Keluaran 32:21-22

32:21 Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you, that you have brought on them so great a sin?” 32:22 Aaron said, “Do not let your anger burn hot, my lord; ¹  you know these people, that they tend to evil. ² 

Bilangan 20:12

The Lord’s Judgment

20:12 Then the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, “Because you did not trust me enough ³  to show me as holy ⁴  before ⁵  the Israelites, therefore you will not bring this community into the land I have given them.” ⁶ 

Yeremia 1:17

1:17 “But you, Jeremiah, ⁷  get yourself ready! ⁸  Go and tell these people everything I instruct you to say. Do not be terrified of them, or I will give you good reason to be terrified of them. ⁹ 

Yunus 1:3

1:3 Instead, Jonah immediately ¹⁰  headed off to Tarshish ¹¹  to escape ¹²  from the commission of the Lord. ¹³  He traveled ¹⁴  to Joppa ¹⁵  and found a merchant ship heading ¹⁶  to Tarshish. ¹⁷  So he paid the fare ¹⁸  and went aboard ¹⁹  it to go with them ²⁰  to Tarshish ²¹  far away from the Lord. ²² 

Yunus 4:3-4

4:3 So now, Lord, kill me instead, ²³  because I would rather die than live!” ²⁴  4:4 The Lord said, “Are you really so very ²⁵  angry?” ²⁶ 

Yunus 4:9

4:9 God said to Jonah, “Are you really so very angry ²⁷  about the little plant?” And he said, “I am as angry ²⁸  as I could possibly be!” ²⁹ 

Matius 16:17-18

16:17 And Jesus answered him, ³⁰  “You are blessed, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood ³¹  did not reveal this to you, but my Father in heaven! 16:18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades ³²  will not overpower it.

Matius 16:23

16:23 But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but on man’s.” ³³ 

Kisah Para Rasul 15:37-39

15:37 Barnabas wanted to bring John called Mark along with them too, 15:38 but Paul insisted ³⁴  that they should not take along this one who had left them in Pamphylia ³⁵  and had not accompanied them in the work. 15:39 They had ³⁶  a sharp disagreement, ³⁷  so that they parted company. Barnabas took along ³⁸  Mark and sailed away to Cyprus, ³⁹ 

Kisah Para Rasul 23:1-5

23:1 Paul looked directly ⁴⁰  at the council ⁴¹  and said, “Brothers, I have lived my life with a clear conscience ⁴²  before God to this day.” 23:2 At that ⁴³  the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near ⁴⁴  Paul ⁴⁵  to strike ⁴⁶  him on the mouth. 23:3 Then Paul said to him, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! ⁴⁷  Do ⁴⁸  you sit there judging me according to the law, ⁴⁹  and in violation of the law ⁵⁰  you order me to be struck?” 23:4 Those standing near him ⁵¹  said, “Do you dare insult ⁵²  God’s high priest?” 23:5 Paul replied, ⁵³  “I did not realize, ⁵⁴  brothers, that he was the high priest, for it is written, ‘You must not speak evil about a ruler of your people.’” ⁵⁵ 

Yakobus 3:2

3:2 For we all stumble ⁵⁶  in many ways. If someone does not stumble ⁵⁷  in what he says, ⁵⁸  he is a perfect individual, ⁵⁹  able to control the entire body as well.

Yakobus 3:1

The Power of the Tongue

3:1 Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sisters, ⁶⁰  because you know that we will be judged more strictly. ⁶¹ 

Yohanes 1:8-10

1:8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify ⁶²  about the light. 1:9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, ⁶³  was coming into the world. ⁶⁴  1:10 He was in the world, and the world was created ⁶⁵  by him, but ⁶⁶  the world did not recognize ⁶⁷  him.

[32:22]  ¹ sn “My lord” refers to Moses.

[32:22]  ² tn Heb “that on evil it is.”

[20:12]  ³ tn Or “to sanctify me.”

