Matius 11:18-19

11:18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon!’ ¹  11:19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him, ²  a glutton and a drunk, a friend of tax collectors ³  and sinners!’ ⁴  But wisdom is vindicated ⁵  by her deeds.” ⁶ 

Matius 12:24

12:24 But when the Pharisees ⁷  heard this they said, “He does not cast out demons except by the power of Beelzebul, ⁸  the ruler ⁹  of demons!”

Matius 12:1

Lord of the Sabbath

12:1 At that time Jesus went through the grain fields on a Sabbath. His ¹⁰  disciples were hungry, and they began to pick heads of wheat ¹¹  and eat them.

1 Samuel 20:30

20:30 Saul became angry with Jonathan ¹²  and said to him, “You stupid traitor! ¹³  Don’t I realize that to your own disgrace and to the disgrace of your mother’s nakedness you have chosen this son of Jesse?

1 Samuel 20:2

20:2 Jonathan ¹⁴  said to him, “By no means are you going to die! My father does nothing ¹⁵  large or small without making me aware of it. ¹⁶  Why would my father hide this matter from me? It just won’t happen!”

1 Samuel 16:7

16:7 But the Lord said to Samuel, “Don’t be impressed by ¹⁷  his appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. God does not view things the way men do. ¹⁸  People look on the outward appearance, ¹⁹  but the Lord looks at the heart.”

Yohanes 7:20

7:20 The crowd ²⁰  answered, “You’re possessed by a demon! ²¹  Who is trying to kill you?” ²² 

Yohanes 8:48

8:48 The Judeans ²³  replied, ²⁴  “Aren’t we correct in saying ²⁵  that you are a Samaritan and are possessed by a demon?” ²⁶ 

Kisah Para Rasul 17:18

17:18 Also some of the Epicurean ²⁷  and Stoic ²⁸  philosophers were conversing ²⁹  with him, and some were asking, ³⁰  “What does this foolish babbler ³¹  want to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign gods.” ³²  (They said this because he was proclaiming the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.) ³³ 

Kisah Para Rasul 17:1

Paul and Silas at Thessalonica

17:1 After they traveled through ³⁴  Amphipolis ³⁵  and Apollonia, ³⁶  they came to Thessalonica, ³⁷  where there was a Jewish synagogue. ³⁸ 

Kolose 1:10

1:10 so that you may live ³⁹  worthily of the Lord and please him in all respects ⁴⁰  – bearing fruit in every good deed, growing in the knowledge of God,

Efesus 4:31-32

4:31 You must put away every kind of bitterness, anger, wrath, quarreling, and evil, slanderous talk. 4:32 Instead, ⁴¹  be kind to one another, compassionate, forgiving one another, just as God in Christ also forgave you. ⁴² 

Titus 3:2

3:2 They must not slander ⁴³  anyone, but be peaceable, gentle, showing complete courtesy to all people.

Titus 3:1

Conduct Toward Those Outside the Church

3:1 Remind them to be subject to rulers and ⁴⁴  authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work.

Pengkhotbah 2:23

2:23 For all day long ⁴⁵  his work produces pain and frustration, ⁴⁶ 

and even at night his mind cannot relax! ⁴⁷ 

This also is futile!

Pengkhotbah 3:9

Man is Ignorant of God’s Timing

3:9 What benefit can a worker ⁴⁸  gain from his toil? ⁴⁹ 

Yudas 1:9

1:9 But even ⁵⁰  when Michael the archangel ⁵¹  was arguing with the devil and debating with him ⁵²  concerning Moses’ body, he did not dare to bring a slanderous judgment, but said, “May the Lord rebuke you!”

[11:18]  ¹ sn John the Baptist was too separatist and ascetic for some, and so he was accused of not being directed by God, but by a demon.

[11:19]  ² tn Grk “Behold a man.”

[11:19]  ³ sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.

[11:19]  ⁴ sn Neither were they happy with Jesus (the Son of Man), even though he was the opposite of John and associated freely with people like tax collectors and sinners. Either way, God’s messengers were subject to complaint.

[11:19]  ⁵ tn Or “shown to be right.”

[11:19]  ⁶ tc Most witnesses (B² C D L Θ Ë¹ 33 Ï lat) have “children” (τέκνων, teknwn) here instead of “deeds” (ἔργων, ergwn), but since “children” is the reading of the parallel in Luke 7:35, scribes would be motivated to convert the less colorful “deeds” into more animate offspring of wisdom. Further, ἔργων enjoys support from א B* W (˹³) as well as early versional and patristic support.

[12:24]  ⁷ sn See the note on Pharisees in 3:7.

[12:24]  ⁸ tn Grk “except by Beelzebul.”

[12:24]  sn Beelzebul is another name for Satan. So some people recognized Jesus’ work as supernatural, but called it diabolical.

[12:24]  ⁹ tn Or “prince.”

