Matthew 27:46-47

Recently, I was thinking about the part in Matthew 27 where Jesus calls out, "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?" and some in the crowd think that He is calling Elijah.  In the same way that they miss the source of Jesus' words (Psalm 22:1) and don't recognize "Eli" as אֵלִי, the Hebrew word for "my God," they also don't recognize Jesus as the Word of God.

Isaiah 5:7

Since the beginning of October, I've been working through the videos on Jeremiah in the archives of the Daily Dose of Hebrew, trying to catch up to the current weekend editions (in chapter 9).  A couple weeks ago, I watched the video on Jeremiah 2:21, which directed me to Isaiah 5, where I found the same sort of feature that I discovered in Isaiah 13 last month.  Part of verse 7 says, "The men of Judah are his [the LORD's] pleasant planting."  The phrase "pleasant planting" exhibits both alliteration and syllabic balance, and this euphony mirrors the description "pleasant."

Malachi 4:1

The Old Testament reading on Worship Anew a couple weeks ago was Malachi 4.  I was following along in the Latin Vulgate and noticed that the word for "stubble" (stipula) in the first verse is a diminutive in Latin.

Ecce enim dies veniet succensa quasi caminus et erunt omnes superbi et omnes facientes impietatem stipula et inflammabit eos dies venies dicit Dominus exercituum quae non relinquet eis radicem et germen 

For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble.  The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the LORD of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch.

As far as I can tell, the Hebrew word (קַשׁ) isn't a diminutive, but if I understand correctly, the Latin stipula is a diminutive of stipes, the word for stalk.  The word describes what "all the arrogant and all evildoers" will become, and I think the use of the diminutive may even have something of a dismissive and belittling sense.

It also occurred to me that since "all" (omnes, כָל) is repeated, there's a sense of totality.

Isaiah 13:22

Last week, as I was flipping through my Bible, I happened to notice some alliteration in Isaiah 13:22:  "Hyenas will cry in its towers, and jackals in the pleasant palaces; its time is close at hand and its days will not be prolonged."

Like I noticed with Psalm 16:6 about a year ago, the euphony of "pleasant palaces" matches the meaning of the words.

I lookt up the Hebrew and discovered that this feature is not present there.

John 17:1

When the Daily Dose of Greek went over John 17:1 last week, I noticed a chiasm.

Ταῦτα ἐλάλησεν Ἰησοῦς, καὶ ἐπάρας τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἶπεν· πάτερ, ἐλήλυθεν ἡ ὥρα· δόξασόν σου τὸν υἱόν, ἵνα ὁ υἱὸς δοξάσῃ σε

When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, "Father the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you."

This particular word order ("[You] glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you") illustrates this reciprocity.

John 16:32

The Daily Dose of Greek has been going through John 16.  A couple days ago, I watched the video for John 16:32:

ἰδοὺ ἔρχεται ὥρα καὶ ἐλήλυθεν ἵνα σκορπισθῆτε ἕκαστος εἰς τὰ ἴδια κἀμὲ μόνον ἀφῆτε· καὶ οὐκ εἰμὶ μόνος, ὅτι ὁ πατὴρ μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐστιν.

Behold the hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, each to his own home, and will leave me alone.  Yet I am not alone, for the Father is with me.

The verb σκορπισθῆτε ("you will be scattered") has a plural subject, but ἕκαστος is singular ("each"), so even in the language here, there's a sense of this division.  There's a movement from plural to singular.

John 11:5

Yester-day, I watched the Concordia University Wisconsin chapel service from 3 April 2017:

The text was John 11:1-45.  As usual, I was following along in my French New Testament, and I noticed a feature in verse 5:  "Or, Jésus aimait Marthe, et sa sœur, et Lazare."  ("Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.")  Because of the polysyndeton (Martha and her sister and Lazarus), there's a greater sense of each individual person than there would be in a mere list (Martha, her sister, and Lazarus), which gives more of a general overview or distant summary.  Consequently, this way of naming these people provides a greater sense of the specific and personal relationship that Jesus has with each of them.

