Font Size
◀ All Reading Plans / Book of Common Prayer / Ps. 1 2 3; Ps. 4 7; Gen. 2:4–9 (10–15) 16–25; Heb. 1:1–14; John 1:1–18 (New English Translation)
Log in to read this devotional and:
- Have reminders sent directly to your email
- Record your reading progress
- Pause your devotional at any time to read at your own pace
Book of Common Prayer
Daily Old and New Testament readings based on the Book of Common Prayer.
Duration: 861 days
New English Translation (NET)
Psalm 1-4
Book 1 (Psalms 1-41)
Psalm 1[a]
1 How blessed[b] is the one[c] who does not follow[d] the advice[e] of the wicked,[f]
or stand in the pathway[g] with sinners,
or sit in the assembly[h] of scoffers.[i]
2 Instead[j] he finds pleasure in obeying the Lord’s commands;[k]
he meditates on[l] his commands[m] day and night.
3 He is like[n] a tree planted by flowing streams;[o]
it[p] yields[q] its fruit at the proper time,[r]
and its leaves never fall off.[s]
He succeeds in everything he attempts.[t]
4 Not so with the wicked!
Instead[u] they are like wind-driven chaff.[v]
5 For this reason[w] the wicked cannot withstand[x] judgment,[y]
nor can sinners join the assembly of the godly.[z]
6 Certainly[aa] the Lord guards the way of the godly,[ab]
but the way of the wicked ends in destruction.[ac]
Psalm 2[ad]
2 Why[ae] do the nations rebel?[af]
Why[ag] are the countries[ah] devising[ai] plots that will fail?[aj]
2 The kings of the earth[ak] form a united front;[al]
the rulers collaborate[am]
against the Lord and his anointed king.[an]
3 They say,[ao] “Let’s tear off the shackles they’ve put on us.[ap]
Let’s free ourselves from[aq] their ropes.”
4 The one enthroned[ar] in heaven laughs in disgust;[as]
the Lord taunts[at] them.
5 Then he angrily speaks to them
and terrifies them in his rage,[au] saying,[av]
6 “I myself[aw] have installed[ax] my king
on Zion, my holy hill.”
7 The king says,[ay] “I will announce the Lord’s decree. He said to me:[az]
‘You are my son.[ba] This very day I have become your father.
8 Ask me,
and I will give you the nations as your inheritance,[bb]
the ends of the earth as your personal property.
9 You will break them[bc] with an iron scepter;[bd]
you will smash them like a potter’s jar.’”[be]
10 So now, you kings, do what is wise;[bf]
you rulers of the earth, submit to correction.[bg]
11 Serve[bh] the Lord in fear.
Repent in terror.[bi]
12 Give sincere homage.[bj]
Otherwise he[bk] will be angry,[bl]
and you will die because of your behavior,[bm]
when his anger quickly ignites.[bn]
How blessed[bo] are all who take shelter in him![bp]
Psalm 3[bq]
A psalm of David, written when he fled from his son Absalom.[br]
3 Lord, how[bs] numerous are my enemies!
Many attack me.[bt]
2 Many say about me,
“God will not deliver him.”[bu] (Selah)[bv]
3 But you, Lord, are a shield that protects me;[bw]
you are my glory[bx] and the one who restores me.[by]
4 To the Lord I cried out,[bz]
and he answered me from his holy hill.[ca] (Selah)
5 I rested and slept;
I awoke,[cb] for the Lord protects[cc] me.
6 I am not afraid[cd] of the multitude of people[ce]
who attack me from all directions.[cf]
7 Rise up,[cg] Lord!
Deliver me, my God!
Yes,[ch] you will strike[ci] all my enemies on the jaw;
you will break the teeth[cj] of the wicked.[ck]
8 The Lord delivers;[cl]
you show favor to your people.[cm] (Selah)
Psalm 4[cn]
For the music director, to be accompanied by stringed instruments; a psalm of David.
4 When I call out, answer me,
O God who vindicates me.[co]
Though I am hemmed in, you will lead me into a wide, open place.[cp]
Have mercy on me[cq] and respond to[cr] my prayer.
2 You men,[cs] how long will you try to turn my honor into shame?[ct]
How long[cu] will you love what is worthless[cv]
and search for what is deceptive?[cw] (Selah)
3 Realize that[cx] the Lord shows the godly special favor;[cy]
the Lord responds[cz] when I cry out to him.
4 Tremble with fear and do not sin.[da]
Meditate as you lie in bed, and repent of your ways.[db] (Selah)
5 Offer the prescribed sacrifices[dc]
and trust in the Lord.[dd]
6 Many say, “Who can show us anything good?”
Smile upon us, Lord![de]
7 You make me happier[df]
than those who have abundant grain and wine.[dg]
8 I will lie down and sleep peacefully,[dh]
for you, Lord, make me safe and secure.[di]
Footnotes
- Psalm 1:1 sn Psalm 1. In this wisdom psalm the author advises his audience to reject the lifestyle of the wicked and to be loyal to God. The psalmist contrasts the destiny of the wicked with that of the righteous, emphasizing that the wicked are eventually destroyed while the godly prosper under the Lord’s protective care.
- Psalm 1:1 tn The Hebrew noun is an abstract plural. The word often refers metonymically to the happiness that God-given security and prosperity produce (see v. 3; Pss 2:12; 34:9; 41:1; 65:4; 84:12; 89:15; 106:3; 112:1; 127:5; 128:1; 144:15).
- Psalm 1:1 tn Heb “[Oh] the happiness [of] the man.” Hebrew wisdom literature often assumes and reflects the male-oriented perspective of ancient Israelite society. The principle of the psalm is certainly applicable to all people, regardless of their gender or age. To facilitate modern application, we translate the gender and age specific “man” with the more neutral “one.” (Generic “he” is employed in vv. 2-3). Since the godly man described in the psalm is representative of followers of God (note the plural form צַדִּיקִים [tsadiqim, “righteous, godly”] in vv. 5-6), one could translate the collective singular with the plural “those” both here and in vv. 2-3, where singular pronouns and verbal forms are utilized in the Hebrew text (cf. NRSV). However, here the singular form may emphasize that godly individuals are usually outnumbered by the wicked. Retaining the singular allows the translation to retain this emphasis.
- Psalm 1:1 tn Heb “walk in.” The three perfect verbal forms in v. 1 refer in this context to characteristic behavior. The sequence “walk—stand—sit” envisions a progression from relatively casual association with the wicked to complete identification with them.
- Psalm 1:1 tn The Hebrew noun translated “advice” most often refers to the “counsel” or “advice” one receives from others. To “walk in the advice of the wicked” means to allow their evil advice to impact and determine one’s behavior.
- Psalm 1:1 tn In the psalms the Hebrew term רְשָׁעִים (reshaʿim, “wicked”) describes people who are proud, practical atheists (Ps 10:2, 4, 11) who hate God’s commands, commit sinful deeds, speak lies and slander (Ps 50:16-20), and cheat others (Ps 37:21).
- Psalm 1:1 tn “Pathway” here refers to the lifestyle of sinners. To “stand in the pathway of/with sinners” means to closely associate with them in their sinful behavior.
- Psalm 1:1 tn Here the Hebrew term מוֹשַׁב (moshav), although often translated “seat” (cf. NEB, NIV), appears to refer to the whole assembly of evildoers. The word also carries the semantic nuance “assembly” in Ps 107:32, where it is in synonymous parallelism with קָהָל (qahal, “assembly”).
- Psalm 1:1 tn The Hebrew word refers to arrogant individuals (Prov 21:24) who love conflict (Prov 22:10) and vociferously reject wisdom and correction (Prov 1:22; 9:7-8; 13:1; 15:12). To “sit in the assembly” of such people means to completely identify with them in their proud, sinful plans and behavior.
- Psalm 1:2 tn Here the Hebrew expression כִּי־אִם (ki ʾim, “instead”) introduces a contrast between the sinful behavior depicted in v. 1 and the godly lifestyle described in v. 2.
- Psalm 1:2 tn Heb “his delight [is] in the law of the Lord.” In light of the following line, which focuses on studying the Lord’s law, one might translate, “he finds pleasure in studying the Lord’s commands.” However, even if one translates the line this way, it is important to recognize that mere study and intellectual awareness are not ultimately what bring divine favor. Study of the law is metonymic here for the correct attitudes and behavior that should result from an awareness of and commitment to God’s moral will; thus “obeying” has been used in the translation rather than “studying.”
- Psalm 1:2 tn The Hebrew imperfect verbal form draws attention to the characteristic behavior described here and lends support to the hyperbolic adverbial phrase “day and night.” The verb הָגָה (hagag) means “to recite quietly; to meditate” and refers metonymically to intense study and reflection.
- Psalm 1:2 tn Or “his law.”
- Psalm 1:3 tn The Hebrew perfect verbal form with vav (ו) consecutive here carries the same characteristic force as the imperfect in the preceding verse. According to the psalmist, the one who studies and obeys God’s commands typically prospers.
- Psalm 1:3 tn Heb “channels of water.”
- Psalm 1:3 tn Heb “which.”
- Psalm 1:3 tn The Hebrew imperfect verbal forms in v. 3 draw attention to the typical nature of the actions/states they describe.
- Psalm 1:3 tn Heb “in its season.”
- Psalm 1:3 tn Or “fade”; “wither.”sn The author compares the godly individual to a tree that has a rich water supply (planted by flowing streams), develops a strong root system, and is filled with leaves and fruit. The simile suggests that the godly have a continual source of life which in turn produces stability and uninterrupted prosperity.
- Psalm 1:3 tn Heb “and all which he does prospers”; or “and all which he does he causes to prosper.” (The simile of the tree does not extend to this line.) It is not certain if the Hiphil verbal form (יַצְלִיחַ, yatsliakh) is intransitive-exhibitive (“prospers”) or causative (“causes to prosper”) here. If the verb is intransitive, then כֹּל (kol, “all, everything”) is the subject. If the verb is causative, then the godly individual or the Lord himself is the subject and כֹּל is the object. The wording is reminiscent of Josh 1:8, where the Lord tells Joshua: “This law scroll must not leave your lips! You must memorize it day and night so you can carefully obey all that is written in it. Then you will prosper (literally, “cause your way to prosper”) and be successful.”
- Psalm 1:4 tn Here the Hebrew expression כִּי־אִם (ki ʾim, “instead,” cf. v. 2) introduces a contrast between the prosperity of the godly depicted in v. 3 and the destiny of the wicked described in v. 4.
- Psalm 1:4 tn Heb “[they are] like the chaff which [the] wind blows about.” The Hebrew imperfect verbal form draws attention to the typical nature of the action described.sn Wind-driven chaff. In contrast to the well-rooted and productive tree described in v. 3, the wicked are like a dried up plant that has no root system and is blown away by the wind. The simile describes the destiny of the wicked (see vv. 5-6).
- Psalm 1:5 tn Or “Therefore.”
- Psalm 1:5 tn Heb “arise in,” but the verb is used metonymically here in the sense of “stand”; “endure,” as in 1 Sam 13:14 and Job 8:15. The negated Hebrew imperfect verbal form is here taken as indicating incapability or lack of potential, though one could understand the verb form as indicating what is typical (“do not withstand”) or what will happen (“will not withstand”).
- Psalm 1:5 tn Heb “the judgment.” The article indicates a judgment that is definite in the mind of the speaker. In the immediate context this probably does not refer to the “final judgment” described in later biblical revelation, but to a temporal/historical judgment which the author anticipates. Periodically during the OT period, God would come in judgment, removing the wicked from the scene, while preserving a godly remnant (see Gen 6-9; Ps 37; Hab 3).
- Psalm 1:5 tn Heb “and sinners in the assembly (or “circle”) of [the] godly.” The negative particle and verb from the preceding line are assumed by ellipsis here (“will not arise/stand”).sn The assembly of the godly is insulated from divine judgment (Ps 37:12-17, 28-29).
- Psalm 1:6 tn The translation understands כי (ki) as asseverative. Another option is to translate “for,” understanding v. 6 as a theological explanation for vv. 3-5, which contrasts the respective destinies of the godly and the wicked.
- Psalm 1:6 tn Heb “the Lord knows the way of the righteous.” To “know a way” means, in its most basic sense, “to recognize/acknowledge a pathway, route, or prescribed way of life” (see Josh 3:4; Job 21:14; Ps 67:2; Isa 42:16; Jer 5:4-5). Here it could refer to the Lord recognizing the behavior of the godly and, by metonymy, rewarding their godliness with security and prosperity (resulting in the translation, “the Lord rewards the behavior of the godly”). The present translation takes the verb in the sense of “mark out” (cf. Job 23:10), which metonymically could mean “watch over, protect, guard.” In this case the “way of the godly” is not their behavior, but their course of life or destiny; a translation reflecting this would be “the Lord protects the lives of the godly” or “the Lord watches over the destiny of the godly” (cf. NEB, NIV, NRSV). The Hebrew active participle יוֹדֵעַ (yodeaʿ, “knows”) has here a characteristic durative force.