[20:12]  sn The verb is the main word for “believe, trust.” It is the verb that describes the faith in the Word of the Lord that leads to an appropriate action. Here God says that Moses did not believe him, meaning that what he did showed more of Moses than of what God said. Moses had taken a hostile stance toward the people, and then hit the rock twice. This showed that Moses was not satisfied with what God said, but made it more forceful and terrifying, thus giving the wrong picture of God to the people. By doing this the full power and might of the Lord was not displayed to the people. It was a momentary lack of faith, but it had to be dealt with.

[20:12]  ⁴ sn Using the basic meaning of the word קָדַשׁ (qadash, “to be separate, distinct, set apart”), we can understand better what Moses failed to do. He was supposed to have acted in a way that would have shown God to be distinct, different, holy. Instead, he gave the impression that God was capricious and hostile – very human. The leader has to be aware of what image he is conveying to the people.

[20:12]  ⁵ tn Heb “in the eyes of.”

[20:12]  ⁶ tn There is debate as to exactly what the sin of Moses was. Some interpreters think that the real sin might have been that he refused to do this at first, but that fact has been suppressed from the text. Some think the text was deliberately vague to explain why they could not enter the land without demeaning them. Others simply, and more likely, note that in Moses there was unbelief, pride, anger, impatience – disobedience.

[1:17]  ⁷ tn The name “Jeremiah” is not in the text. The use of the personal pronoun followed by the proper name is an attempt to reflect the correlative emphasis between Jeremiah’s responsibility noted here and the Lord’s promise noted in the next verse. The emphasis in the Hebrew text is marked by the presence of the subject pronouns at the beginning of each of the two verses.

[1:17]  ⁸ tn Heb “gird up your loins.” For the literal use of this idiom to refer to preparation for action see 2 Kgs 4:29; 9:1. For the idiomatic use to refer to spiritual and emotional preparation as here, see Job 38:3, 40:7, and 1 Pet 1:13 in the NT.

[1:17]  ⁹ tn Heb “I will make you terrified in front of them.” There is a play on words here involving two different forms of the same Hebrew verb and two different but related prepositional phrases, “from before/of,” a preposition introducing the object of a verb of fearing, and “before, in front of,” a preposition introducing a spatial location.

[1:3]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “he arose to flee.” The phrase וַיָּקָם לִבְרֹחַ (vayyaqam livroakh, “he arose to flee”) is a wordplay on the Lord’s command (קוּם לֵךְ, qum lekh; “Arise! Go!”) in v. 2. By repeating the first verb קוּם the narrator sets up the reader to expect that Jonah was intending to obey God. But Jonah did not “arise to go” to Nineveh; he “arose to flee” to Tarshish. Jonah looks as though he was about to obey, but he does not. This unexpected turn of events creates strong irony. The narrator does not reveal Jonah’s motivation to the reader at this point. He delays this revelation for rhetorical effect until 4:2-3.