This feature is also present in the Greek:  Ἠγάπα δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς τὴν Μάρθαν καὶ τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὐτῆς καὶ τὸν Λάζαρον.

Luke 14:9

Last week, the Gospel reading was from Luke 14, and I noticed some interesting translation differences in verse 9, specifically in the clause "δὸς τούτῳ τόπον."  I was following along in my French New Testament, where this is translated "Cède la place à cette personne-là."  In the ESV, it's translated as "Give your place to this person," and in the NIV, "Give this man your seat."  The ESV and NIV both supply a possessive adjective ("your place" and "your seat") that's not present in the original Greek or my French translation.  In the NKJV, this clause is rendered as "Give place to this man," which I think is the best of these three English translations.

As the context makes clear, the man who is askt to give up this seat doesn't have a valid claim to it, so the possessive adjective your doesn't truly apply.

Hebrews 11

An-other of the readings on Worship Anew two weeks ago was from Hebrews 11.  This reminded me of something I'd previously noticed about this chapter.  Almost half of the verses begin with the phrase "by faith."  This repetition illustrates the importance of faith, and this importance is further emphasized by the phrase's position at the beginning of most of these verses.

Psalm 103:11-12

The Psalm reading on Worship Anew last week was part of Psalm 103.  Years ago, I had a realization about verses 11-12 and I felt I should write about it here too.

In the ESV, these verses are:  "11 For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him; 12 as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us."  In verse 11, there's a comparison involving height, and in verse 12, there's a comparison involving lateral distance.  Taken together, the directions of these two comparisons form a cross, and Christ's death on the cross illustrates "his steadfast love" and is how "he remove[s] our transgressions from us."

1 Corinthians 12:18

A couple weeks ago, I watched the Concordia University Wisconsin chapel service from 29 January 2016:

The text was 1 Corinthians 12:12-26.  I noticed in particular verse 18:  "But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose."  This comes right after Paul's arguments that a foot is still part of the body even though it's not a hand and that an ear is still part of the body even though it's not an eye.

Hearing the text this time, I realized that God's "arrang[ing] the members in the body" has a broader sense.  It works both within and outside of this illustration.  In the immediate context, it refers to the positions of the foot and ear and so on.  Since these body parts are acting as metaphors for individuals in the body of Christ, however, there's also a second sense:  God puts people in specific places and times.

Proverbs 29:6

Last week, I read some more chapters in Proverbs and noticed two contrasts in the verbs in Proverbs 29:6:  "An evil man is ensnared in his transgression, but a righteous man sings and rejoices."  In the first clause, there's one verb, and it's passive ("is ensnared"); in the second clause, there are two verbs, and both are active ("sings" and "rejoices").  These contrasts emphasize the trapped nature of the evil man.  Even in the language used to describe him, he has no agency.  He is acted upon; he himself doesn't act.  The righteous man, on the other hand, is the active agent in his clause and does two actions.

This may not be the case in the original Hebrew though.  As I've mentioned before, I don't understand Hebrew verbs well enough yet to be able to comment on this, but in my German translation of Proverbs, what's rendered as "is ensnared" in English is translated as an active voice verb:  "Wenn ein Böser sündigt, verstrickt er sich selbst" ("when an evil man sins, he ensnares himself").

Proverbs 24:3-4

Last week, I read a few chapters of Proverbs, and I noticed some significance in the structure of Proverbs 24:3-4:  "3 By wisdom a house is built, and by understanding it is established; 4 by knowledge the rooms are filled with all precious and pleasant riches."

In each of these three clauses, the agents precede the passive voice verbs.  To some degree, this particular structure illustrates that wisdom is a prerequisite for building a house, understanding is a prerequisite for establishing it, and knowledge is a prerequisite for filling the rooms.  In the same way that wisdom, understanding, and knowledge come first in these clauses, they also must come first in a temporal sense.