- Psalm 1:6 tn Heb “but the way of the wicked perishes.” The “way of the wicked” may refer to their course of life (Ps 146:9; Prov 4:19; Jer 12:1) or their sinful behavior (Prov 12:26; 15:9). The Hebrew imperfect verbal form probably describes here what typically happens, though one could take the form as indicating what will happen (“will perish”).
- Psalm 2:1 sn Psalm 2. In this royal psalm the author asserts the special status of the divinely chosen Davidic king and warns the nations and their rulers to submit to the authority of God and his chosen vice-regent.
- Psalm 2:1 tn The question is rhetorical. Rather than seeking information, the psalmist expresses his outrage that the nations would have the audacity to rebel against God and his chosen king.
- Psalm 2:1 tn The Hebrew verb רָגַשׁ (ragash) occurs only here. In Dan 6:6, 11, 15 the Aramaic cognate verb describes several officials acting as a group. A Hebrew nominal derivative is used in Ps 55:14 of a crowd of people in the temple.
- Psalm 2:1 tn The interrogative לָמָּה (lammah, “why?”) is understood by ellipsis in the second line.
- Psalm 2:1 tn Or “peoples” (so many English versions).
- Psalm 2:1 tn The Hebrew imperfect form describes the rebellion as underway. The verb הָגָה (hagah), which means “to recite quietly, meditate,” here has the metonymic nuance “devise, plan, plot” (see Ps 38:12; Prov 24:2).
- Psalm 2:1 tn Heb “devising emptiness.” The noun רִיק (riq, “emptiness”) may characterize their behavior as “worthless, morally bankrupt” but more likely refers to the outcome of their plots (i.e., failure). As the rest of the psalm emphasizes, their rebellion will fail.
- Psalm 2:2 sn The expression kings of the earth refers somewhat hyperbolically to the kings who had been conquered by and were subject to the Davidic king.
- Psalm 2:2 tn Or “take their stand.” The Hebrew imperfect verbal form describes their action as underway.
- Psalm 2:2 tn Or “conspire together.” The verbal form is a Niphal from יָסַד (yasad). BDB 413-14 s.v. יָסַד defines the verb as “establish, found,” but HALOT 417 s.v. II יסד proposes a homonym meaning “get together, conspire” (an alternate form of סוּד, sud).
- Psalm 2:2 tn Heb “and against his anointed one.” The Davidic king is the referent (see vv. 6-7).
- Psalm 2:3 tn The words “they say” are supplied in the translation for clarification. The quotation represents the words of the rebellious kings.
- Psalm 2:3 tn Heb “their (i.e., the Lord’s and the king’s) shackles.” The kings compare the rule of the Lord and his vice-regent to being imprisoned.
- Psalm 2:3 tn Heb “throw off from us.”
- Psalm 2:4 tn Heb “sitting.” The Hebrew verb יָשַׁב (yashav) is here used metonymically of “sitting enthroned” (see Pss 9:7; 29:10; 55:19; 102:12; 123:1).
- Psalm 2:4 tn As the next line indicates, this refers to derisive laughter. The Hebrew imperfect verbal forms in vv. 4-5 describe the action from the perspective of an eyewitness who is watching the divine response as it unfolds before his eyes.
- Psalm 2:4 tn Or “scoffs at”; “derides”; “mocks.”
- Psalm 2:5 sn And terrifies them in his rage. This line focuses on the effect that God’s angry response (see previous line) has on the rebellious kings.
- Psalm 2:5 tn The word “saying” is supplied in the translation for clarification to indicate that the speaker is the Lord (cf. RSV, NIV).
- Psalm 2:6 tn The first person pronoun appears before the first person verbal form for emphasis, reflected in the translation by “myself.”
- Psalm 2:6 tn Or perhaps “consecrated.”
- Psalm 2:7 tn The words “the king says” are supplied in the translation for clarification. The speaker is the Lord’s chosen king.
- Psalm 2:7 tn Or “I will relate the decree. The Lord said to me” (in accordance with the Masoretic accentuation).
- Psalm 2:7 sn ‘You are my son.’ The Davidic king was viewed as God’s “son” (see 2 Sam 7:14; Ps 89:26-27). The idiom reflects ancient Near Eastern adoption language associated with covenants of grant, by which a lord would reward a faithful subject by elevating him to special status, referred to as “sonship.” Like a son, the faithful subject received an “inheritance,” viewed as an unconditional, eternal gift. Such gifts usually took the form of land and/or an enduring dynasty. See M. Weinfeld, “The Covenant of Grant in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East,” JAOS 90 (1970): 184-203, for general discussion and some striking extra-biblical parallels.
- Psalm 2:8 sn I will give you the nations. The Lord promises the Davidic king universal dominion.
- Psalm 2:9 tc The LXX reads “you will shepherd them.” This reading, quoted in the Greek text of the NT in Rev 2:27; 12:5; 19:15, assumes a different vocalization of the consonantal Hebrew text and understands the verb as רָעָה (raʿah, “to shepherd”) rather than רָעָע (raʿaʿ, “to break”). But the presence of נָפַץ (nafats, “to smash”) in the next line strongly favors the MT vocalization.
- Psalm 2:9 tn The Hebrew term שֵׁבֶט (shevet) can refer to a “staff” or “rod,” but here it probably refers to the Davidic king’s royal scepter, symbolizing his sovereignty.
- Psalm 2:9 sn Like a potter’s jar. Before the Davidic king’s awesome power, the rebellious nations are like fragile pottery.
- Psalm 2:10 sn The speaker here is either the psalmist or the Davidic king, who now addresses the rebellious kings.
- Psalm 2:10 tn The Niphal has here a tolerative nuance; the kings are urged to submit themselves to the advice being offered.
- Psalm 2:11 tn The Hebrew verb translated “serve” refers here to submitting to the Lord’s sovereignty as expressed through the rule of the Davidic king. Such “service” would involve maintaining allegiance to the Davidic king by paying tribute on a regular basis.
- Psalm 2:11 tn Traditionally, “rejoice with trembling” (KJV). The verb גִּיל (gil) normally means “rejoice,” but this meaning does not fit well here in conjunction with “in trembling.” Some try to understand “trembling” (and the parallel יִרְאָה, yirʾah, “fear”) in the sense of “reverential awe” and then take the verbs “serve” and “rejoice” in the sense of “worship” (cf. NASB). But רְעָדָה (reʿadah, “trembling”) and its related terms consistently refer to utter terror and fear (see Exod 15:15; Job 4:14; Pss 48:6; 55:5; 104:32; Isa 33:14; Dan 10:11) or at least great emotional distress (Ezra 10:9). It seems more likely here that גִּיל carries its polarized meaning “mourn, lament,” as in Hos 10:5. “Mourn, lament” would then be metonymic in this context for “repent” (referring to one’s rebellious ways). On the meaning of the verb in Hos 10:5, see F. I. Andersen and D. N. Freedman, Hosea (AB), 556-57.
- Psalm 2:12 tn Traditionally, “kiss the son” (KJV). But בַּר (bar) is the Aramaic word for “son,” not the Hebrew. For this reason many regard the reading as suspect. Some propose emendations of vv. 11b-12a. One of the more popular proposals is to read בִּרְעָדָה נַשְּׁקוּ לְרַגְלָיו (birʿadah nashequ leraglayv, “in trembling kiss his feet”). It makes better sense to understand בַּר (bar) as an adjective meaning “pure” (see Pss 24:4; 73:1 and BDB 141 s.v. בַּר 3) functioning here in an adverbial sense. If read this way, then the syntactical structure of exhortation (imperative followed by adverbial modifier) corresponds to the two preceding lines (see v. 11). The verb נָשַׁק (nashaq, “kiss”) refers metonymically to showing homage (see 1 Sam 10:1; Hos 13:2). The exhortation in v. 12a advocates a genuine expression of allegiance and warns against insincerity. When swearing allegiance, vassal kings would sometimes do so insincerely, with the intent of rebelling when the time was right. The so-called “Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon” also warn against such an attitude. In this treaty the vassal is told: “If you, as you stand on the soil where this oath [is sworn], swear the oath with your words and lips [only], do not swear with your entire heart, do not transmit it to your sons who will live after this treaty, if you take this curse upon yourselves but do not plan to keep the treaty of Esarhaddon…may your sons and grandsons because of this fear in the future” (see J. B. Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near East, 2:62).
- Psalm 2:12 tn Throughout the translation of this verse the third person masculine pronouns refer to the Lord (cf. v. 11).
- Psalm 2:12 tn The implied subject of the verb is the Lord, mentioned in v. 11. Elsewhere the subject of this verb is consistently the Lord, suggesting it may be a technical term for divine anger. Anger is here used metonymically for judgment, as the following statement makes clear. A Moabite cognate occurs in the Mesha inscription, where it is used of the Moabite god Chemosh’s anger at his people (see J. B. Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near East, 1:209).
- Psalm 2:12 tn Heb “and you will perish [in the] way.” The Hebrew word דֶּרֶךְ (derekh, “way”) here refers to their rebellious behavior (not to a pathway, as often understood). It functions syntactically as an adverbial accusative in relation to the verb “perish.”
- Psalm 2:12 tn Or “burns.” The Lord’s anger is compared here to fire, the most destructive force known in ancient Israel.
- Psalm 2:12 tn The Hebrew noun is an abstract plural. The word often refers metonymically to the happiness that God-given security and prosperity produce (see Pss 1:1; 34:9; 41:1; 65:4; 84:12; 89:15; 106:3; 112:1; 127:5; 128:1; 144:15).
- Psalm 2:12 sn Who take shelter in him. “Taking shelter” in the Lord is an idiom for seeking his protection. Seeking his protection presupposes and even demonstrates the subject’s loyalty to the Lord. In the psalms those who “take shelter” in the Lord are contrasted with the wicked and equated with those who love, fear, and serve the Lord (Pss 5:11-12; 31:17-20; 34:21-22).
- Psalm 3:1 sn Psalm 3. The psalmist acknowledges that he is confronted by many enemies (vv. 1-2). But, alluding to a divine oracle he has received (vv. 4-5), he affirms his confidence in God’s ability to protect him (vv. 3, 6) and requests that God make his promise a reality (vv. 7-8).
- Psalm 3:1 sn According to Jewish tradition, David offered this prayer when he was forced to flee from Jerusalem during his son Absalom’s attempted coup (see 2 Sam 15:13-17).
- Psalm 3:1 tn The Hebrew term מָה (mah, “how”) is used here as an adverbial exclamation (see BDB 553 s.v.).
- Psalm 3:1 tn Heb “many rise up against me.”
- Psalm 3:2 tn Heb “there is no deliverance for him in God.”
- Psalm 3:2 sn The function of the Hebrew term סֶלָה (selah), transliterated here “Selah,” is uncertain. It may be a musical direction of some kind.
- Psalm 3:3 tn Heb “a shield round about me.”
- Psalm 3:3 tn Heb “my glory,” or “my honor.” The psalmist affirms that the Lord is his source of honor, i.e., the one who gives him honor in the sight of others. According to BDB 459 s.v. II כָּבוֹד 7, the phrase refers to God as the one to whom the psalmist gives honor. But the immediate context focuses on what God does for the psalmist, not vice-versa.
- Psalm 3:3 tn Heb “[the one who] lifts my head.” This phrase could be understood to refer to a general strengthening of the psalmist by God during difficult circumstances. However, if one takes the suggestion of the superscription that this is a Davidic psalm written during the revolt of Absalom, the phrase “lift the head” could refer to the psalmist’s desire for restoration to his former position (cf. Gen 40:13 where the same phrase is used). Like the Hebrew text, the present translation (“who restores me”) can be understood in either sense.
- Psalm 3:4 tn The prefixed verbal form could be an imperfect, yielding the translation “I cry out,” but the verb form in the next line (a vav [ו] consecutive with the preterite) suggests this is a brief narrative of what has already happened. Consequently the verb form in v. 4a is better understood as a preterite, “I cried out.” (For another example of the preterite of this same verb form, see Ps 30:8.) Sometime after the crisis arose, the psalmist prayed to the Lord and received an assuring answer. Now he confidently awaits the fulfillment of the divine promise.
- Psalm 3:4 sn His holy hill. That is, Zion (see Pss 2:6; 48:1-2). The psalmist recognizes that the Lord dwells in his sanctuary on Mount Zion.