[1:3]  ¹¹ tn The place-name תַּרְשִׁישׁ (tarshish, “Tarshish”) refers to a distant port city or region (Isa 23:6; Jer 10:9; Ezek 27:12; 38:13; 2 Chr 9:21; 20:36, 37) located on the coastlands in the Mediterranean west of Palestine (Ps 72:10; Isa 23:6, 10; 66:19; Jonah 1:3; see BDB 1076 s.v. תַּרְשִׁישׁ; HALOT 1798 s.v. תַּרְשִׁישׁ E.a). Scholars have not established its actual location (HALOT 1797 s.v. B). It has been variously identified with Tartessos in southwest Spain (Herodotus, Histories 1.163; 4.152; cf. Gen 10:4), Carthage (LXX of Isa 23:1, 14 and Ezek 27:25), and Sardinia (F. M. Cross, “An Interpretation of the Nora Stone,” BASOR 208 [1972]: 13-19). The ancient versions handle it variously. The LXX identifies תַּרְשִׁישׁ with Carthage/Καρχηδών (karchdwn; Isa 23:1, 6, 10, 14; Ezek 27:12; 38:13). The place name תַּרְשִׁישׁ is rendered “Africa” in the Targums in some passages (Tg. 1 Kgs 10:22; 22:49; Tg. Jer 10:9) and elsewhere as “sea” (Isa 2:16; 23:1, 14; 50:9; 66:19; Ezek 27:12, 25; 38:13; Jonah 4:2). The Jewish Midrash Canticles Rabbah 5:14.2 cites Jonah 1:3 as support for the view that Tarshish = “the Great Sea” (the Mediterranean). It is possible that תַּרְשִׁישׁ does not refer to one specific port but is a general term for the distant Mediterranean coastlands (Ps 72:10; Isa 23:6, 10; 66:19). In some cases it seems to mean simply “the open sea”: (1) the Tg. Jonah 1:3 translates תַּרְשִׁישׁ as “[he arose to flee] to the sea”; (2) Jerome’s commentary on Isa 2:16 states that Hebrew scholars in his age defined תַּרְשִׁישׁ as “sea”; and (3) the gem called II תַּרְשִׁישׁ, “topaz” (BDB 1076 s.v.; HALOT 1798 s.v.) in Exod 28:20 and 39:13 is rendered “the color of the sea” in Tg. Onq. (see D. Stuart, Hosea-Jonah [WBC], 451). The designation אֳנִיּוֹת תַּרְשִׁישׁ (’oniyyot tarshish, “Tarshish-ships”) referred to large oceangoing vessels equipped for the high seas (2 Chr 9:21; Ps 48:8; Isa 2:16; 23:1, 14; 60:9; Ezek 27:25) or large merchant ships designed for international trade (1 Kgs 10:22; 22:49; 2 Chr 9:21; 20:36; Isa 23:10; HALOT 1798 s.v. E.b). The term תַּרְשִׁישׁ is derived from the Iberian tart[uli] with the Anatolian suffix –issos/essos, resulting in Tartessos (BRL2 332a); however, the etymological meaning of תַּרְשִׁישׁ is uncertain (see W. F. Albright, “New Light on the Early History of Phoenician Colonization,” BASOR 83 [1941]: 21-22 and note 29; HALOT 1797 s.v. I תַּרְשִׁישׁ A). The name תַּרְשִׁישׁ appears in sources outside the Hebrew Bible in Neo-Assyrian ^KURTar-si-si (R. Borger, Die Inschriften Asarhaddons [AfO], 86, §57 line 10) and Greek Ταρτησσος (tarthssos; HALOT 1797 s.v. C). Most English versions render תַּרְשִׁישׁ as “Tarshish” (KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NIV, NEB, NJB, JPS, NJPS), but TEV, CEV render it more generally as “to Spain.” NLT emphasizes the rhetorical point: “in the opposite direction,” though “Tarshish” is mentioned later in the verse.

[1:3]  ¹² tn Heb “Jonah arose to flee to Tarshish away from the Lord.”