This same structure is present in the Hebrew.  I don't know enough about Hebrew verbs to be able to comment on how the verbs in this verse relate to the English passive forms, but I think the notion of wisdom being necessary before a house is built and so on for the other clauses is comparable.

1 John 4:20

In going through 1 John in the archives of the Daily Dose of Greek, I recently noticed an interesting structure in 1 John 4:20:  "If anyone says, 'I love God,' and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen."

In the Greek text, the structure of the phrases "love God" and "hates his brother" are inverted from each other.  In the first, the direct object follows the verb (ἀγαπῶ τὸν θεὸν), but in the second, the direct object precedes the verb (τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ μισῇ).  This inversion illustrates that these two ideas are opposites.

Daniel 3

I've been following along in the Daily Dose of Aramaic's series on Daniel.  I noticed that throughout chapter three (verses 6, 11, 15, 17, 20, 21, 23, 26), there's a redundant description:  "the burning fiery furnace."  There are fires in furnaces, and fires burn; neither of these words is really necessary.  This redundant description, however, may demonstrate the severity of Nebuchadnezzar's threat or indicate the extreme heat of the furnace even before it is "heated seven times more than it was usually heated" in verse 19.

Jonah 3:6

Near the end of March, I started going through Jonah in the archives of the Daily Dose of Hebrew.  A couple weeks ago, I went over Jonah 3:6:  "The word reached the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, removed his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes."  I think there's some significant word choice in the Hebrew here.  "Word" (דָּבָר) and "arose" (from the verb קוּם) also appear at the beginning of the book, in Jonah 1:1-3a:  "1 Now the word of the LORD came to Jonah the son of Amittai, saying, 2 'Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and call out against it, for their evil has come up before me.'  3 But Jonah rose to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the LORD."

Using the same words in these two sections highlights the contrast between Jonah in chapter 1 and the king of Nineveh in chapter 3.  When the word of the LORD comes to Jonah, he rises to try to avoid it, but when the word reaches the king of Nineveh, he rises to take action.

John 6:2, 5

Recently, the Daily Dose of Latin started John 6.  I noticed that in John 6:2 and 6:5, the Greek word ὄχλος is translated in the Vulgate as multitudo.

This struck me as a bit unusual.  Most of the time, ὄχλος is translated as turba.  I did a search with the STEP Bible, and while my numbers might not be entirely accurate, it seems that out of 171 occurrences of a form of ὄχλος, 155 of them are translated as a form of turba.

These instances in particular seem odd because "multitudo magna" and "multitudo maxima" are redundant; both mean something like "a great multitude."  (Maxima is the superlative form of magna.)  Perhaps this is intended to indicate the exceedingly great size of the crowd.

As I've been following along with the Daily Dose of Latin, I've been reading the New King James Version.  There, both of these phrases are translated as "great multitude."  In the ESV, they're both "large crowd," and in the NIV, "great crowd."

Hebrews 4:12

Recently, I was thinking about Hebrews 4:12:  "For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart."  I had to look up the Greek text to make sure, but "living" is a participle there too:  "ζῶν γὰρ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐνεργὴς..."  I think this is significant.  Because a participle is a verbal adjective, there's some of the dynamic nature of a verb here, and this goes well with the meaning of the word "living."

1 John 3:5

Since February, I've been going through 1 John in the archives of the Daily Dose of Greek.  A few weeks ago, I copied out 1 John 3:5 and then read it in a few different translations.  The ESV made me cringe.  The Greek text is καὶ οἴδατε ὅτι ἐκεῖνος ἐφανερώθη ἵνα τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἄρῃ, καὶ ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν. but the ESV renders this as "You know that he appeared to take away sins, and in him there is no sin."  In the intended reading, "appeared" has the sense of "showed up," and "to take" is an infinitive of purpose, but this translation could be misread so that "appeared" has the sense of "seemed" and (if my parsing is right) "to take" is an epexegetical infinitive.  Understood this way, the clause is saying that this "tak[ing] away [of] sins" was merely an illusion ("he seemed to take away sins"), but this is obviously not the meaning of the Greek text.  Simply adding "in order to" clears up this ambiguity:  "You know that he appeared in order to take away sins...."