- Psalm 3:5 tn The three verbal forms that appear in succession here (perfect + vav [ו] consecutive with preterite + perfect) are most naturally taken as narrational. When the psalmist received an assuring word from the Lord, he was able to sleep calmly. Because the Lord was protecting him, he awoke safely from his sleep.
- Psalm 3:5 tn Or “supports”; “sustains.” In this explanatory causal clause the imperfect verbal form probably has a habitual or present progressive nuance, for the psalmist is confident of God’s continual protection (see v. 3). Another option is to take the verb as a preterite, “for the Lord protected me.” In this case, the psalmist focuses specifically on the protection God provided while he slept.
- Psalm 3:6 tn The imperfect verbal form here expresses the psalmist’s continuing attitude as he faces the crisis at hand.
- Psalm 3:6 tn Or perhaps “troops.” The Hebrew noun עָם (ʿam) sometimes refers to a military contingent or army.
- Psalm 3:6 tn Heb “who all around take a stand against me.”
- Psalm 3:7 tn In v. 1 the psalmist describes his enemies as those who “confront” him (קָמִים [qamim], literally, “rise up against him”). Now, using the same verbal root (קוּם, qum) he asks the Lord to rise up (קוּמָה, qumah) in his defense.
- Psalm 3:7 tn Elsewhere in the psalms the particle כִּי (ki), when collocated with a perfect verbal form and subordinated to a preceding imperative directed to God, almost always has an explanatory or causal force (“for, because”) and introduces a motivating argument for why God should respond positively to the request (see Pss 5:10; 6:2; 12:1; 16:1; 41:4; 55:9; 56:1; 57:1; 60:2; 69:1; 74:20; 119:94; 123:3; 142:6; 143:8). (On three occasions the כִּי is recitative after a verb of perception [“see/know that,” see Pss 4:3; 25:19; 119:159]). If כִּי is taken as explanatory here, then the psalmist is arguing that God should deliver him now because that is what God characteristically does. However, such a motivating argument is not used in the passages cited above. The motivating argument usually focuses on the nature of the psalmist’s dilemma or the fact that he trusts in the Lord. For this reason it is unlikely that כִּי has its normal force here. Most scholars understand the particle כִּי as having an asseverative (emphasizing) function here (“indeed, yes”; NEB leaves the particle untranslated).
- Psalm 3:7 tn If the particle כִּי (ki) is taken as explanatory, then the perfect verbal forms in v. 7b would describe God’s characteristic behavior. However, as pointed out in the preceding note on the word “yes,” the particle probably has an asseverative force here. If so, the perfects may be taken as indicating rhetorically the psalmist’s certitude and confidence that God will intervene. The psalmist is so confident of God’s positive response to his prayer, he can describe God’s assault on his enemies as if it had already happened. Such confidence is consistent with the mood of the psalm, as expressed before (vv. 3-6) and after this (v. 8). Another option is to take the perfects as precative, expressing a wish or request (“Strike all my enemies on the jaw, break the teeth of the wicked”). See IBHS 494-95 §30.5.4c, d. However, not all grammarians are convinced that the perfect is used as a precative in biblical Hebrew.
- Psalm 3:7 sn The expression break the teeth may envision violent hand-to hand combat, though it is possible that the enemies are pictured here as a dangerous animal (see Job 29:17).
- Psalm 3:7 tn In the psalms the Hebrew term רְשָׁעִים (reshaʿim, “wicked”) describes people who are proud, practical atheists (Ps 10:2, 4, 11) who hate God’s commands, commit sinful deeds, speak lies and slander (Ps 50:16-20), and cheat others (Ps 37:21). They oppose God and his people.
- Psalm 3:8 tn Heb “to the Lord [is] deliverance.”
- Psalm 3:8 tn Heb “upon your people [is] your blessing.” In this context God’s “blessing” includes deliverance/protection, vindication, and sustained life (see Pss 21:3, 6; 24:5).
- Psalm 4:1 sn Psalm 4. The psalmist asks God to hear his prayer, expresses his confidence that the Lord will intervene, and urges his enemies to change their ways and place their trust in God. He concludes with another prayer for divine intervention and again affirms his absolute confidence in God’s protection.
- Psalm 4:1 tn Heb “God of my righteousness.”
- Psalm 4:1 tn Heb “in distress (or “a narrow place”) you make (a place) large for me.” The function of the Hebrew perfect verbal form here is uncertain. The translation above assumes that the psalmist is expressing his certitude and confidence that God will intervene. The psalmist is so confident of God’s positive response to his prayer, he can describe God’s deliverance as if it had already happened. Such confidence is consistent with the mood of the psalm (vv. 3, 8). Another option is to take the perfects as precative, expressing a wish or request (“lead me”). See IBHS 494-95 §30.5.4c, d. However, not all grammarians are convinced that the perfect is used as a precative in biblical Hebrew.
- Psalm 4:1 tn Or “show me favor.”
- Psalm 4:1 tn Heb “hear.”
- Psalm 4:2 tn Heb “sons of man.”
- Psalm 4:2 tn Heb “how long my honor to shame?”
- Psalm 4:2 tn The interrogative construction עַד־מֶה (ʿad meh, “how long?”), is understood by ellipsis in the second line.
- Psalm 4:2 tn Heb “emptiness.”
- Psalm 4:2 tn Heb “a lie.” Some see the metonymic language of v. 2b (“emptiness, lie”) as referring to idols or false gods. However, there is no solid immediate contextual evidence for such an interpretation. It is more likely that the psalmist addresses those who threaten him (see v. 1) and refers in a general way to their sinful lifestyle. (See R. Mosis, TDOT 7:121.) The two terms allude to the fact that sinful behavior is ultimately fruitless and self-destructive.
- Psalm 4:3 tn Heb “and know that.”
- Psalm 4:3 tn Heb “that the Lord sets apart a faithful one for himself.” The psalmist states a general principle, though the singular form and the parallel line indicate he has himself in mind as the representative godly person. A חָסִיד (khasid; here translated as “the godly”) is one who does what is right in God’s eyes and remains faithful to God (see Pss 12:1; 18:25; 31:23; 37:28; 86:2; 97:10).
- Psalm 4:3 tn Heb “hears.”
- Psalm 4:4 sn The psalmist warns his enemies that they need to tremble with fear before God and repudiate their sinful ways.
- Psalm 4:4 tn Heb “say in your heart(s) on your bed(s) and wail/lament.” The verb דֹמּוּ (dommu) is understood as a form of דָמָם (“wail, lament”) in sorrow and repentance. Another option is to take the verb from II דָמָם (damam, “be quiet”); cf. NIV, NRSV “be silent.”
- Psalm 4:5 tn Or “proper, right.” The phrase also occurs in Deut 33:19 and Ps 51:19.
- Psalm 4:5 sn Trust in the Lord. The psalmist urges his enemies to make peace with God and become his followers.
- Psalm 4:6 tn Heb “lift up upon us the light of your face, Lord.” The verb נסה is apparently an alternate form of נשׂא, “lift up.” See GKC 217 §76.b. The idiom “light of your face” probably refers to a smile (see Eccl 8:1), which in turn suggests favor and blessing (see Num 6:25; Pss 31:16; 44:3; 67:1; 80:3, 7, 19; 89:15; Dan 9:17).sn Smile upon us. Though many are discouraged, the psalmist asks the Lord to intervene and transform the situation.
- Psalm 4:7 tn Heb “you place joy in my heart.” Another option is to understand the perfect verbal form as indicating certitude, “you will make me happier.”
- Psalm 4:7 tn Heb “from (i.e., more than) the time (when) their grain and their wine are abundant.”
- Psalm 4:8 tn Heb “in peace at the same time I will lie down and sleep.”
- Psalm 4:8 tn Heb “for you, Lord, solitarily, securely make me dwell.” The translation understands לְבָדָד (levadad) as modifying the verb; the Lord keeps enemies away from the psalmist so that he is safe and secure. Another option is to take לְבָדָד with what precedes and translate, “you alone, Lord, make me secure.”
Psalm 7
Psalm 7[a]
A musical composition[b] by David, which he sang to the Lord concerning[c] a Benjaminite named Cush.[d]
7 O Lord my God, in you I have taken shelter.[e]
Deliver me from all who chase me. Rescue me!
2 Otherwise they will rip[f] me[g] to shreds like a lion;
they will tear me to bits and no one will be able to rescue me.[h]
3 O Lord my God, if I have done what they say,[i]
or am guilty of unjust actions,[j]
4 or have wronged my ally,[k]
or helped his lawless enemy,[l]
5 may an enemy relentlessly chase[m] me[n] and catch me;[o]
may he trample me to death[p]
and leave me lying dishonored in the dust.[q] (Selah)
6 Stand up angrily,[r] Lord.
Rise up with raging fury against my enemies.[s]
Wake up for my sake, and execute the judgment you have decreed for them.[t]
7 The countries are assembled all around you;[u]
take once more your rightful place over them.[v]
8 The Lord judges the nations.[w]
Vindicate me, Lord, because I am innocent,[x]
because I am blameless,[y] O Exalted One.[z]
9 May the evil deeds of the wicked[aa] come to an end.[ab]
But make the innocent[ac] secure,[ad]
O righteous God,
you who examine[ae] inner thoughts and motives.[af]
10 The Exalted God is my shield,[ag]
the one who delivers the morally upright.[ah]
11 God is a just judge;
he is angry throughout the day.[ai]
12 If a person[aj] does not repent, God will wield his sword.[ak]
He has prepared to shoot his bow.[al]
13 He has prepared deadly weapons to use against him;[am]
he gets ready to shoot flaming arrows.[an]
14 See the one who is pregnant with wickedness,
who conceives destructive plans,
and gives birth to harmful lies—
15 he digs a pit[ao]
and then falls into the hole he has made.[ap]
16 He becomes the victim of his own destructive plans[aq]—
and the violence he intended for others falls on his own head.[ar]
17 I will thank the Lord for[as] his justice;
I will sing praises to the Lord Most High![at]
Footnotes
- Psalm 7:1 sn Psalm 7. The psalmist asks the Lord to intervene and deliver him from his enemies. He protests his innocence and declares his confidence in God’s justice.
- Psalm 7:1 tn The precise meaning of the Hebrew term שִׁגָּיוֹן (shiggayon; translated here “musical composition”) is uncertain. Some derive the noun from the verbal root שָׁגָה (shagah, “swerve, reel”) and understand it as referring to a “wild, passionate song, with rapid changes of rhythm” (see BDB 993 s.v. שִׁגָּיוֹן). But this proposal is purely speculative. The only other appearance of the noun is in Hab 3:1, where it occurs in the plural.
- Psalm 7:1 tn Or “on account of.”
- Psalm 7:1 sn Apparently this individual named Cush was one of David’s enemies.
- Psalm 7:1 tn The Hebrew perfect verbal form probably refers here to a completed action with continuing results.
- Psalm 7:2 tn The verb is singular in the Hebrew text, even though “all who chase me” in v. 1 refers to a whole group of enemies. The singular is also used in vv. 4-5, but the psalmist returns to the plural in v. 6. The singular is probably collective, emphasizing the united front that the psalmist’s enemies present. This same alternation between a collective singular and a plural referring to enemies appears in Pss 9:3, 6; 13:4; 31:4, 8; 41:6, 10-11; 42:9-10; 55:3; 64:1-2; 74:3-4; 89:22-23; 106:10-11; 143:3, 6, 9.
- Psalm 7:2 tn Heb “my life.” The pronominal suffix attached to נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh) is equivalent to a personal pronoun. See Ps 6:3.
- Psalm 7:2 tn Heb “tearing and there is no one rescuing.” The verbal form translated “tearing” is a singular active participle.
- Psalm 7:3 tn Heb “if I have done this.”
- Psalm 7:3 tn Heb “if there is injustice in my hands.” The “hands” figuratively suggest deeds or actions.
- Psalm 7:4 tn Heb “if I have repaid the one at peace with me evil.” The form שׁוֹלְמִי (sholemi, “the one at peace with me”) probably refers to a close friend or ally, i.e., one with whom the psalmist has made a formal agreement. See BDB 1023 s.v. שָׁלוֹם 4.a.