[1:3]  ¹³ tn Heb “away from the presence of the Lord.” The term מִלִּפְנֵי (millifne, “away from the presence of”) is composed of the preposition לְפָנָי (lÿfanay, “in front of, before the presence of”) and מִן (min, “away from”). The term מִלִּפְנֵי is used with בָּרַח (barakh, “to flee”) only here in biblical Hebrew so it is difficult to determine its exact meaning (HALOT 942 s.v. פָּנֶה 4.h.ii; see E. Jenni, “‘Fliehen’ im akkadischen und im hebräischen Sprachgebrauch,” Or 47 [1978]: 357). The most likely options are: (1) Jonah simply fled from the Lord’s presence manifested in the temple (for mention of the temple elsewhere in Jonah, see 2:5,8). This is reflected in Jerome’s rendering fugeret in Tharsis a facie Domini (“he fled to Tarshish away from the face/presence of the Lord”). The term מִלִּפְנֵי is used in this sense with יָצָא (yatsa’, “to go out”) to depict someone or something physically leaving the manifested presence of the Lord (Lev 9:24; Num 17:11, 24; cf. Gen 4:16). This is reflected in several English versions: “from the presence of the Lord” (KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, ASV, NASB) and “out of the reach of the Lord” (REB). (2) Jonah was fleeing to a distant place outside the land of Israel (D. Stuart, Hosea-Jonah [WBC], 450). The term לְפָנָי is used in various constructions with מִן to describe locations outside the land of Israel where Yahweh was not worshiped (1 Sam 26:19-20; 2 Kgs 13:23; 17:20, 23; Jer 23:39). This would be the equivalent of a self-imposed exile. (3) The term מִלִּפְנֵי can mean “out of sight” (Gen 23:4,8), so perhaps Jonah was trying to escape from the Lord’s active awareness – out of the Lord’s sight. The idea would either be an anthropomorphism (standing for a distance out of the sight of God) or it would reflect an inadequate theology of the limited omniscience and presence of God. This is reflected in some English versions: “ran away from the Lord” (NIV), “running away from Yahweh” (NJB), “to get away from the Lord” (NLT), “to escape from the Lord” (NEB) and “to escape” (CEV). (4) The term לְפָנָי can mean “in front of someone in power” (Gen 43:33; HALOT 942 s.v. c.i) and “at the disposal of” a king (Gen 13:9; 24:51; 34:10; 2 Chr 14:6; Jer 40:4; HALOT 942 s.v. 4.f). The expression would be a metonymy: Jonah was trying to escape from his commission (effect) ordered by God (cause). This is reflected in several English versions: “to flee from the Lord’s service” (JPS, NJPS). Jonah confesses in 4:2-3 that he fled to avoid carrying out his commission – lest God relent from judging Nineveh if its populace might repent. But it is also clear in chs. 1-2 that Jonah could not escape from the Lord himself.

[1:3]  sn Three times in chap. 1 (in vv. 3 and 10) Jonah’s voyage is described as an attempt to escape away from the Lord – from the Lord’s presence (and therefore his active awareness; compare v. 2). On one level, Jonah was attempting to avoid a disagreeable task, but the narrator’s description personalizes Jonah’s rejection of the task. Jonah’s issue is with the Lord himself, not just his commission. The narrator’s description is also highly ironic, as the rest of the book shows. Jonah tries to sail to Tarshish, in the opposite direction from Nineveh, as if by doing that he could escape from the Lord, when the Lord is the one who knows all about Nineveh’s wickedness and is involved in all that happens to Jonah throughout the book. Compare Jonah’s explanation when talking with the Lord (see 4:2).

[1:3]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “he went down.” The verb יָרַד (yarad, “to go down”) can refer to a journey that is physically downhill. This suggests that Jonah had started out from Jerusalem, which is at a higher elevation. He probably received his commission in the temple (see 2:4, 7 for mention of the temple).

[1:3]  sn The verb יָרַד (yarad, “to go down”) is repeated four times in chs. 1-2 for rhetorical effect (1:3a, 3b, 5; 2:7). Jonah’s “downward” journey from Jerusalem down to Joppa (1:3a) down into the ship (1:3b) down into the cargo hold (1:5) and ultimately down into the bottom of the sea, pictured as down to the very gates of the netherworld (2:7), does not end until he turns back to God who brings him “up” from the brink of death (2:6-7).

[1:3]  ¹⁵ sn Joppa was a small harbor town on the Palestinian coast known as Yepu in the Amarna Letters (14^th century b.c.) and Yapu in Neo-Assyrian inscriptions (9th-8th centuries b.c.). It was a port through which imported goods could flow into the Levant (Josh 19:46; 2 Chr 2:15 [16]; Ezra 3:7). It was never annexed by Israel until the Maccabean period (ca. 148 b.c.; 1 Macc 10:76). Jonah chose a port where the people he would meet and the ships he could take were not likely to be Israelite. Once in Joppa he was already partly “away from the Lord” as he conceived it.

[1:3]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “going to” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV); NIV “bound for”; NLT “leaving for.”

[1:3]  ¹⁷ tn See note on the phrase “to Tarshish” at the beginning of the verse.

[1:3]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “its fare.” The 3rd person feminine singular suffix on the noun probably functions as a genitive of worth or value: “the fare due it.” However, it is translated here simply as “the fare” for the sake of readability. On the other hand “bought a ticket” (CEV, NLT) is somewhat overtranslated, since the expression “paid the fare” is still understandable to most English readers.