The NIV has a much better translation:  "But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins.  And in him is no sin."

Matthew 20:24, Mark 10:41

A couple weeks ago, I watched the Concordia University Wisconsin chapel service from 23 March 2015:

The reading was Mark 10:35-45.  I'm pretty sure that Dr. Feiertag reads the NIV, where verse 41 is translated as "When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John."  I was following along in my French New Testament, where this verse is rendered as "Les dix, ayant entendu cela, commencèrent à s'indigner contre Jacques et Jean."  Where the NIV has "indignant with" and the ESV has "indignant at," the French translation has "s'indigner contre."  (In Greek, the preposition here is περὶ.)  In French, contre also means against.  This carries a greater weight than de (the other preposition, meaning with or at, used with this verb), so in this particular translation, there's a greater sense of opposition between the ten disciples and the two brothers.

Matthew 20:24 is comparable.

My French translation has:  "Les dix, ayant entendu cela, furent indignés contre les deux frères."

The ESV has:  "And when the ten heard it, they were indignant at the two brothers."

And the NIV has:  "When the ten heard about this, they were indignant with the two brothers."

Genesis 3:15

When I went to church a couple weeks ago, the pastor referenced Genesis 3:15 in his sermon.  I noticed that the second half of the verse has a chiastic structure:  "He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."  The study notes in my Bible explain that "This points to Christ and His defeat of Satan on the cross."  It may be coincidental, but even the structure here (the cross form of the chiasm) seems to point to Christ's crucifixion.  I lookt up this verse in the STEP Bible, and while the possessive adjectives for "head" and "heel" are implied, this structure is present in the Hebrew too.

Luke 15:11-32 (The Prodigal Son)

The Gospel reading last week was Luke 15:1-3, 11-32, the parable of the prodigal son.  While watching Worship Anew, I realized that the father acts the same way toward both of his sons.  There's a sort of parallelism between "while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion, and ran and embraced him and kissed him" (verse 20) and "His father came out and entreated him" (verse 28).  Clearly, the father cares for both of his sons, and while the situations are different, he goes out to each of them and shows his compassion.

Acts 9:1-3

I've been reading Acts lately and noticed a feature specific to the ESV in Acts 9:1-3:

1 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.  3 Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him.

In this translation, there seems to be a contrast between "the Way" in verse 2 and "his way" in verse 3.  Saul is persecuting the church, so his "way" (in a more metaphorical sense) is opposed to "the Way."

When I lookt up the Greek, however, I discovered that these two words are unrelated.  The "Way" in verse 2 is ὁδοῦ, and - if I understand it aright - the whole construction "he went on his way" in verse 3 comes from the verb πορεύω.

Genesis 22:7-8

Recently, I watched the Concordia University Wisconsin chapel service from 24 February 2015.

The text was Genesis 22:1-14.  I was following along in the Latin Vulgate and noticed that where the ESV has "the lamb for a burnt offering" in verses 7 and 8, the Vulgate has "victima holocausti."  Instead of "lamb" or "goat" specifically (which is also what's in the Hebrew:  הַשֶּׂה), the Vulgate has a more generic word that means "victim" or "sacrifice."

There are some elements in this account that prefigure the crucifixion of Christ (who is called "the Lamb of God" in John 1:29).  Because the Vulgate uses a more generic term for "sacrifice," the metaphorical language is stripped away, and these connections may be a bit easier to see.