- Psalm 7:4 tn Heb “or rescued my enemy in vain.” The preterite with vav (ו) consecutive (the verb form is pseudo-cohortative; see IBHS 576-77 §34.5.3) carries on the hypothetical nuance of the perfect in the preceding line. Some regard the statement as a parenthetical assertion that the psalmist is kind to his enemies. Others define חָלַץ (khalats) as “despoil” (cf. NASB, NRSV “plundered”; NIV “robbed”), an otherwise unattested nuance for this verb. Still others emend the verb to לָחַץ (lakhats, “oppress”). Most construe the adverb רֵיקָם (reqam, “emptily, vainly”) with “my enemy,” i.e., the one who is my enemy in vain.” The present translation (1) assumes an emendation of צוֹרְרִי (tsoreri, “my enemy”) to צוֹרְרוֹ (tsorero, “his [i.e., the psalmist’s ally’s] enemy”) following J. Tigay, “Psalm 7:5 and Ancient Near Eastern Treaties,” JBL 89 (1970): 178-86, (2) understands the final mem (ם) on רֵיקָם as enclitic, and (3) takes רִיק (riq) as an adjective modifying “his enemy.” (For other examples of a suffixed noun followed by an attributive adjective without the article, see Pss 18:17 (“my strong enemy”), 99:3 (“your great and awesome name”) and 143:10 (“your good spirit”). The adjective רִיק occurs with the sense “lawless” in Judg 9:4; 11:3; 2 Chr 13:7. In this case the psalmist affirms that he has not wronged his ally, nor has he given aid to his ally’s enemies. Ancient Near Eastern treaties typically included such clauses, with one or both parties agreeing not to lend aid to the treaty partner’s enemies.
- Psalm 7:5 tn The vocalization of the verb form seems to be a mixture of Qal and Piel (see GKC 168 §63.n). The translation assumes the Piel, which would emphasize the repetitive nature of the action. The translation assumes the prefixed verbal form is a jussive. The psalmist is so certain that he is innocent of the sins mentioned in vv. 3-4, he pronounces an imprecation on himself for rhetorical effect.
- Psalm 7:5 tn Heb “my life.” The pronominal suffix attached to נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh) is equivalent to a personal pronoun. See Ps 6:3.
- Psalm 7:5 tn Heb “and may he overtake.” The prefixed verbal form is distinctly jussive. The object “me,” though unexpressed, is understood from the preceding statement.
- Psalm 7:5 tn Heb “and may he trample down to the earth my life.”
- Psalm 7:5 tn Heb “and my honor in the dust may he cause to dwell.” The prefixed verbal form is distinctly jussive. Some emend כְבוֹדִי (khevodi, “my honor”) to כְבֵדִי (khevedi, “my liver” as the seat of life), but the term כְבוֹדִי (khevodi) is to be retained since it probably refers to the psalmist’s dignity or honor.
- Psalm 7:6 tn Heb “in your anger.”
- Psalm 7:6 tn Heb “Lift yourself up in the angry outbursts of my enemies.” Many understand the preposition prefixed to עַבְרוֹת (ʿavrot, “angry outbursts”) as adversative, “against,” and the following genitive “enemies” as subjective. In this case one could translate, “rise up against my furious enemies” (cf. NIV, NRSV). The present translation, however, takes the preposition as indicating manner (cf. “in your anger” in the previous line) and understands the plural form of the noun as indicating an abstract quality (“fury”) or excessive degree (“raging fury”). Cf. Job 21:30.
- Psalm 7:6 tc Heb “Wake up to me [with the] judgment [which] you have commanded.” The LXX understands אֵלִי (ʾeliy, “my God”) instead of אֵלַי (ʾelay, “to me”; the LXX reading is followed by NEB, NIV, NRSV.) If the reading of the MT is retained, the preposition probably has the sense of “on account of, for the sake of.” The noun מִשְׁפָּט (mishpat, “judgment”) is probably an adverbial accusative, modifying the initial imperative, “wake up.” In this case צִוִּיתָ (tsivvita, “[which] you have commanded”) is an asyndetic relative clause. Some take the perfect as precative. In this case one could translate the final line, “Wake up for my sake! Decree judgment!” (cf. NIV). However, not all grammarians are convinced that the perfect is used as a precative in biblical Hebrew.
- Psalm 7:7 tn Heb “and the assembly of the peoples surrounds you.” Some understand the prefixed verbal form as a jussive, “may the assembly of the peoples surround you.”
- Psalm 7:7 tn Heb “over it (the feminine suffix refers back to the feminine noun “assembly” in the preceding line) on high return.” Some emend שׁוּבָה (shuvah, “return”) to שֵׁבָה (shevah, “sit [in judgment]”) because they find the implication of “return” problematic. But the psalmist does not mean to imply that God has abandoned his royal throne and needs to regain it. Rather he simply urges God, as sovereign king of the world, to once more occupy his royal seat of judgment and execute judgment, as the OT pictures God doing periodically.
- Psalm 7:8 sn The Lord judges the nations. In hyperbolic fashion the psalmist pictures the nations assembled around the divine throne (v. 7a). He urges God to take his rightful place on the throne (v. 7b) and then pictures him making judicial decisions that vindicate the innocent (see vv. 8-16).
- Psalm 7:8 tn Heb “judge me, O Lord, according to my innocence.”
- Psalm 7:8 tn Heb “according to my blamelessness.” The imperative verb translated “vindicate” governs the second line as well.
- Psalm 7:8 tn The Hebrew form עָלָי (ʿalay) has been traditionally understood as the preposition עַל (ʿal, “over”) with a first person suffix. But this is syntactically awkward and meaningless. The form is probably a divine title derived from the verbal root עָלָה (ʿalah, “ascend”). This relatively rare title appears elsewhere in the OT (see HALOT 824-25 s.v. I עַל, though this text is not listed) and in Ugaritic as an epithet for Baal (see G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends, 98). See M. Dahood, Psalms (AB), 1:44-45, and P. C. Craigie, Psalms 1-50 (WBC), 98.
- Psalm 7:9 tn In the psalms the Hebrew term רְשָׁעִים (reshaʿim, “wicked”) describes people who are proud, practical atheists (Ps 10:2, 4, 11) who hate God’s commands, commit sinful deeds, speak lies and slander (Ps 50:16-20), and cheat others (Ps 37:21). They oppose God and his people.
- Psalm 7:9 tn The prefixed verbal form is a jussive, expressing an imprecation here.
- Psalm 7:9 tn Or “the godly” (see Ps 5:12). The singular form is collective (see the plural “upright in heart” in v. 10), though it may reflect the personal focus of the psalmist in this context.
- Psalm 7:9 tn The prefixed verbal form expresses the psalmist’s prayer or wish.
- Psalm 7:9 tn For other uses of the verb in this sense, see Job 7:18; Pss 11:4; 26:2; 139:23.
- Psalm 7:9 tn Heb “and [the one who] tests hearts and kidneys, righteous God.” The translation inverts the word order to improve the English style. The heart and kidneys were viewed as the seat of one’s volition, conscience, and moral character.
- Psalm 7:10 tn Traditionally, “my shield is upon God” (cf. NASB). As in v. 8, עַל (ʿal) should be understood as a divine title, here compounded with “God” (cf. NIV, “God Most High”). See M. Dahood, Psalms (AB), 1:45-46. The shield metaphor pictures God as a protector against deadly attacks.
- Psalm 7:10 tn Heb “pure of heart.” The “heart” is here viewed as the seat of one’s moral character and motives. The “pure of heart” are God’s faithful followers who trust in and love the Lord and, as a result, experience his deliverance (see Pss 11:2; 32:11; 36:10; 64:10; 94:15; 97:11).
- Psalm 7:11 tn Heb “God (the divine name אֵל [ʾel] is used) is angry during all the day.” The verb זֹעֵם (zoʿem) means “be indignant, be angry, curse.” Here God’s angry response to wrongdoing and injustice leads him to prepare to execute judgment as described in the following verses.
- Psalm 7:12 tn Heb “If he”; the referent (a person who is a sinner) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The subject of the first verb is understood as the sinner who fails to repent of his ways and becomes the target of God’s judgment (vv. 9, 14-16).
- Psalm 7:12 tn Heb “if he does not return, his sword he wields.” The referent (God) of the pronominal subject of the second verb (“sharpens”) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The verb לָטַשׁ (latash) appears only five times in the Bible. It is typically taken as a reference to sharpening, as in 1 Sam 13:20. But the meaning “wield” known from Ugaritic, a close cognate language, seems to fit the context better. The following verbs describe past actions of having gotten instruments prepared for battle. It is more consistent with that setting to picture God taking his sword and swinging it as a final act of preparation or as an immediate threat.
- Psalm 7:12 tn Heb “his bow he has stepped [on] and prepared it.” “Treading the bow” involved stepping on one end of it in order to bend and string it and thus prepare it for battle. The verbs are a perfect and a preterite, thus referring to past action.
- Psalm 7:13 tn Heb “and for him he has prepared the weapons of death.”
- Psalm 7:13 tn Heb “his arrows into flaming [things] he makes.” The verb is a prefixed form and understood as an imperfect. As a parallel to the first verb in the series, יִלְטֹשׁ (yiltosh; he will wield), it describes a final act of preparation or the beginning of engaging in battle. It is also possible that the form is a preterite and should be understood as past tense, like the preceding perfect and preterite verbs.
- Psalm 7:15 tn Heb “a pit he digs and he excavates it.” Apparently the imagery of hunting is employed; the wicked sinner digs this pit to entrap and destroy his intended victim. The redundancy in the Hebrew text has been simplified in the translation.
- Psalm 7:15 tn The verb forms in vv. 15-16 describe the typical behavior and destiny of those who attempt to destroy others. The image of the evildoer falling into the very trap he set for his intended victim emphasizes the appropriate nature of God’s judgment.
- Psalm 7:16 tn Heb “his harm [i.e., the harm he conceived for others, see v. 14] returns on his head.”
- Psalm 7:16 tn Heb “and on his forehead his violence [i.e., the violence he intended to do to others] comes down.”
- Psalm 7:17 tn Heb “according to.”
- Psalm 7:17 tn Heb “[to] the name of the Lord Most High.” God’s “name” refers metonymically to his divine characteristics as suggested by his name, in this case the compound “Lord Most High.” The divine title “Most High” (עֶלְיוֹן, ʿelyon) pictures God as the exalted ruler of the universe who vindicates the innocent and judges the wicked. See especially Ps 47:2.
Genesis 2:4-25
The Creation of Man and Woman
4 This is the account[a] of the heavens and the earth[b] when they were created—when[c] the Lord God[d] made the earth and heavens.[e]
5 Now[f] no shrub of the field had yet grown on the earth, and no plant of the field[g] had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground.[h] 6 Springs[i] would well up[j] from the earth and water[k] the whole surface of the ground.[l] 7 The Lord God formed[m] the man from the soil of the ground[n] and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life,[o] and the man became a living being.[p]
8 The Lord God planted an orchard[q] in the east,[r] in Eden;[s] and there he placed the man he had formed.[t] 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow from the soil,[u] every tree that was pleasing to look at[v] and good for food. (Now[w] the tree of life[x] and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil[y] were in the middle of the orchard.)
10 Now[z] a river flows[aa] from Eden[ab] to water the orchard, and from there it divides[ac] into four headstreams.[ad] 11 The name of the first is Pishon; it runs through[ae] the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is pure;[af] pearls[ag] and lapis lazuli[ah] are also there). 13 The name of the second river is Gihon; it runs through[ai] the entire land of Cush.[aj] 14 The name of the third river is Tigris; it runs along the east side of Assyria.[ak] The fourth river is the Euphrates.
15 The Lord God took the man and placed[al] him in the orchard in[am] Eden to care for it and to maintain it.[an] 16 Then the Lord God commanded[ao] the man, “You may freely eat[ap] fruit[aq] from every tree of the orchard, 17 but[ar] you must not eat[as] from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when[at] you eat from it you will surely die.”[au]
18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone.[av] I will make a companion[aw] for him who corresponds to him.”[ax] 19 The Lord God formed[ay] out of the ground every living animal of the field and every bird of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would[az] name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man named all the animals, the birds of the air, and the living creatures of the field, but for Adam[ba] no companion who corresponded to him was found.[bb] 21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep,[bc] and while he was asleep,[bd] he took part of the man’s side[be] and closed up the place with flesh.[bf] 22 Then the Lord God made[bg] a woman from the part he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 23 Then the man said,
“This one at last[bh] is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
this one will be called[bi] ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of[bj] man.”[bk]
24 That is why[bl] a man leaves[bm] his father and mother and unites with[bn] his wife, and they become one family.[bo] 25 The man and his wife were both naked,[bp] but they were not ashamed.[bq]
Footnotes
- Genesis 2:4 tn The Hebrew phrase אֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת (ʾelleh toledot) is traditionally translated as “these are the generations of” because the noun was derived from the verb “beget.” Its usage, however, shows that it introduces more than genealogies; it begins a narrative that traces what became of the entity or individual mentioned in the heading. In fact, a good paraphrase of this heading would be: “This is what became of the heavens and the earth,” for what follows is not another account of creation but a tracing of events from creation through the fall and judgment (the section extends from 2:4 through 4:26). See M. H. Woudstra, “The Toledot of the Book of Genesis and Their Redemptive-Historical Significance,” CTJ 5 (1970): 184-89.sn The expression this is the account of is an important title used throughout the Book of Genesis, serving as the organizing principle of the work. It is always a heading, introducing the subject matter that is to come. From the starting point of the title, the narrative traces the genealogy or the records or the particulars involved. Although some would make the heading in 2:4 a summary of creation (1:1-2:3), that goes against the usage in the book. As a heading it introduces the theme of the next section, the particulars about this creation that God made. Genesis 2 is not a simple parallel account of creation; rather, beginning with the account of the creation of man and women, the narrative tells what became of that creation. As a beginning, the construction of 2:4-7 forms a fine parallel to the construction of 1:1-3. The subject matter of each תּוֹלְדֹת (toledot, “this is the account of”) section of the book traces a decline or a deterioration through to the next beginning point, and each is thereby a microcosm of the book which begins with divine blessing in the garden, and ends with a coffin in Egypt. So, what became of the creation? Gen 2:4-4:26 will explain that sin entered the world and all but destroyed God’s perfect creation.