[1:3]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “he went down into it.” The verb יָרַד (yarad, “to go down”) is repeated for rhetorical effect in v. 3a, 3b, 5. See note on the word “traveled” in v. 3a.

[1:3]  ²⁰ tn “Them” refers to the other passengers and sailors in the ship.

[1:3]  ²¹ tn See note on the phrase “to Tarshish” at the beginning of the verse.

[1:3]  ²² tn Heb “away from the presence of the Lord.” See note on the phrase “from the commission of the Lord” in v. 3a.

[4:3]  ²³ tn Heb “take my life from me.”

[4:3]  ²⁴ tn Heb “better my death than my life.”

[4:4]  ²⁵ tn Heb “Rightly does it burn to you?” Note this question occurs again in v. 9, there concerning the withered plant. “Does it so thoroughly burn to you?” or “Does it rightly burn to you?” or “Does it burn so thoroughly to you?” The Hiphil of יָטַב (yatav, “to do good”) here may have one of two meanings: (1) It may mean “to do [something] rightly” in terms of ethical right and wrong (BDB 406 s.v. יָטַב 5.b; HALOT 408 s.v. יטב 3.c; e.g., Gen 4:7; Lev 5:4; Pss 36:4; 119:68; Isa 1:17; Jer 4:22; 13:23). This approach is adopted by many English versions: “Do you have any right to be angry?” (NIV); “Are you right to be angry?” (REB, NJB); “Is it right for you to be angry?” (NRSV, NLT); “Do you have good reason to be angry?” (NASB); “Do you do well to be angry?” (cf. KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV); “What right do you have to be angry?” (cf. TEV, CEV). (2) It may be used as an adverb meaning “well, utterly, thoroughly” (BDB 405 s.v. 3; HALOT 408 s.v. 5; e.g., Deut 9:21; 13:15; 17:4; 19:18; 27:8; 1 Sam 16:17; 2 Kgs 11:18; Prov 15:2; Isa 23:16; Jer 1:12; Ezek 33:32; Mic 7:3). This view is adopted by other English versions: “Are you that deeply grieved?” (JPS, NJPS); “Are you so angry?” (NEB). This is also the approach of the Tg. Jonah 4:4: “Are you that greatly angered?” Whether or not Jonah had the right to be angry about the death of the plant is a trivial issue. Instead the dialogue focuses on the depth of Jonah’s anger: he would rather be dead than alive (vv. 3, 8) and he concludes by saying that he was as angry as he could possibly be (v. 9; see note on עַד־מָוֶת [’ad-mavet, “to death”] in v. 9). the Lord then uses an a fortiori argument (from lesser to greater): Jonah was very upset that the plant had died (v. 10), likewise God was very concerned about averting the destruction of Nineveh (v. 11).

[4:4]  sn The use of the term יָטַב (yatab, “rightly, good”) creates a wordplay with its antonym רָעָה (ra’ah, “evil, wrong”) which is used in 4:1 of Jonah’s bad attitude.

[4:4]  ²⁶ tn Heb “Does it burn to you?” The verb חָרָה (kharah, “to burn”) functions figuratively here (hypocatastasis) to refer to strong anger (BDB 354 s.v. חָרָה). The verb is repeated from v. 1 and will be used again in v. 9.

[4:9]  ²⁷ tn Heb “Does it burn so thoroughly to you?” or “Does it burn rightly to you?” See note on this expression in v. 4.

[4:9]  ²⁸ tn Heb “It thoroughly burns to me” or “It rightly burns to me.”