Genesis 7:17-19

After running across a reference to Genesis 1 in Les Misérables recently, I've been reading chapters of Genesis.  I noticed that in the ESV, successive verses in Genesis 7:17-19 have more adverbs:

17 The flood continued forty days on the earth.  The waters increased and bore up the ark, and it rose high above the earth.  18 The waters prevailed and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the face of the waters.  19 And the waters prevailed so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered.

First, there's just a subject and a verb ("the waters increased"); then there's one adverb ("the waters prevailed and increased greatly"); then there are two adverbs ("the waters prevailed so mightily").  The increasing number of adverbs reflects the rising level of the waters.

I lookt up this passage in the STEP Bible and found that this feature is also present in the Hebrew.  מְאֹד is used once in verse 18 and twice in succession (for a greater degree) in verse 19.

Luke 6:20-26

On Worship Anew last week, the Gospel reading was Luke 6:17-26.  In verses 20-26, Jesus presents some contrasts:  "Blessed are you who are poor" (verse 20) but "woe to you who are rich" (verse 24), "blessed are you who are hungry now" (21) but "woe to you who are full now" (25), "blessed are you who weep now" (21) but "woe to you who laugh now" (25), and "blessed are you when people hate you" (22) but "woe to you when all people speak well of you" (26).

I was following along in my French New Testament, and I noticed that in that particular translation, these opposites have a sharper contrast because the French words for "blessed" ("heureux") and "woe" ("malheur") come from the same root.

Ecclesiastes 1:5

Earlier this month, I read a few chapters of Ecclesiastes, and I realized something about the structure of Ecclesiastes 1:5:  "The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises."  The verse starts and ends with the sun's rising, so even the structure of just this one verse illustrates the vanity that the preacher talks about.

Genesis 22:17

One of the readings from the Christmas Eve service I attended last month was from Genesis 22.  I noticed a small feature in verse 17 where God says to Abraham, "'I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore.'"

Taken together, the images in these comparisons encompass a wide sweep (the stars above and the sand below), and this breadth mirrors the abundance of Abraham's offspring.

Matthew 16:23

About a month ago, I watched the CUW chapel service from 3 September 2014:

The reading was Matthew 16:21-25, and while I was following along in my French translation, I noticed a small feature in verse 23:  "Mais Jésus, se retournant, dit à Pierre:  Arrière de moi, Satan!  tu m'es en scandale; car tes pensées ne sont pas les pensées de Dieu, mais celles des hommes."  In the ESV, this is rendered as:  "But he turned and said to Peter, 'Get behind me, Satan!  You are a hindrance to me.  For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.'"

In the French translation, "you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man" (οὐ φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων) is rendered as "tes pensées ne sont pas les pensées de Dieu, mais celles des hommes."  Literally, this is "your thoughts are not the thoughts of God but those of men," and this echoes Isaiah 55:8:  "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD."

Psalm 16:6

A couple months ago, the Psalm in church was Psalm 16.  I noticed a small feature in verse 6:  "The lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; indeed, I have a beautiful inheritance."

The phrase "pleasant places" has both alliteration and syllabic balance, and the euphony of these features matches the meaning of the words.

Luke 18:9-14

When I read a few chapters of Luke a couple months ago, I noticed some contrasts in Luke 18:9-14, the Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector.  There's an obvious contrast in what these two men are saying as they pray, but I noticed that this contrast is also shown in how they speak.

The Pharisee's prayer:

God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.  I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.

The tax collector's prayer:

God, be merciful to me, a sinner.

In each clause of the Pharisee's prayer, the subject is "I."  He uses it five times.  In the tax collector's prayer, the personal pronoun is used only once and then in the dative case ("to me").  Even in the language, then, it's illustrated that the Pharisee thinks primarily of himself while the tax collector has humility.

There's also a contrast in the length of these prayers.  The tax collector's prayer is short and to the point, while the Pharisee (to borrow a description from Matthew 6:7) seems to "think that [he] will be heard for [his] many words."