- Genesis 2:4 tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1.sn This is the only use of the Hebrew noun תּוֹלְדֹת (toledot) in the book that is not followed by a personal name (e.g., “this is the account of Isaac”). The poetic parallelism reveals that even though the account may be about the creation, it is the creation the Lord God made.
- Genesis 2:4 tn Heb “on the day.” In contrast to the numbered days in ch. 1 (see note on “day” at 1:5), “day” appears here in a phrase which means “at the time when.” It may but does not need to refer to a particular day. It can refer to a broader period of time (cf. Obad 11), though typically a short period of time pertaining to a particular event. Here it summarizes the seven days of creation as “when” the Lord created.
- Genesis 2:4 sn Advocates of the so-called documentary hypothesis of pentateuchal authorship argue that the introduction of the name Yahweh (Lord) here indicates that a new source (designated J), a parallel account of creation, begins here. In this scheme Gen 1:1-2:3 is understood as the priestly source (designated P) of creation. Critics of this approach often respond that the names, rather than indicating separate sources, were chosen to reflect the subject matter (see U. Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis). Gen 1:1-2:3 is the grand prologue of the book, showing the sovereign God creating by decree. The narrative beginning in 2:4 is the account of what this God invested in his creation. Since it deals with the close, personal involvement of the covenant God, the narrative uses the covenantal name Yahweh (Lord) in combination with the name God. For a recent discussion of the documentary hypothesis from a theologically conservative perspective, see D. A. Garrett, Rethinking Genesis. For an attempt by source critics to demonstrate the legitimacy of the source critical method on the basis of ancient Near Eastern parallels, see J. H. Tigay, ed., Empirical Models for Biblical Criticism. For reaction to the source critical method by literary critics, see I. M. Kikawada and A. Quinn, Before Abraham Was; R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 131-54; and Adele Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative, 111-34.
- Genesis 2:4 tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1; the order here is reversed, but the meaning is the same.
- Genesis 2:5 tn Heb “Now every sprig of the field before it was.” The verb forms, although appearing to be imperfects, are technically preterites coming after the adverb טֶרֶם (terem). The word order (conjunction + subject + predicate) indicates a disjunctive clause, which provides background information for the following narrative (as in 1:2). Two negative clauses are given (“before any sprig…”, and “before any cultivated grain” existed), followed by two causal clauses explaining them, and then a positive circumstantial clause is given—again dealing with water as in 1:2 (water would well up).
- Genesis 2:5 tn The first term, שִׂיחַ (siakh), probably refers to the wild, uncultivated plants (see Gen 21:15; Job 30:4, 7); whereas the second, עֵשֶׂב (ʿesev), refers to cultivated grains. It is a way of saying: “back before anything was growing.”
- Genesis 2:5 tn The two causal clauses explain the first two disjunctive clauses: There was no uncultivated, general growth because there was no rain, and there were no grains because there was no man to cultivate the soil.sn The last clause in v. 5, “and there was no man to cultivate the ground,” anticipates the curse and the expulsion from the garden (Gen 3:23).
- Genesis 2:6 tn The conjunction vav (ו) introduces a third disjunctive clause. The Hebrew word אֵד (ʾed) was traditionally translated “mist” because of its use in Job 36:27. However, an Akkadian cognate edu in Babylonian texts refers to subterranean springs or waterways. Such a spring would fit the description in this context, since this water “goes up” and waters the ground.
- Genesis 2:6 tn Heb “was going up.” The verb is an imperfect form, which in this narrative context carries a customary nuance, indicating continual action in past time.
- Genesis 2:6 tn The perfect with vav (ו) consecutive carries the same nuance as the preceding verb. Whenever it would well up, it would water the ground.
- Genesis 2:6 tn The Hebrew word אֲדָמָה (ʾadamah) actually means “ground; fertile soil.”sn Here is an indication of fertility. The water would well up from the earth (אֶרֶץ, ʾerets) and water all the surface of the fertile soil (אֲדָמָה). It is from that soil that the man (אָדָם, ʾadam) was made (Gen 2:7).
- Genesis 2:7 tn Or “fashioned.” The prefixed verb form with vav (ו) consecutive initiates narrative sequence. The Hebrew word יָצַר (yatsar) means “to form” or “to fashion,” usually by plan or design (see the related noun יֵצֶר [yetser] in Gen 6:5). It is the term for an artist’s work (the Hebrew term יוֹצֵר [yotser] refers to a potter; see Jer 18:2-4.)sn Various traditions in the ancient Near East reflect this idea of creation. Egyptian drawings show a deity turning little people off of the potter’s wheel with another deity giving them life. In the Bible humans are related to the soil and return to it (see 3:19; see also Job 4:19, 20:9; and Isa 29:16).
- Genesis 2:7 tn The line literally reads “And Yahweh God formed the man, soil, from the ground.” “Soil” is an adverbial accusative, identifying the material from which the man was made.
- Genesis 2:7 tn The phrase נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים (nishmat khayyim, “breath of life”) appears for certain only here. In Gen 6:17; 7:15 the phrase is רוּחַ חַיִּים (ruakh khayyim, “breath/spirit of life”), where רוּחַ can mean “breath, wind, spirit.” And in Gen 7:22 the phrase is נִשְׁמַת רוּחַ חַיִּים (nishmat ruakh khayyim, “breath of the breath/spirit of life”). T. C. Mitchell (“The Old Testament Usage of Neshama,” VT 11 [1961]: 177-87) suggests the possibility that נְשָׁמָה (neshamah, “breath”) may not be used for animals but only God and man. BDB 675 s.v. נְשָׁמָה 4 states that the word refers to the human “spirit” in Prov 20:27. Many versions, including the NET, take it that way at Job 26:4 (KJV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV). Job 32:8 asserts that God’s “breath” gives people understanding. If so, this may be part of indicating that God made humans differently than other breathing living organisms (נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה, nefesh khayyah). However Gen 7:22 and Job 34:14-15 may use the term נְשָׁמָה of animals.sn Human life is described here as consisting of a body (made from soil from the ground) and breath (given by God). Both animals and humans are called “a living being” (נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה) but humankind became that in a different and more significant way.
- Genesis 2:7 tn The Hebrew term נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh, “being”) is often translated “soul,” but the word usually refers to the whole person. The phrase נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה (nefesh khayyah, “living being”) is used of both animals and human beings (see 1:20, 24, 30; 2:19).
- Genesis 2:8 tn Traditionally “garden,” but the subsequent description of this “garden” makes it clear that it is an orchard of fruit trees.sn The Lord God planted an orchard. Nothing is said of how the creation of this orchard took place. A harmonization with chap. 1 might lead to the conclusion that it was by decree, prior to the creation of human life. But the narrative sequence here in chap. 2 suggests the creation of the garden followed the creation of the man. Note also the past perfect use of the perfect in the relative clause in the following verse.
- Genesis 2:8 tn Heb “from the east” or “off east.”sn One would assume this is east from the perspective of the land of Israel, particularly since the rivers in the area are identified as the rivers in those eastern regions.
- Genesis 2:8 sn The name Eden (עֵדֶן,ʿeden) means “pleasure” in Hebrew.
- Genesis 2:8 tn The perfect verbal form here requires the past perfect translation since it describes an event that preceded the event described in the main clause.
- Genesis 2:9 tn Heb “ground,” referring to the fertile soil.
- Genesis 2:9 tn Heb “desirable of sight [or “appearance”].” The phrase describes the kinds of trees that are visually pleasing and yield fruit that is desirable to the appetite.
- Genesis 2:9 tn The verse ends with a disjunctive clause providing a parenthetical bit of information about the existence of two special trees in the garden.
- Genesis 2:9 tn In light of Gen 3:22, the construction “tree of life” should be interpreted to mean a tree that produces life-giving fruit (objective genitive) rather than a living tree (attributive genitive). See E. O. James, The Tree of Life (SHR); and R. Marcus, “The Tree of Life in Proverbs,” JBL 62 (1943): 117-20.
- Genesis 2:9 tn The expression “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” must be interpreted to mean that the tree would produce fruit which, when eaten, gives special knowledge of “good and evil.” Scholars debate what this phrase means here. For a survey of opinions, see G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:62-64. One view is that “good” refers to that which enhances, promotes, and produces life, while “evil” refers to anything that hinders, interrupts or destroys life. So eating from this tree would change human nature—people would be able to alter life for better (in their thinking) or for worse. See D. J. A. Clines, “The Tree of Knowledge and the Law of Yahweh,” VT 24 (1974): 8-14; and I. Engnell, “‘Knowledge’ and ‘Life’ in the Creation Story,” Wisdom in Israel and in the Ancient Near East [VTSup], 103-19. Another view understands the “knowledge of good and evil” as the capacity to discern between moral good and evil. The following context suggests the tree’s fruit gives one wisdom (see the phrase “capable of making one wise” in 3:6, as well as the note there on the word “wise”), which certainly includes the capacity to discern between good and evil. Such wisdom is characteristic of divine beings, as the serpent’s promise implies (3:5) and as 3:22 makes clear. (Note, however, that this capacity does not include the ability to do what is right.) God prohibits man from eating of the tree. The prohibition becomes a test to see if man will be satisfied with his role and place, or if he will try to ascend to the divine level. There will be a time for man to possess moral discernment/wisdom, as God reveals and imparts it to him, but it is not something to be grasped at in an effort to become “a god.” In fact, the command to be obedient was the first lesson in moral discernment/wisdom. God was essentially saying: “Here is lesson one—respect my authority and commands. Disobey me and you will die.” When man disobeys, he decides he does not want to acquire moral wisdom God’s way, but instead tries to rise immediately to the divine level. Once man has acquired such divine wisdom by eating the tree’s fruit (3:22), he must be banned from the garden so that he will not be able to achieve his goal of being godlike and thus live forever, a divine characteristic (3:24). Ironically, man now has the capacity to discern good from evil (3:22), but he is morally corrupted and rebellious and will not consistently choose what is right.
- Genesis 2:10 tn The disjunctive clause (note the construction conjunction + subject + predicate) introduces an entire paragraph about the richness of the region in the east.
- Genesis 2:10 tn The Hebrew active participle may be translated here as indicating past durative action, “was flowing,” or as a present durative, “flows.” Since this river was the source of the rivers mentioned in vv. 11-14, which appear to describe a situation contemporary with the narrator, it is preferable to translate the participle in v. 10 with the present tense. This suggests that Eden and its orchard still existed in the narrator’s time. According to ancient Jewish tradition, Enoch was taken to the Garden of Eden, where his presence insulated the garden from the destructive waters of Noah’s flood. See Jub. 4:23-24.
- Genesis 2:10 sn Eden is portrayed here as a source of life-giving rivers (that is, perennial streams). This is no surprise because its orchard is where the tree of life is located. Eden is a source of life, but tragically its orchard is no longer accessible to humankind. The river flowing out of Eden is a tantalizing reminder of this. God continues to provide life-giving water to sustain physical existence on the earth, but immortality has been lost.
- Genesis 2:10 tn The imperfect verb form has the same nuance as the preceding participle. (If the participle is taken as past durative, then the imperfect would be translated “was dividing.”)
- Genesis 2:10 tn Or “branches”; Heb “heads.” Cf. NEB “streams”; NASB “rivers.”
- Genesis 2:11 tn Heb “it is that which goes around.”
- Genesis 2:12 tn Heb “good.”
- Genesis 2:12 tn The Hebrew term translated “pearls” may be a reference to resin (cf. NIV “aromatic resin”) or another precious stone (cf. NEB, NASB, NRSV “bdellium”).
- Genesis 2:12 tn Or “onyx.”
- Genesis 2:13 tn Heb “it is that which goes around.”
