

whoever provokes him ¹⁸  sins against himself. ¹⁹ 

Amsal 27:3-4

27:3 A stone is heavy and sand is weighty,

but vexation ²⁰  by a fool is more burdensome ²¹  than the two of them.

27:4 Wrath is cruel and anger is overwhelming, ²² 

but who can stand before jealousy? ²³ 

Amsal 29:22

29:22 An angry person ²⁴  stirs up dissension,

and a wrathful person ²⁵  is abounding in transgression. ²⁶ 

Matius 2:16

2:16 When Herod ²⁷  saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, he became enraged. He sent men ²⁸  to kill all the children in Bethlehem ²⁹  and throughout the surrounding region from the age of two and under, according to the time he had learned from the wise men.

Matius 5:22

5:22 But I say to you that anyone who is angry with a brother ³⁰  will be subjected to judgment. And whoever insults ³¹  a brother will be brought before ³²  the council, ³³  and whoever says ‘Fool’ ³⁴  will be sent ³⁵  to fiery hell. ³⁶ 

[3:13]  ¹ tn Aram “in anger and wrath”; NASB “in rage and anger.” The expression is a hendiadys.

[3:13]  ² tn The Aramaic infinitive is active.

[3:13]  ³ tn Aram “these men.” The pronoun is used in the translation to avoid undue repetition.

[5:2]  ⁴ tn One of the reasons that commentators transpose v. 1 is that the כִּי (ki, “for”) here seems to follow 4:21 better. If people die without wisdom, it is folly that kills them. But the verse also makes sense after 5:1. He is saying that complaining against God will not bring deliverance (v. 1), but rather, by such impatience the fool will bring greater calamity on himself.

[5:2]  ⁵ tn The two words for “foolish person” are common in wisdom literature. The first, אֱוִיל (’evil), is the fool who is a senseless person; the פֹּתֶה (poteh) is the naive and silly person, the simpleton, the one who is easily led astray. The direct object is introduced with the preposition ל (lamed) in this verse (see GKC 366 §117.n).

[5:2]  ⁶ tn The two parallel nouns are similar; their related verbs are also paralleled in Deut 32:16 with the idea of “vex” and “irritate.” The first word כַּעַשׂ (ka’as) refers to the inner irritation and anger one feels, whereas the second word קִנְאָה (qin’ah) refers to the outward expression of the anger. In Job 6:2, Job will respond “O that my impatience [ka’as] were weighed….”

[76:10]  ⁷ tn Or “for.”

[76:10]  ⁸ tn Heb “the anger of men will praise you.” This could mean that men’s anger (subjective genitive), when punished by God, will bring him praise, but this interpretation does not harmonize well with the next line. The translation assumes that God’s anger is in view here (see v. 7) and that “men” is an objective genitive. God’s angry judgment against men brings him praise because it reveals his power and majesty (see vv. 1-4).

[76:10]  ⁹ tn Heb “the rest of anger you put on.” The meaning of the statement is not entirely clear. Perhaps the idea is that God, as he prepares for battle, girds himself with every last ounce of his anger, as if it were a weapon.

[16:14]  ¹⁰ sn This proverb introduces the danger of becoming a victim of the king’s wrath (cf. CEV “if the king becomes angry, someone may die”). A wise person knows how to pacify the unexpected and irrational behavior of a king. The proverb makes the statement, and then gives the response to the subject.

[16:14]  ¹¹ tn The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied for the sake of clarity.

[16:14]  ¹² tn The expression uses an implied comparison, comparing “wrath” to a messenger because it will send a message. The qualification is “death,” an objective genitive, meaning the messenger will bring death, or the message will be about death. E.g., 1 Kgs 2:25, 29-34 and 46. Some have suggested a comparison with the two messengers of Baal to the god Mot (“Death”) in the Ugaritic tablets (H. L. Ginsberg, “Baal’s Two Messengers,” BASOR 95 [1944]: 25-30). If there is an allusion, it is a very slight one. The verse simply says that the king’s wrath threatens death.

[16:14]  ¹³ tn The verb is כָּפַּר (kapar), which means “to pacify; to appease” and “to atone; to expiate” in Levitical passages. It would take a wise person to know how to calm or pacify the wrath of a king – especially in the ancient Near East.

[19:12]  ¹⁴ sn The verse contrasts the “rage” of the king with his “favor” by using two similes. The first simile presents the king at his most dangerous – his anger (e.g., 20:2; Amos 3:4). The second simile presents his favor as beneficial for life (e.g., 16:14-15; 28:15).

[19:12]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “is a roaring like a lion.”

[19:12]  ¹⁶ sn The proverb makes an observation about a king’s power to terrify or to refresh. It advises people to use tact with a king.

[20:2]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “the terror of a king” (so ASV, NASB); The term “terror” is a metonymy of effect for cause: the anger of a king that causes terror among the people. The term “king” functions as a possessive genitive: “a king’s anger” (cf. NIV “A king’s wrath”; NLT “The king’s fury”).