[12:1]  ¹⁰ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[12:1]  ¹¹ tn Or “heads of grain.” While the generic term στάχυς (stacus) can refer to the cluster of seeds at the top of grain such as barley or wheat, in the NT the term is restricted to wheat (L&N 3.40; BDAG 941 s.v. 1).

[20:30]  ¹² tc Many medieval Hebrew mss include the words “his son” here.

[20:30]  ¹³ tn Heb “son of a perverse woman of rebelliousness.” But such an overly literal and domesticated translation of the Hebrew expression fails to capture the force of Saul’s unrestrained reaction. Saul, now incensed and enraged over Jonathan’s liaison with David, is actually hurling very coarse and emotionally charged words at his son. The translation of this phrase suggested by Koehler and Baumgartner is “bastard of a wayward woman” (HALOT 796 s.v. עוה), but this is not an expression commonly used in English. A better English approximation of the sentiments expressed here by the Hebrew phrase would be “You stupid son of a bitch!” However, sensitivity to the various public formats in which the Bible is read aloud has led to a less startling English rendering which focuses on the semantic value of Saul’s utterance (i.e., the behavior of his own son Jonathan, which he viewed as both a personal and a political betrayal [= “traitor”]). But this concession should not obscure the fact that Saul is full of bitterness and frustration. That he would address his son Jonathan with such language, not to mention his apparent readiness even to kill his own son over this friendship with David (v. 33), indicates something of the extreme depth of Saul’s jealousy and hatred of David.

[20:2]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “he”; the referent (Jonathan) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[20:2]  ¹⁵ tc The translation follows the Qere, many medieval Hebrew mss, and the ancient versions in reading “he will not do,” rather than the Kethib of the MT (“do to him”).

[20:2]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “without uncovering my ear.”

[16:7]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “don’t look toward.”

[16:7]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “for not that which the man sees.” The translation follows the LXX, which reads, “for not as man sees does God see.” The MT has suffered from homoioteleuton or homoioarcton. See P. K. McCarter, I Samuel (AB), 274.

[16:7]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “to the eyes.”

[7:20]  ²⁰ tn Or “The common people” (as opposed to the religious authorities mentioned in 7:15).

[7:20]  ²¹ tn Grk “You have a demon!”

[7:20]  ²² tn Grk “Who is seeking to kill you?”

[7:20]  sn Who is trying to kill you? Many of the crowd (if they had come in from surrounding regions for the feast) probably were ignorant of any plot. The plot was on the part of the Jewish leaders. Note how carefully John distinguishes between the leadership and the general populace in their respective responses to Jesus.

[8:48]  ²³ tn Grk “the Jews.” See the note on this term in v. 31. Here the phrase refers to the Jewish people in Jerusalem (“Judeans”; cf. BDAG 479 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαῖος 2.e) who had been listening to Jesus’ teaching in the temple courts (8:20) and had initially believed his claim to be the Messiah (cf. 8:31). They had become increasingly hostile as Jesus continued to teach. Now they were ready to say that Jesus was demon-possessed.

[8:48]  ²⁴ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[8:48]  ²⁵ tn Grk “Do we not say rightly.”

[8:48]  ²⁶ tn Grk “and have a demon.” It is not clear what is meant by the charge Σαμαρίτης εἶ σὺ καὶ δαιμόνιον ἔχεις (Samarith" ei su kai daimonion ecei"). The meaning could be “you are a heretic and are possessed by a demon.” Note that the dual charge gets one reply (John 8:49). Perhaps the phrases were interchangeable: Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24) and in later traditions Dositheus, the two Samaritans who claimed to be sons of God, were regarded as mad, that is, possessed by demons.

[17:18]  ²⁷ sn An Epicurean was a follower of the philosophy of Epicurus, who founded a school in Athens about 300 b.c. Although the Epicureans saw the aim of life as pleasure, they were not strictly hedonists, because they defined pleasure as the absence of pain. Along with this, they desired the avoidance of trouble and freedom from annoyances. They saw organized religion as evil, especially the belief that the gods punished evildoers in an afterlife. In keeping with this, they were unable to accept Paul’s teaching about the resurrection.

[17:18]  ²⁸ sn A Stoic was a follower of the philosophy founded by Zeno (342-270 b.c.), a Phoenician who came to Athens and modified the philosophical system of the Cynics he found there. The Stoics rejected the Epicurean ideal of pleasure, stressing virtue instead. The Stoics emphasized responsibility for voluntary actions and believed risks were worth taking, but thought the actual attainment of virtue was difficult. They also believed in providence.

[17:18]  ²⁹ tn BDAG 956 s.v. συμβάλλω 1 has “converse, confer” here.

[17:18]  ³⁰ tn Grk “saying.”