- Genesis 2:13 sn Cush. In the Bible the Hebrew word כּוּשׁ (kush, “Kush”) often refers to Ethiopia (so KJV, CEV), but here it must refer to a region in Mesopotamia, the area of the later Cassite dynasty of Babylon. See Gen 10:7-10 as well as E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB), 20. The man Cush had a son named Havilah (see 2:11: “land of Havilah”). Another son was Nimrod, the centers of whose kingdom were in Babylon, Ninevah, and similarly placed cities. Eden was in the East, which was where the headwaters of the four rivers were.
- Genesis 2:14 tn Heb “Asshur” (so NEB, NIV).
- Genesis 2:15 tn The Hebrew verb נוּחַ (nuakh, translated here as “placed”) is a different verb than the one used in 2:8.
- Genesis 2:15 tn Traditionally translated “the Garden of Eden,” the context makes it clear that the garden (or orchard) was in Eden (making “Eden” a genitive of location).
- Genesis 2:15 tn Heb “to work it and to keep it.”sn Note that man’s task is to care for and maintain the trees of the orchard. Not until after the fall, when he is condemned to cultivate the soil, does this task change.
- Genesis 2:16 sn This is the first time in the Bible that the verb tsavah (צָוָה, “to command”) appears. Whatever the man had to do in the garden, the main focus of the narrative is on keeping God’s commandments. God created humans with the capacity to obey him and then tested them with commands.
- Genesis 2:16 tn The imperfect verb form probably carries the nuance of permission (“you may eat”) since the man is not being commanded to eat from every tree. The accompanying infinitive absolute adds emphasis: “you may freely eat,” or “you may eat to your heart’s content.”
- Genesis 2:16 tn The word “fruit” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied as the direct object of the verb “eat.” Presumably the only part of the tree the man would eat would be its fruit (cf. 3:2).
- Genesis 2:17 tn The disjunctive clause here indicates contrast: “but from the tree of the knowledge….”
- Genesis 2:17 tn The negated imperfect verb form indicates prohibition, “you must not eat.”
- Genesis 2:17 tn Or “in the very day, as soon as.” If one understands the expression to have this more precise meaning, then the following narrative presents a problem, for the man does not die physically as soon as he eats from the tree. In this case one may argue that spiritual death is in view. If physical death is in view here, there are two options to explain the following narrative: (1) The following phrase “You will surely die” concerns mortality which ultimately results in death (a natural paraphrase would be, “You will become mortal”), or (2) God mercifully gave man a reprieve, allowing him to live longer than he deserved.
- Genesis 2:17 tn Heb “dying you will die.” The imperfect verb form here has the nuance of the specific future because it is introduced with the temporal clause, “when you eat…you will die.” That certainty is underscored with the infinitive absolute, “you will surely die.”sn The Hebrew text (“dying you will die”) does not refer to two aspects of death (“dying spiritually, you will then die physically”). The construction simply emphasizes the certainty of death, however it is defined. Death is essentially separation. To die physically means separation from the land of the living, but not extinction. To die spiritually means to be separated from God. Both occur with sin, although the physical alienation is more gradual than instant, and the spiritual is immediate, although the effects of it continue the separation.
- Genesis 2:18 tn Heb “The man’s being alone is not good.” The meaning of “good” must be defined contextually. Within the context of creation, in which God instructs humankind to be fruitful and multiply, the man alone cannot comply. Being alone prevents the man from fulfilling the design of creation and therefore is not good.sn The statement about Adam being alone precedes the naming of the animals, and the command to be fruitful (1:28) came after the creation of woman (1:27). Naming the animals will show that none of them qualify as a companion for Adam (v. 20).
- Genesis 2:18 tn Traditionally “helper.” The English word “helper,” because it can connote so many different ideas, does not accurately convey the connotation of the Hebrew word עֵזֶר (ʿezer). Usage of the Hebrew term does not suggest a subordinate role, a connotation which English “helper” can have. In the Bible God is frequently described as the “helper,” the one who does for us what we cannot do for ourselves, the one who meets our needs. In this context the word seems to express the idea of an “indispensable companion.” The woman would supply what the man was lacking in the design of creation and logically it would follow that the man would supply what she was lacking, although that is not stated here. See further M. L. Rosenzweig, “A Helper Equal to Him,” Jud 139 (1986): 277-80.
- Genesis 2:18 tn The Hebrew expression כְּנֶגְדּוֹ (kenegdo) literally means “according to the opposite of him.” Translations such as “suitable [for]” (NASB, NIV), “matching,” “corresponding to” all capture the idea. (Translations that render the phrase simply “partner” [cf. NEB, NRSV], while not totally inaccurate, do not reflect the nuance of correspondence and/or suitability.) The man’s form and nature are matched by the woman’s as she reflects him and complements him. Together they correspond. In short, this prepositional phrase indicates that she has everything that God had invested in him.
- Genesis 2:19 tn Or “fashioned.” To harmonize the order of events with the chronology of chapter one, some translate the prefixed verb form with vav (ו) consecutive as a past perfect (“had formed,” cf. NIV) here. (In chapter one the creation of the animals preceded the creation of man; here the animals are created after the man.) However, it is unlikely that the Hebrew construction can be translated in this way in the middle of this pericope, for the criteria for unmarked temporal overlay are not present here. See S. R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew, 84-88, and especially R. Buth, “Methodological Collision between Source Criticism and Discourse Analysis,” Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, 138-54. For a contrary viewpoint see IBHS 552-53 §33.2.3 and C. J. Collins, “The Wayyiqtol as ‘Pluperfect’: When and Why,” TynBul 46 (1995): 117-40.
- Genesis 2:19 tn The imperfect verb form is future from the perspective of the past time narrative.
- Genesis 2:20 tn Here for the first time the Hebrew word אָדָם (ʾadam) appears without the article, suggesting that it might now be the name “Adam” rather than “[the] man.” Translations of the Bible differ as to where they make the change from “man” to “Adam” (e.g., NASB and NIV translate “Adam” here, while NEB and NRSV continue to use “the man”; the KJV uses “Adam” twice in v. 19).
- Genesis 2:20 tn Heb “there was not found a companion who corresponded to him.” The subject of the third masculine singular verb form is indefinite. Without a formally expressed subject the verb may be translated as passive: “one did not find = there was not found.”
- Genesis 2:21 tn Heb “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on the man.”
- Genesis 2:21 tn Heb “and he slept.” In the sequence the verb may be subordinated to the following verb to indicate a temporal clause (“while…”).
- Genesis 2:21 tn Traditionally translated “rib,” the Hebrew word actually means “side.” The Hebrew text reads, “and he took one from his sides,” which could be rendered “part of his sides.” That idea may fit better the explanation by the man that the woman is his flesh and bone.
- Genesis 2:21 tn Heb “closed up the flesh under it.”
- Genesis 2:22 tn The Hebrew verb is בָּנָה (banah, “to make, to build, to construct”). The text states that the Lord God built the rib into a woman. Again, the passage gives no indication of precisely how this was done.
- Genesis 2:23 tn The Hebrew term הַפַּעַם (happaʿam) means “the [this] time, this place,” or “now, finally, at last.” The expression conveys the futility of the man while naming the animals and finding no one who corresponded to him.
- Genesis 2:23 tn The Hebrew text is very precise, stating: “of this one it will be said, ‘woman’.” The text is not necessarily saying that the man named his wife—that comes after the fall (Gen 3:20).sn Some argue that naming implies the man’s authority or ownership over the woman here. Naming can indicate ownership or authority if one is calling someone or something by one’s name and/or calling a name over someone or something (see 2 Sam 12:28; 2 Chr 7:14; Isa 4:1; Jer 7:14; 15:16), especially if one is conquering and renaming a site. But the idiomatic construction used here (the Niphal of קָרָא [qaraʾ] with the preposition ל [lamed]) does not suggest such an idea. In each case where it is used, the one naming discerns something about the object being named and gives it an appropriate name (See 1 Sam 9:9; 2 Sam 18:18; Prov 16:21; Isa 1:26; 32:5; 35:8; 62:4, 12; Jer 19:6). Adam is not so much naming the woman as he is discerning her close relationship to him and referring to her accordingly. He may simply be anticipating that she will be given an appropriate name based on the discernible similarity.
- Genesis 2:23 tn Or “from” (but see v. 22).
- Genesis 2:23 sn This poetic section expresses the correspondence between the man and the woman. She is bone of his bones, flesh of his flesh. Note the wordplay (paronomasia) between “woman” (אִשָּׁה, ʾishah) and “man” (אִישׁ, ʾish). On the surface it appears that the word for woman is the feminine form of the word for man. But the two words are not etymologically related. The sound and the sense give that impression, however, and make for a more effective wordplay.
- Genesis 2:24 tn This statement, introduced by the Hebrew phrase עַל־כֵּן (ʿal ken, “therefore” or “that is why”), is an editorial comment, not an extension of the quotation. The statement is describing what typically happens, not what will or should happen. It is saying, “This is why we do things the way we do.” It links a contemporary (with the narrator) practice with the historical event being narrated. The historical event narrated in v. 23 provides the basis for the contemporary practice described in v. 24. That is why the imperfect verb forms are translated with the present tense rather than future.
- Genesis 2:24 tn The prefixed verb form יַעֲזָב (yaʿzov) may be an imperfect, “leaves,” with a gnomic or characteristic nuance, or a jussive, “should leave” (possibly indicated by the short o-vowel). The next two verbs, each a perfect consecutive, continue the force of this verb. For other examples of עַל־כֵּן (ʿal ken, “therefore, that is why”) with the imperfect in a narrative framework, see Gen 10:9; 32:32 (the phrase “to this day” indicates characteristic behavior is in view); Num 21:14, 27; 1 Sam 5:5 (note “to this day”); 19:24 (perhaps the imperfect is customary here, “were saying”); 2 Sam 5:8. The verb translated “leave” (עָזָב, ʿazav) normally means “to abandon, to forsake, to leave behind,” when used with human subject and object (see Josh 22:3; 1 Sam 30:13; Ps 27:10; Prov 2:17; Isa 54:6; 60:15; 62:4; Jer 49:11). Within the context of the ancient Israelite extended family structure, this cannot refer to emotional or geographical separation. The narrator is using hyperbole to emphasize the change in perspective that typically overtakes a young man when his thoughts turn to love and marriage.
- Genesis 2:24 tn The verb is traditionally translated “cleaves [to]”; it has the basic idea of “stick with/to” (e.g., it is used of Ruth resolutely staying with her mother-in-law in Ruth 1:14). In this passage it describes the inseparable relationship between the man and the woman in marriage as God intended it.
- Genesis 2:24 tn Heb “and they become one flesh.” The retention of the word “flesh” (בָּשָׂר, basar) in the translation often leads to an incomplete interpretation. The Hebrew word refers to more than just a sexual union. The man and woman bring into being a new family unit (הָיָה plus preposition ל [hayah plus lamed] means “become”). The phrase “one flesh” occurs only here and must be interpreted in light of v. 23. There the man declares that the woman is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. To be one’s “bone and flesh” is to be related by blood to someone. For example, the phrase describes the relationship between Laban and Jacob (Gen 29:14); Abimelech and the Shechemites (Judg 9:2; his mother was a Shechemite); David and the Israelites (2 Sam 5:1); David and the elders of Judah (2 Sam 19:12); and David and his nephew Amasa (2 Sam 19:13; see 2 Sam 17:25; 1 Chr 2:16-17). The expression “one flesh” seems to indicate that they become, as it were, “kin,” at least legally (a new family unit is created) or metaphorically. In this first marriage in human history, the woman was literally formed from the man’s bone and flesh. The first marriage sets the pattern for how later marriages are understood and explains why marriage supersedes the parent-child relationship. See NT use of this passage in Matt 19:5-6; Mark 10:8; 1 Cor 6:16; and Eph 5:31.
- Genesis 2:25 tn Heb “And the two of them were naked, the man and his wife.” sn Naked. The motif of nakedness is introduced here and plays an important role in the next chapter. In the Bible nakedness conveys different things. In this context it signifies either innocence or integrity, depending on how those terms are defined. There is no fear of exploitation, no sense of vulnerability. But after the entrance of sin into the race, nakedness takes on a negative sense. It is then usually connected with the sense of vulnerability, shame, exploitation, and exposure (such as the idea of “uncovering nakedness” either in sexual exploitation or in captivity in war).
- Genesis 2:25 tn The imperfect verb form here has a customary nuance, indicating a continuing condition in past time. The meaning of the Hebrew term בּוֹשׁ (bosh) is “to be ashamed, to put to shame,” but its meaning is stronger than “to be embarrassed.” The word conveys the fear of exploitation or evil—enemies are put to shame through military victory. It indicates the feeling of shame that approximates a fear of evil.