[4:9]  ²⁹ tn Heb “unto death.” The phrase עַד־מָוֶת (’ad-mavet, “unto death”) is an idiomatic expression meaning “to the extreme” or simply “extremely [angry]” (HALOT 563 s.v. מָוֶת 1.c). The noun מָוֶת (“death”) is often used as an absolute superlative with a negative sense, similar to the English expression “bored to death” (IBHS 267-69 §14.5). For example, “his soul was vexed to death” (לָמוּת, lamut) means that he could no longer endure it (Judg 16:16), and “love is as strong as death” (כַמָּוֶת, kammavet) means love is irresistible or exceedingly strong (Song 8:6). Here the expression “I am angry unto death” (עַד־מָוֶת) means that Jonah could not be more angry. Unfortunately, this idiomatic expression has gone undetected by virtually every other major English version to date (KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NJB, JPS, NJPS). The only English version that comes close to representing the idiom correctly is BBE: “I have a right to be truly angry.”

[16:17]  ³⁰ tn Grk “answering, Jesus said to him.” The participle ἀποκριθείς (apokriqeis) is redundant, but the syntax of this phrase has been modified for clarity.

[16:17]  ³¹ tn The expression “flesh and blood” could refer to “any human being” (so TEV, NLT; cf. NIV “man”), but it could also refer to Peter himself (i.e., his own intuition; cf. CEV “You didn’t discover this on your own”). Because of the ambiguity of the referent, the phrase “flesh and blood” has been retained in the translation.

[16:18]  ³² tn Or “and the power of death” (taking the reference to the gates of Hades as a metonymy).

[16:18]  sn In the OT, Hades was known as Sheol. It is the place where the unrighteous will reside (Matt 11:23; Luke 16:23; Rev 20:13-14). Some translations render this by its modern equivalent, “hell”; others see it as a reference to the power of death.

[16:23]  ³³ tn Grk “people.”

[15:38]  ³⁴ tn BDAG 94 s.v. ἀξιόω 2.a has “he insisted (impf.) that they should not take him along” for this phrase.

[15:38]  ³⁵ sn Pamphylia was a province in the southern part of Asia Minor. See Acts 13:13, where it was mentioned previously.

[15:39]  ³⁶ tn Grk “There happened a sharp disagreement.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[15:39]  ³⁷ tn BDAG 780 s.v. παροξυσμός 2 has “sharp disagreement” here; L&N 33.451 has “sharp argument, sharp difference of opinion.”

[15:39]  ³⁸ tn Grk “taking along Mark sailed.” The participle παραλαβόντα (paralabonta) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[15:39]  ³⁹ sn Cyprus is a large island in the Mediterranean off the south coast of Asia Minor.

[23:1]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “Paul, looking directly at the council, said.” The participle ἀτενίσας (atenisa") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[23:1]  ⁴¹ tn Grk “the Sanhedrin” (the Sanhedrin was the highest legal, legislative, and judicial body among the Jews).

[23:1]  ⁴² tn BDAG 846 s.v. πολιτεύομαι 3 has “W. a double dat. συνειδήσει ἀγαθῇ πεπολίτευμαι τῷ θεῷ I have lived my life with a clear conscience before God Ac 23:1.”

[23:2]  ⁴³ tn Grk “and” (δέ, de); the phrase “at that” has been used in the translation to clarify the cause and effect relationship.

[23:2]  ⁴⁴ tn BDAG 778 s.v. παρίστημι/παριστάνω 2.b.α has “οἱ παρεστῶτες αὐτῷ those standing near him Ac 23:2.”

[23:2]  ⁴⁵ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Paul) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[23:2]  ⁴⁶ tn Or “hit” (‘strike’ maintains the wordplay with the following verse). The action was probably designed to indicate a rejection of Paul’s claim to a clear conscience in the previous verse.

[23:3]  ⁴⁷ sn You whitewashed wall. This was an idiom for hypocrisy – just as the wall was painted on the outside but something different on the inside, so this person was not what he appeared or pretended to be (L&N 88.234; see also BDAG 1010 s.v. τοῖχος). Paul was claiming that the man’s response was two-faced (Ezek 13:10-16; Matt 23:27-28). See also Deut 28:22.

[23:3]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “And do.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[23:3]  ⁴⁹ tn The law refers to the law of Moses.

[23:3]  ⁵⁰ tn BDAG 769 s.v. παρανομέω has “παρανομῶν κελεύεις in violation of the law you order Ac 23:3.”