[17:18]  ³¹ tn Or “ignorant show-off.” The traditional English translation of σπερμολόγος (spermologo") is given in L&N 33.381 as “foolish babbler.” However, an alternate view is presented in L&N 27.19, “(a figurative extension of meaning of a term based on the practice of birds in picking up seeds) one who acquires bits and pieces of relatively extraneous information and proceeds to pass them off with pretense and show – ‘ignorant show-off, charlatan.’” A similar view is given in BDAG 937 s.v. σπερμολόγος: “in pejorative imagery of persons whose communication lacks sophistication and seems to pick up scraps of information here and there scrapmonger, scavenger…Engl. synonyms include ‘gossip’, ‘babbler’, chatterer’; but these terms miss the imagery of unsystematic gathering.”

[17:18]  ³² tn The meaning of this phrase is not clear. Literally it reads “strange deities” (see BDAG 210 s.v. δαιμόνιον 1). The note of not being customary is important. In the ancient world what was new was suspicious. The plural δαιμονίων (daimoniwn, “deities”) shows the audience grappling with Paul’s teaching that God was working through Jesus.

[17:18]  ³³ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[17:1]  ³⁴ tn BDAG 250 s.v. διοδεύω 1 has “go, travel through” for this verse.

[17:1]  ³⁵ sn Amphipolis. The capital city of the southeastern district of Macedonia (BDAG 55 s.v. ᾿Αμφίπολις). It was a military post. From Philippi this was about 33 mi (53 km).

[17:1]  ³⁶ sn Apollonia was a city in Macedonia about 27 mi (43 km) west southwest of Amphipolis.

[17:1]  ³⁷ sn Thessalonica (modern Salonica) was a city in Macedonia about 33 mi (53 km) west of Apollonia. It was the capital of Macedonia. The road they traveled over was called the Via Egnatia. It is likely they rode horses, given their condition in Philippi. The implication of v. 1 is that the two previously mentioned cities lacked a synagogue.

[17:1]  map For location see JP1 C1; JP2 C1; JP3 C1; JP4 C1.

[17:1]  ³⁸ sn See the note on synagogue in 6:9.

[1:10]  ³⁹ tn The infinitive περιπατῆσαι (peripathsai, “to walk, to live, to live one’s life”) is best taken as an infinitive of purpose related to “praying” (προσευχόμενοι, proseucomenoi) and “asking” (αἰτούμενοι, aitoumenoi) in v. 9 and is thus translated as “that you may live.”

[1:10]  ⁴⁰ tn BDAG 129 s.v. ἀρεσκεία states that ἀρεσκείαν (areskeian) refers to a “desire to please εἰς πᾶσαν ἀ. to please (the Lord) in all respects Col 1:10.”

[4:32]  ⁴¹ tc ‡ Although most witnesses have either δέ (de; Ì⁴⁹ א A D² Ψ 33 1739^mg Ï lat) or οὖν (oun; D* F G 1175) here, a few important mss lack a conjunction (Ì⁴⁶ B 0278 6 1739* 1881). If either conjunction were originally in the text, it is difficult to explain how the asyndetic construction could have arisen (although the dropping of δέ could have occurred via homoioteleuton). Further, although Hellenistic Greek rarely joined sentences without a conjunction, such does occur in the corpus Paulinum on occasion, especially to underscore a somber point. “Instead” has been supplied in the translation because of stylistic requirements, not textual basis. NA²⁷ places δέ in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

[4:32]  ⁴² tn Or “forgiving.”

[3:2]  ⁴³ tn Or “discredit,” “damage the reputation of.”

[3:1]  ⁴⁴ tc Most later witnesses (D² 0278 Ï lat sy) have καί (kai, “and”) after ἀρχαῖς (arcai", “rulers”), though the earliest and best witnesses (א A C D* F G Ψ 33 104 1739 1881) lack the conjunction. Although the καί is most likely not authentic, it has been added in translation due to the requirements of English style. For more discussion, see TCGNT 586.

[2:23]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “all his days.”

[2:23]  ⁴⁶ 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!

[2:23]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “his heart (i.e., mind) does not rest.”

[3:9]  ⁴⁸ tn The term הָעוֹשֶׂה (ha’oseh, article + Qal active participle ms from עָשַׂה, ’asah, “to do”) functions substantively (“the worker”); see BDB 794 s.v. עָשַׂה II.1. This is a figurative description of man (metonymy of association), and plays on the repetition of עָשַׂה (verb: “to do,” noun: “work”) throughout the passage. In the light of God’s orchestration of human affairs, man’s efforts cannot change anything. It refers to man in general with the article functioning in a generic sense (see IBHS 244-45 §13.5.1f; Joüon 2:511 §137.m).

[3:9]  ⁴⁹ sn This rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “Man gains nothing from his toil!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51). Any advantage that man might gain from his toil is nullified by his ignorance of divine providence.

[1:9]  ⁵⁰ tn The word “even” is not in Greek; it is implied by the height of the contrast.

[1:9]  ⁵¹ sn According to Jewish intertestamental literature (such as 1 En. 20), Michael was one of seven archangels.

[1:9]  ⁵² tn The sentence structure is a bit different in Greek. Literally it reads: “But Michael the archangel, when arguing with the devil and disputing.”