Hebrews 1
Introduction: God Has Spoken Fully and Finally in His Son
1 After God spoke long ago[a] in various portions[b] and in various ways[c] to our ancestors[d] through the prophets, 2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son,[e] whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world.[f] 3 The Son is[g] the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word,[h] and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.[i] 4 Thus he became[j] so far better than the angels as[k] he has inherited a name superior to theirs.
The Son Is Superior to Angels
5 For to which of the angels did God[l] ever say, “You are my son! Today I have fathered you”?[m] And in another place[n] he says,[o] “I will be his father and he will be my son.”[p] 6 But when he again brings[q] his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all the angels of God worship him!”[r] 7 And he says[s] of the angels, “He makes[t] his angels winds[u] and his ministers a flame of fire,”[v] 8 but of[w] the Son he says,[x]
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,[y]
and a righteous scepter[z] is the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness.
So God, your God, has anointed you over your companions[aa] with the oil of rejoicing.”[ab]
10 And,
“You founded the earth in the beginning, Lord,[ac]
and the heavens are the works of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you continue.
And they will all grow old like a garment,
12 and like a robe you will fold them up
and like a garment[ad] they will be changed,
but you are the same and your years will never run out.”[ae]
13 But to which of the angels[af] has he ever said, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet”?[ag] 14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to serve those[ah] who will inherit salvation?
Footnotes
- Hebrews 1:1 tn Or “spoke formerly.”
- Hebrews 1:1 tn Or “parts.” The idea is that God’s previous revelation came in many parts and was therefore fragmentary or partial (L&N 63.19), in comparison with the final and complete revelation contained in God’s Son. However, some interpret πολυμερῶς (polumerōs) in Heb 1:1 to mean “on many different occasions” and would thus translate “many times” (L&N 67.11). This is the option followed by the NIV “at many times and in various ways.” Finally, this word is also understood to refer to the different manners in which something may be done, and would then be translated “in many different ways” (L&N 89.81). In this last case, the two words πολυμερῶς and πολυτρόπως (polutropōs) mutually reinforce one another (“in many and various ways,” NRSV).
- Hebrews 1:1 tn These two phrases are emphasized in Greek by being placed at the beginning of the sentence and by alliteration.
- Hebrews 1:1 tn Grk “to the fathers.”
- Hebrews 1:2 tn The Greek puts an emphasis on the quality of God’s final revelation. As such, it is more than an indefinite notion (“a son”) though less than a definite one (“the son”), for this final revelation is not just through any son of God, nor is the emphasis specifically on the person himself. Rather, the focus here is on the nature of the vehicle of God’s revelation: He is no mere spokesman (or prophet) for God, nor is he merely a heavenly messenger (or angel); instead, this final revelation comes through one who is intimately acquainted with the heavenly Father in a way that only a family member could be. There is, however, no exact equivalent in English (“in son” is hardly good English style).sn The phrase in a son is the fulcrum of Heb 1:1-4. It concludes the contrast of God’s old and new revelation and introduces a series of seven descriptions of the Son. These descriptions show why he is the ultimate revelation of God.
- Hebrews 1:2 tn Grk “the ages.” The temporal (ages) came to be used of the spatial (what exists in those time periods). See Heb 11:3 for the same usage.
- Hebrews 1:3 tn Grk “who being…and sustaining.” Heb 1:1-4 form one skillfully composed sentence in Greek, but it must be broken into shorter segments to correspond to contemporary English usage, which does not allow for sentences of this length and complexity.
- Hebrews 1:3 tn Grk “by the word of his power.”
- Hebrews 1:3 sn An allusion to Ps 110:1, quoted often in Hebrews.
- Hebrews 1:4 tn Grk “having become.” This is part of the same sentence that extends from v. 1 through v. 4 in the Greek text.
- Hebrews 1:4 tn Most modern English translations attempt to make the comparison somewhat smoother by treating “name” as if it were the subject of the second element: “as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs” (cf. NAB, NIV, NRSV, CEV). However, the Son is the subject of both the first and second elements: “he became so far better”; “he has inherited a name.” The present translation maintains this parallelism even though it results in a somewhat more awkward rendering.sn This comparison is somewhat awkward to express in English, but it reflects an important element in the argument of Hebrews: the superiority of Jesus Christ.
- Hebrews 1:5 tn Grk “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
- Hebrews 1:5 tn Grk “I have begotten you.”sn A quotation from Ps 2:7.
- Hebrews 1:5 tn Grk “And again,” quoting another OT passage.
- Hebrews 1:5 tn The words “he says” are not in the Greek text but are supplied to make a complete English sentence. In the Greek text this is a continuation of the previous sentence, but English does not normally employ such long and complex sentences.
- Hebrews 1:5 tn Grk “I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me.”sn A quotation from 2 Sam 7:14 (cf. 1 Chr 17:13).
- Hebrews 1:6 tn Or “And again when he brings.” The translation adopted in the text looks forward to Christ’s second coming to earth. Some take “again” to introduce the quotation (as in 1:5) and understand this as Christ’s first coming, but this view does not fit well with Heb 2:7. Others understand it as his exaltation/ascension to heaven, but this takes the phrase “into the world” in an unlikely way.
- Hebrews 1:6 sn A quotation combining themes from Deut 32:43 and Ps 97:7.
- Hebrews 1:7 sn The Greek correlative conjunctions μέν and δέ (men and de) emphasize the contrastive parallelism of vs. 7 (what God says about the angels) over against vv. 8-9 and vv. 10-12 (what God says about the son).
- Hebrews 1:7 tn Grk “He who makes.”
- Hebrews 1:7 tn Or “spirits” (so KJV, NKJV). The Greek word πνεῦμα (pneuma) can mean either “wind” or “spirit” depending on the context. Since the context here concerns the superiority of the Son to the angels, many interpreters and most modern English translations see the present verse emphasizing the transitory or ephemeral nature of God’s other servants, the angels, and thus underscoring their inferiority to the Son.
- Hebrews 1:7 sn A quotation from Ps 104:4.
- Hebrews 1:8 tn Or “to.”
- Hebrews 1:8 tn The verb “he says” (λέγει, legei) is implied from the λέγει of v. 7.
- Hebrews 1:8 tn Or possibly, “Your throne is God forever and ever.” This translation is quite doubtful, however, since (1) in the context the Son is being contrasted to the angels and is presented as far better than they. The imagery of God being the Son’s throne would seem to be of God being his authority. If so, in what sense could this not be said of the angels? In what sense is the Son thus contrasted with the angels? (2) The μέν…δέ (men…de) construction that connects v. 7 with v. 8 clearly lays out this contrast: “On the one hand, he says of the angels…on the other hand, he says of the Son.” Thus, although it is grammatically possible that θεός (theos) in v. 8 should be taken as a predicate nominative, the context and the correlative conjunctions are decidedly against it. Hebrews 1:8 is thus a strong affirmation of the deity of Christ.
- Hebrews 1:8 tn Grk “the righteous scepter,” but used generically.
- Hebrews 1:9 sn God…has anointed you over your companions. God’s anointing gives the son a superior position and authority over his fellows.
- Hebrews 1:9 sn A quotation from Ps 45:6-7.
- Hebrews 1:10 sn You founded the earth…your years will never run out. In its original setting Ps 102:25-27 refers to the work of God in creation, but here in Hebrews 1:10-12 the writer employs it in reference to Christ, the Lord, making a strong argument for the essential deity of the Son.
- Hebrews 1:12 tc The words “like a garment” (ὡς ἱμάτιον, hōs himation) are found in excellent and early mss (P46 א A B D* 1739) though absent in a majority of witnesses (D1 Ψ 0243 0278 33 1881 M lat sy bo). Although it is possible that longer reading was produced by overzealous scribes who wanted to underscore the frailty of creation, it is much more likely that the shorter reading was produced by scribes who wanted to conform the wording to that of Ps 102:26 (101:27 LXX), which here lacks the second “like a garment.” Both external and internal considerations decidedly favor the longer reading, and point to the author of Hebrews as the one underscoring the difference between the Son and creation.sn The phrase like a garment here is not part of the original OT text (see tc note above); for this reason it has been printed in normal type.
- Hebrews 1:12 sn A quotation from Ps 102:25-27.
- Hebrews 1:13 sn The parallel phrases to which of the angels in vv. 5 and 13 show the unity of this series of quotations (vv. 5-14) in revealing the superiority of the Son over angels (v. 4).
- Hebrews 1:13 sn A quotation from Ps 110:1.
- Hebrews 1:14 tn Grk “sent for service for the sake of those.”
John 1:1-18
The Prologue to the Gospel
1 In the beginning[a] was the Word, and the Word was with God,[b] and the Word was fully God.[c] 2 The Word[d] was with God in the beginning. 3 All things were created[e] by him, and apart from him not one thing was created[f] that has been created.[g] 4 In him was life,[h] and the life was the light of mankind.[i] 5 And the light shines on[j] in the darkness,[k] but[l] the darkness has not mastered it.[m]
6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John.[n] 7 He came as a witness[o] to testify[p] about the light, so that everyone[q] might believe through him. 8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify[r] about the light. 9 The true light, who gives light to everyone,[s] was coming into the world.[t] 10 He was in the world, and the world was created[u] by him, but[v] the world did not recognize[w] him. 11 He came to what was his own,[x] but[y] his own people[z] did not receive him.[aa] 12 But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name[ab]—he has given the right to become God’s children 13 —children not born[ac] by human parents[ad] or by human desire[ae] or a husband’s[af] decision,[ag] but by God.
14 Now[ah] the Word became flesh[ai] and took up residence[aj] among us. We[ak] saw his glory—the glory of the one and only,[al] full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. 15 John[am] testified[an] about him and shouted out,[ao] “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am,[ap] because he existed before me.’” 16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another.[aq] 17 For the law was given through Moses, but[ar] grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. The only one,[as] himself God, who is in closest fellowship with[at] the Father, has made God[au] known.[av]
Footnotes
- John 1:1 sn In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning, John 1:1) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis—“In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in Gen 1 are also found in John’s prologue: “life” (1:4) “light” (1:4) and “darkness” (1:5). Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in John 2 with the changing of water into wine, in John 11 with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)
- John 1:1 tn The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός…means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.
- John 1:1 tn Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (theos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.sn And the Word was fully God. John’s theology consistently drives toward the conclusion that Jesus, the incarnate Word, is just as much God as God the Father. This can be seen, for example, in texts like John 10:30 (“The Father and I are one”), 17:11 (“so that they may be one just as we are one”), and 8:58 (“before Abraham came into existence, I am”). The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”); rather it affirms that the Word and God are one in essence.
- John 1:2 tn Grk “He”; the referent (the Word) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
- John 1:3 tn Or “made”; Grk “came into existence.”
- John 1:3 tn Or “made”; Grk “nothing came into existence.”
- John 1:3 tc There is a major punctuation problem here: Should this relative clause go with v. 3 or v. 4? The earliest mss have no punctuation (P66,75* א* A B Δ al). Many of the later mss which do have punctuation place it before the phrase, thus putting it with v. 4 (P75c C D L Ws 050* pc). NA25 placed the phrase in v. 3; NA26 moved the words to the beginning of v. 4. In a detailed article K. Aland defended the change (“Eine Untersuchung zu Johannes 1, 3-4. Über die Bedeutung eines Punktes,” ZNW 59 [1968]: 174-209). He sought to prove that the attribution of ὃ γέγονεν (ho gegonen) to v. 3 began to be carried out in the 4th century in the Greek church. This came out of the Arian controversy, and was intended as a safeguard for doctrine. The change was unknown in the West. Aland is probably correct in affirming that the phrase was attached to v. 4 by the Gnostics and the Eastern Church; only when the Arians began to use the phrase was it attached to v. 3. But this does not rule out the possibility that, by moving the words from v. 4 to v. 3, one is restoring the original reading. Understanding the words as part of v. 3 is natural and adds to the emphasis which is built up there, while it also gives a terse, forceful statement in v. 4. On the other hand, taking the phrase ὃ γέγονεν with v. 4 gives a complicated expression: C. K. Barrett says that both ways of understanding v. 4 with ὃ γέγονεν included “are almost impossibly clumsy” (St. John, 157): “That which came into being—in it the Word was life”; “That which came into being—in the Word was its life.” The following stylistic points should be noted in the solution of this problem: (1) John frequently starts sentences with ἐν (en); (2) he repeats frequently (“nothing was created that has been created”); (3) 5:26 and 6:53 both give a sense similar to v. 4 if it is understood without the phrase; (4) it makes far better Johannine sense to say that in the Word was life than to say that the created universe (what was made, ὃ γέγονεν) was life in him. In conclusion, the phrase is best taken with v. 3. Schnackenburg, Barrett, Carson, Haenchen, Morris, KJV, and NIV concur (against Brown, Beasley-Murray, and NEB). The arguments of R. Schnackenburg, St. John, 1:239-40, are particularly persuasive.tn Or “made”; Grk “that has come into existence.”