[23:3]  sn In violation of the law. Paul was claiming that punishment was given before the examination was complete (m. Sanhedrin 3:6-8). Luke’s noting of this detail shows how quickly the leadership moved to react against Paul.

[23:4]  ⁵¹ tn The word “him” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[23:4]  ⁵² tn L&N 33.393 has for λοιδορέω (loidorew) “to speak in a highly insulting manner – ‘to slander, to insult strongly, slander, insult.’”

[23:4]  sn Insult God’s high priest. Paul was close to violation of the Mosaic law with his response, as the citation from Exod 22:28 in v. 5 makes clear.

[23:5]  ⁵³ tn Grk “said.”

[23:5]  ⁵⁴ tn Or “know.”

[23:5]  ⁵⁵ sn A quotation from Exod 22:28. This text defines a form of blasphemy. Paul, aware of the fact that he came close to crossing the line, backed off out of respect for the law.

[3:2]  ⁵⁶ tn Or “fail.”

[3:2]  ⁵⁷ tn Or “fail.”

[3:2]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “in speech.”

[3:2]  ⁵⁹ tn The word for “man” or “individual” is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” But it sometimes is used generically to mean “anyone,” “a person,” as here (cf. BDAG 79 s.v. 2).

[3:1]  ⁶⁰ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.

[3:1]  ⁶¹ tn Grk “will receive a greater judgment.”

[1:8]  ⁶² tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:9]  ⁶³ tn Grk “every man” (but in a generic sense, “every person,” or “every human being”).

[1:9]  ⁶⁴ tn Or “He was the true light, who gives light to everyone who comes into the world.” The participle ἐρχόμενον (ercomenon) may be either (1) neuter nominative, agreeing with τὸ φῶς (to fw"), or (2) masculine accusative, agreeing with ἄνθρωπον (anqrwpon). Option (1) results in a periphrastic imperfect with ἦν (hn), ἦν τὸ φῶς… ἐρχόμενον, referring to the incarnation. Option (2) would have the participle modifying ἄνθρωπον and referring to the true light as enlightening “every man who comes into the world.” Option (2) has some rabbinic parallels: The phrase “all who come into the world” is a fairly common expression for “every man” (cf. Leviticus Rabbah 31.6). But (1) must be preferred here, because: (a) In the next verse the light is in the world; it is logical for v. 9 to speak of its entering the world; (b) in other passages Jesus is described as “coming into the world” (6:14, 9:39, 11:27, 16:28) and in 12:46 Jesus says: ἐγὼ φῶς εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἐλήλυθα (egw fw" ei" ton kosmon elhluqa); (c) use of a periphrastic participle with the imperfect tense is typical Johannine style: 1:28, 2:6, 3:23, 10:40, 11:1, 13:23, 18:18 and 25. In every one of these except 13:23 the finite verb is first and separated by one or more intervening words from the participle.

[1:9]  sn In v. 9 the world (κόσμος, kosmos) is mentioned for the first time. This is another important theme word for John. Generally, the world as a Johannine concept does not refer to the totality of creation (the universe), although there are exceptions at 11:9. 17:5, 24, 21:25, but to the world of human beings and human affairs. Even in 1:10 the world created through the Logos is a world capable of knowing (or reprehensibly not knowing) its Creator. Sometimes the world is further qualified as this world (ὁ κόσμος οὗτος, Jo kosmos Joutos) as in 8:23, 9:39, 11:9, 12:25, 31; 13:1, 16:11, 18:36. This is not merely equivalent to the rabbinic phrase “this present age” (ὁ αἰών οὗτος, Jo aiwn Joutos) and contrasted with “the world to come.” For John it is also contrasted to a world other than this one, already existing; this is the lower world, corresponding to which there is a world above (see especially 8:23, 18:36). Jesus appears not only as the Messiah by means of whom an eschatological future is anticipated (as in the synoptic gospels) but also as an envoy from the heavenly world to this world.

[1:10]  ⁶⁵ tn Or “was made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:10]  ⁶⁶ tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”

[1:10]  ⁶⁷ tn Or “know.”