[20:2]  ¹⁸ tn The verb מִתְעַבְּרוֹ (mit’abbÿro) is problematic; in the MT the form is the Hitpael participle with a pronominal suffix, which is unusual, for the direct object of this verb usually takes a preposition first: “is angry with.” The LXX rendered it “angers [or, irritates].”

[20:2]  ¹⁹ sn The expression “sins against himself” has been taken by some to mean “forfeits his life” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV) or “endangers his life” (cf. NCV, NLT). That may be the implication of getting oneself in trouble with an angry king (cf. TEV “making him angry is suicide”).

[27:3]  ²⁰ tn The subject matter is the vexation produced by a fool. The term כַּעַס (ca’as) means “vexation” (ASV); provocation” (NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV); “anger” (KJV “wrath”) and usually refers to undeserved treatment. Cf. NLT “the resentment caused by a fool.”

[27:3]  sn The same noun is used in 1 Sam 1:6, 16 for the “provocation” given to Hannah by Peninnah for being barren.

[27:3]  ²¹ sn The contrast is made between dealing with the vexation of a fool and physical labor (moving stones and sand). More tiring is the vexation of a fool, for the mental and emotional effort it takes to deal with it is more draining than physical labor. It is, in the sense of this passage, almost unbearable.

[27:4]  ²² tn Heb “fierceness of wrath and outpouring [= flood] of anger.” A number of English versions use “flood” here (e.g., NASB, NCV, NLT).

[27:4]  ²³ tn The Hebrew term translated “jealousy” here probably has the negative sense of “envy” rather than the positive sense of “zeal.” It is a raging emotion (like “anger” and “wrath,” this word has nuances of heat, intensity) that defies reason at times and can be destructive like a consuming fire (e.g., 6:32-35; Song 8:6-7). The rhetorical question is intended to affirm that no one can survive a jealous rage. (Whether one is the subject who is jealous or the object of the jealousy of someone else is not so clear.)

[29:22]  ²⁴ tn Heb “a man of anger.” Here “anger” is an attributive (“an angry man”). This expression describes one given to or characterized by anger, not merely temporarily angry. The same is true of the next description.

[29:22]  ²⁵ tn Heb “possessor of wrath.” Here “wrath” is an attributive (cf. ASV “a wrathful man”; KJV “a furious man”).

[29:22]  ²⁶ tn Heb “an abundance of transgression.” The phrase means “abounding in transgression” (BDB 913 s.v. רַב 1.d]). Not only does the angry person stir up dissension, but he also frequently causes sin in himself and in others (e.g., 14:17, 29; 15:18; 16:32; 22:24).

[2:16]  ²⁷ sn See the note on King Herod in 2:1. Note the fulfillment of the prophecy given by the angel in 2:13.

[2:16]  ²⁸ tn Or “soldiers.”

[2:16]  ²⁹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

[5:22]  ³⁰ tc The majority of mss read the word εἰκῇ (eikh, “without cause”) here after “brother.” This insertion has support from א² D L W Θ 0233 Ë^1,13 33 Ï it sy co Ir^lat Or^mss Cyp Cyr. Thus the Western, Caesarean, and Byzantine texttypes all include the word, while the best Alexandrian and some other witnesses (Ì⁶⁴ א* B 1424^mg pc aur vg Or Hier^mss) lack it. The ms evidence favors its exclusion, though there is a remote possibility that εἰκῇ could have been accidentally omitted from these witnesses by way of homoioarcton (the next word, ἔνοχος [enocos, “guilty”], begins with the same letter). An intentional change would likely arise from the desire to qualify “angry,” especially in light of the absolute tone of Jesus’ words. While “without cause” makes good practical sense in this context, and must surely be a true interpretation of Jesus’ meaning (cf. Mark 3:5), it does not commend itself as original.

[5:22]  ³¹ tn Grk “whoever says to his brother ‘Raca,’” an Aramaic word of contempt or abuse meaning “fool” or “empty head.”

[5:22]  ³² tn Grk “subjected,” “guilty,” “liable.”

[5:22]  ³³ tn Grk “the Sanhedrin.”

[5:22]  ³⁴ tn The meaning of the term μωρός (mwros) is somewhat disputed. Most take it to mean, following the Syriac versions, “you fool,” although some have argued that it represents a transliteration into Greek of the Hebrew term מוֹרֵה (moreh) “rebel” (Deut 21:18, 20; cf. BDAG 663 s.v. μωρός c).

[5:22]  ³⁵ tn Grk “subjected,” “guilty,” “liable.”

[5:22]  ³⁶ tn Grk “the Gehenna of fire.”

[5:22]  sn The word translated hell is “Gehenna” (γέεννα, geenna), a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew words ge hinnom (“Valley of Hinnom”). This was the valley along the south side of Jerusalem. In OT times it was used for human sacrifices to the pagan god Molech (cf. Jer 7:31; 19:5-6; 32:35), and it came to be used as a place where human excrement and rubbish were disposed of and burned. In the intertestamental period, it came to be used symbolically as the place of divine punishment (cf. 1 En. 27:2, 90:26; 4 Ezra 7:36).