- John 1:4 tn John uses ζωή (zōē) 36 times: 17 times it occurs with αἰώνιος (aiōnios), and in the remaining occurrences outside the prologue it is clear from context that “eternal” life is meant. The two uses in 1:4, if they do not refer to “eternal” life, would be the only exceptions. (Also 1 John uses ζωή 13 times, always of “eternal” life.)sn An allusion to Ps 36:9, which gives significant OT background: “For with you is the fountain of life; In your light we see light.” In later Judaism, Bar 4:2 expresses a similar idea. Life, especially eternal life, will become one of the major themes of John’s Gospel.
- John 1:4 tn Or “humanity”; Grk “of men” (but ἄνθρωπος [anthrōpos] is used in a generic sense here, not restricted to males only, thus “mankind,” “humanity”).
- John 1:5 tn To this point the author has used past tenses (imperfects, aorists); now he switches to a present. The light continually shines (thus the translation, “shines on”). Even as the author writes, it is shining. The present here most likely has gnomic force (though it is possible to take it as a historical present); it expresses the timeless truth that the light of the world (cf. 8:12; 9:5; 12:46) never ceases to shine.sn The light shines on. The question of whether John has in mind here the preincarnate Christ or the incarnate Christ is probably too specific. The incarnation is not really introduced until v. 9, but here the point is more general: It is of the very nature of light, that it shines.
- John 1:5 sn The author now introduces what will become a major theme of John’s Gospel: the opposition of light and darkness. The antithesis is a natural one, widespread in antiquity. Gen 1 gives considerable emphasis to it in the account of the creation, and so do the writings of Qumran. It is the major theme of one of the most important extra-biblical documents found at Qumran, the so-called War Scroll, properly titled The War of the Sons of Light with the Sons of Darkness. Connections between John and Qumran are still an area of scholarly debate and a consensus has not yet emerged. See T. A. Hoffman, “1 John and the Qumran Scrolls,” BTB 8 (1978): 117-25.
- John 1:5 tn Grk “and,” but the context clearly indicates a contrast, so this has been translated as an adversative use of καί (kai).
- John 1:5 tn Or “comprehended it,” or “overcome it.” The verb κατέλαβεν (katelaben) is not easy to translate. “To seize” or “to grasp” is possible, but this also permits “to grasp with the mind” in the sense of “to comprehend” (esp. in the middle voice). This is probably another Johannine double meaning—one does not usually think of darkness as trying to “understand” light. For it to mean this, “darkness” must be understood as meaning “certain people,” or perhaps “humanity” at large, darkened in understanding. But in John’s usage, darkness is not normally used of people or a group of people. Rather it usually signifies the evil environment or ‘sphere’ in which people find themselves: “They loved darkness rather than light” (John 3:19). Those who follow Jesus do not walk in darkness (8:12). They are to walk while they have light, lest the darkness “overtake/overcome” them (12:35, same verb as here). For John, with his set of symbols and imagery, darkness is not something which seeks to “understand (comprehend)” the light, but represents the forces of evil which seek to “overcome (conquer)” it. The English verb “to master” may be used in both sorts of contexts, as “he mastered his lesson” and “he mastered his opponent.”
- John 1:6 sn John refers to John the Baptist.
- John 1:7 tn Grk “came for a testimony.”sn Witness is also one of the major themes of John’s Gospel. The Greek verb μαρτυρέω (martureō) occurs 33 times (compare to once in Matthew, once in Luke, 0 in Mark) and the noun μαρτυρία (marturia) 14 times (0 in Matthew, once in Luke, 3 times in Mark).
- John 1:7 tn Or “to bear witness.”
- John 1:7 tn Grk “all.”
- John 1:8 tn Or “to bear witness.”
- John 1:9 tn Grk “every man” (but in a generic sense, “every person,” or “every human being”).
- John 1:9 tn Or “He was the true light, who gives light to everyone who comes into the world.” The participle ἐρχόμενον (erchomenon) may be either (1) neuter nominative, agreeing with τὸ φῶς (to phōs), or (2) masculine accusative, agreeing with ἄνθρωπον (anthrōpon). Option (1) results in a periphrastic imperfect with ἦν (ēn), 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 (egō phōs eis ton kosmon elēlutha); (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.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, ho kosmos houtos) 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, ho aiōn houtos) 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.
- John 1:10 tn Or “was made”; Grk “came into existence.”
- John 1:10 tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”
- John 1:10 tn Or “know.”
- John 1:11 tn Grk “to his own things.”
- John 1:11 tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”
- John 1:11 tn “People” is not in the Greek text but is implied.
- John 1:11 sn His own people did not receive him. There is a subtle irony here: When the λόγος (logos) came into the world, he came to his own (τὰ ἴδια, ta idia, literally “his own things”) and his own people (οἱ ἴδιοι, hoi idioi), who should have known and received him, but they did not. This time John does not say that “his own” did not know him, but that they did not receive him (παρέλαβον, parelabon). The idea is one not of mere recognition, but of acceptance and welcome.
- John 1:12 tn On the use of the πιστεύω + εἰς (pisteuō + eis) construction in John: The verb πιστεύω occurs 98 times in John (compared to 11 times in Matthew, 14 times in Mark [including the longer ending], and 9 times in Luke). One of the unsolved mysteries is why the corresponding noun form πίστις (pistis) is never used at all. Many have held the noun was in use in some pre-Gnostic sects and this rendered it suspect for John. It might also be that for John, faith was an activity, something that men do (cf. W. Turner, “Believing and Everlasting Life—A Johannine Inquiry,” ExpTim 64 [1952/53]: 50-52). John uses πιστεύω in 4 major ways: (1) of believing facts, reports, etc., 12 times; (2) of believing people (or the scriptures), 19 times; (3) of believing “in” Christ” (πιστεύω + εἰς + acc.), 36 times; (4) used absolutely without any person or object specified, 30 times (the one remaining passage is 2:24, where Jesus refused to “trust” himself to certain individuals). Of these, the most significant is the use of πιστεύω with εἰς + accusative. It is not unlike the Pauline ἐν Χριστῷ (en Christō) formula. Some have argued that this points to a Hebrew (more likely Aramaic) original behind the Fourth Gospel. But it probably indicates something else, as C. H. Dodd observed: “πιστεύειν with the dative so inevitably connoted simple credence, in the sense of an intellectual judgment, that the moral element of personal trust or reliance inherent in the Hebrew or Aramaic phrase—an element integral to the primitive Christian conception of faith in Christ—needed to be otherwise expressed” (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 183).
- John 1:13 tn The Greek term translated “born” here also involves conception.
- John 1:13 tn Grk “of blood(s).” The plural αἱμάτων (haimatōn) has seemed a problem to many interpreters. At least some sources in antiquity imply that blood was thought of as being important in the development of the fetus during its time in the womb: thus Wis 7:1: “in the womb of a mother I was molded into flesh, within the period of 10 months, compacted with blood, from the seed of a man and the pleasure of marriage.” In John 1:13, the plural αἱμάτων may imply the action of both parents. It may also refer to the “genetic” contribution of both parents, and so be equivalent to “human descent” (see BDAG 26 s.v. αἷμα 1.a). E. C. Hoskyns thinks John could not have used the singular here because Christians are in fact ‘begotten’ by the blood of Christ (The Fourth Gospel, 143), although the context would seem to make it clear that the blood in question is something other than the blood of Christ.
- John 1:13 tn Or “of the will of the flesh.” The phrase οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκός (oude ek thelēmatos sarkos) is more clearly a reference to sexual desire, but it should be noted that σάρξ (sarx) in John does not convey the evil sense common in Pauline usage. For John it refers to the physical nature in its weakness rather than in its sinfulness. There is no clearer confirmation of this than the immediately following verse, where the λόγος (logos) became σάρξ.
- John 1:13 tn Or “man’s.”
- John 1:13 tn The third phrase, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρός (oude ek thelēmatos andros), means much the same as the second one. The word here (ἀνηρ, anēr) is often used for a husband, resulting in the translation “or a husband’s decision,” or more generally, “or of any human volition whatsoever.” L. Morris may be right when he sees here an emphasis directed at the Jewish pride in race and patriarchal ancestry, although such a specific reference is difficult to prove (John [NICNT], 101).
- John 1:14 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic, the incarnation of the Word. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.
- John 1:14 tn This looks at the Word incarnate in humility and weakness; the word σάρξ (sarx) does not carry overtones of sinfulness here as it frequently does in Pauline usage. See also John 3:6.
- John 1:14 tn Grk “and tabernacled.”sn The Greek word translated took up residence (σκηνόω, skēnoō) alludes to the OT tabernacle, where the Shekinah, the visible glory of God’s presence, resided. The author is suggesting that this glory can now be seen in Jesus (note the following verse). The verb used here may imply that the Shekinah glory that once was found in the tabernacle has taken up residence in the person of Jesus. Cf. also John 2:19-21. The Word became flesh. This verse constitutes the most concise statement of the incarnation in the New Testament. John 1:1 makes it clear that the Logos was fully God, but 1:14 makes it clear that he was also fully human. A Docetic interpretation is completely ruled out. Here for the first time the Logos of 1:1 is identified as Jesus of Nazareth—the two are one and the same. Thus this is the last time the word logos is used in the Fourth Gospel to refer to the second person of the Trinity. From here on it is Jesus of Nazareth who is the focus of John’s Gospel.
- John 1:14 tn Grk “and we saw.”
- John 1:14 tn Or “of the unique one.” Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12; 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant., 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14; 1:18; 3:16, and 3:18).
- John 1:15 sn John refers to John the Baptist.
- John 1:15 tn Or “bore witness.”
- John 1:15 tn Grk “and shouted out saying.” The participle λέγων (legōn) is redundant in English and has not been translated.
- John 1:15 tn Or “has a higher rank than I.”
- John 1:16 tn Grk “for from his fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace.” The meaning of the phrase χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος (charin anti charitos) could be: (1) love (grace) under the New Covenant in place of love (grace) under the Sinai Covenant, thus replacement; (2) grace “on top of” grace, thus accumulation; (3) grace corresponding to grace, thus correspondence. The most commonly held view is (2) in one sense or another, and this is probably the best explanation. This sense is supported by a fairly well-known use in Philo, Posterity 43 (145). Morna D. Hooker suggested that Exod 33:13 provides the background for this expression: “Now therefore, I pray you, if I have found χάρις (LXX) in your sight, let me know your ways, that I may know you, so that I may find χάρις (LXX) in your sight.” Hooker proposed that it is this idea of favor given to one who has already received favor which lies behind 1:16, and this seems very probable as a good explanation of the meaning of the phrase (“The Johannine Prologue and the Messianic Secret,” NTS 21 [1974/75]: 53).sn Earlier commentators (including Origen and Luther) took the words For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another to be John the Baptist’s. Most modern commentators take them as the words of the author.
- John 1:17 tn “But” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the implied contrast between the Mosaic law and grace through Jesus Christ. John 1:17 seems to indicate clearly that the Old Covenant (Sinai) was being contrasted with the New. In Jewish sources the Law was regarded as a gift from God (Josephus, Ant. 3.8.10 [3.223]; Pirqe Avot 1.1; Sifre Deut 31:4 §305). Further information can be found in T. F. Glasson, Moses in the Fourth Gospel (SBT).
- John 1:18 tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenēs theos, “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (ho monogenēs huios, “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C3 Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 M lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. P75 א1 33 have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in P66 א* B C* L. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (ho ōn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (theos ēn ho logos) means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8; 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.tn Or “The unique one.” For the meaning of μονογενής (monogenēs) see the note on “one and only” in 1:14.
- John 1:18 tn Grk “in the bosom of” (an idiom for closeness or nearness; cf. L&N 34.18; BDAG 556 s.v. κόλπος 1).
- John 1:18 tn Grk “him”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
- John 1:18 sn Has made God known. In this final verse of the prologue, the climactic and ultimate statement of the earthly career of the Logos, Jesus of Nazareth, is reached. The unique One (John 1:14), the One who has taken on human form and nature by becoming incarnate (became flesh, 1:14), who is himself fully God (the Word was God, 1:1c) and is to be identified with the ever-living One of the Old Testament revelation (Exod 3:14), who is in intimate relationship with the Father, this One and no other has fully revealed what God is like. As Jesus said to Philip in John 14:9, “The one who has seen me has seen the Father.”
New English Translation (NET)
NET Bible® copyright ©1996-2017 by Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C. http://netbible.com All rights reserved.