John 18, 21

In the Daily Dose of Greek video for John 21:9, Dr. Plummer mentions almost as a side note that ἀνθρακιά ("charcoal fire," in the accusative form in the verse) occurs only twice in the Bible:  in this verse and in John 18:18.

At first, I didn't give much thought to this, but the day after I watched the video, I realized that the contexts in which this word appears are related.

In John 18:18, Peter is standing by a charcoal fire while the soldiers take Jesus to Annas.  In the surrounding verses (17, 25-27), Peter three times denies knowing Jesus.

In John 21, after the charcoal fire is mentioned, Jesus three times asks Peter if he loves Him (verses 15-17).  The three instances (three denials and three questions) link these two passages, as John 21:17 makes clear ("Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, 'Do you love me?'"), and while the charcoal fire isn't nearly as significant, it's a sensory detail that also connects these two accounts.

Matthew 28:20

A couple months ago, the Gospel reading on Worship Anew was Matthew 28:16-20.  I was following along in the Latin Vulgate and noticed the same feature that I saw in Psalm 23 shortly before this.  In verse 20, Jesus says, "ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus" ("Behold, I am with you in all days").  Because the Latin prepositional phrase "cum vobis" ("with you") is often inverted and combined into a single word ("vobiscum"), the two pronouns are directly next to each other:  "ego vobiscum" ("I you-with").  This proximity provides a greater sense of accompaniment.

Matthew 23:6-7, 12

A few months ago, I watched the CUW chapel service from 8 November 2017 (if I'm not mistaken, this was Pastor Bender's first sermon as associate campus pastor):

The reading was Matthew 23:1-12, and I noticed a couple rhetorical features in it.

"6 And they [the Pharisees] love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues 7 and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others."  These verses exhibit polysyndeton (the repeated "and"), and it emphasizes the abundance that the Pharisees desire.

"12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted."  There's a chiastic structure here, and it illustrates this inversion.  (I wrote about this earlier this year, too, with "first" and "last.")

These features are also present in the Greek text:

6 φιλοῦσι δὲ τὴν πρωτοκλισίαν ἐν τοῖς δείπνοις καὶ τὰς πρωτοκαθεδρίας ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς 7 καὶ τοὺς ἀσπασμοὺς ἐν ταῖς ἀγοραῖς καὶ καλεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ῥαββεί.

12 ὅστις δὲ ὑψώσει ἑαυτὸν ταπεινωθήσεται, καὶ ὅστις ταπεινώσει ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται.

 and in the Latin Vulgate:

6 amant autem primos recubitus in cenis et primas cathedras in synagogis 7 et salutationes in foro et vocari ab hominibus rabbi

12 qui autem se exaltaverit humiliabitur et qui se humiliaverit exaltabitur

Jeremiah 9:23

A couple months ago, I watched the Daily Dose of Hebrew video on Jeremiah 9:23, which is 9:22 in the Hebrew versification:

כֹּה ׀ אָמַר יְהוָה אַל־יִתְהַלֵּל חָכָם בְּחָכְמָתוֹ וְאַל־יִתְהַלֵּל הַגִּבּוֹר בִּגְבֽוּרָתוֹ אַל־יִתְהַלֵּל עָשִׁיר בְּעָשְׁרֽוֹ

Thus says the Lord:  "Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches" [ESV]

The sentiment is completed in the next verse:  "'but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth.  For in these things I delight, declares the LORD.'"

Tom Blanchard, the host of these weekend editions, notes the relationship between חָכָם (a "wise man") and חָכְמָתוֹ ("his wisdom"), between הַגִּבּוֹר ("the mighty man") and גְבֽוּרָתוֹ ("his might"), and between עָשִׁיר (a "rich man") and עָשְׁרֽוֹ ("his riches"), which the ESV retains.

Because these words are so closely related, there's almost a reflexive sense.  Although the wise man is boasting in his wisdom, the mighty man is boasting in his might, and the rich man is boasting in his riches, common to all is a man boasting in himself (what he possesses or what he's done).  These closely related words indicate the inward-looking nature that must be eschewed in favor of looking to God.  This contrast is also present in Psalm 146:  "3 Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation.  4 When his breath departs, he returns to the earth; on that very day his plans perish.  5 Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the LORD his God, 6 who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, who keeps faith forever."

John 7:24

A couple months ago, I watched the Daily Dose of Latin video on John 7:24:

Dr. Flatt comes close to mentioning that, of course, the words "iustum iudicium iudicate" alliterate, and I realized that because of this alliteration, there's a sense in the Latin of the orderliness of a just judgement.  

In my German New Testament, this verse is:  "Richtet nicht nach dem, was vor Augen ist, sondern richtet gerecht."  To a lesser degree, the same feature is present here, although with consonance rather than alliteration:  "richtet gerecht."

John 20:26

A couple months ago, I watched the Daily Dose of Greek video on John 20:26:

Καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡμέρας ὀκτὼ πάλιν ἦσαν ἔσω οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ Θωμᾶς μετ᾽ αὐτῶν. ἔρχεται ὁ Ἰησοῦς τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων καὶ ἔστη εἰς τὸ μέσον καὶ εἶπεν· εἰρήνη ὑμῖν.

Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them.  Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." [ESV]

I was surprised to discovered that the "was" in the clause "Thomas was with them" isn't present in the Greek; it's just "Θωμᾶς μετ᾽ αὐτῶν."  I had a couple thoughts about this, although I'll admit they may be a bit far-fetched.

Most of the translations I lookt at render it like the ESV above and supply an implied verb:

Thomas war bei ihnen

Thomas se trouvait avec eux

Thomas was with them [NIV]

The Latin Vulgate and the NKJV are the exceptions:

Thomas cum eis

Thomas with them

I think it's possible to see Thomas as part of the plural subject of the verb "were."  Put an-other way, it would be "his disciples and Thomas with them were inside...."  Granted, the "with them" is a bit redundant then, but if Thomas is included with the other disciples as the subject of the sentence, it provides something of a foreshadowing of his return to faith after seeing Jesus' wounds.  In grammatical structure and in faith, he's part of the group again.

Alternatively, the lack of an explicit verb for Thomas' being there mirrors his lack of faith.

Matthew 27:20

For about a year and a half now, I've been slowly working through New Testament Greek for Laymen by Michael Merritt, which I downloaded from the resources page of the Daily Dose of Greek website.  Two months ago, I lookt up Matthew 27:20, since it's one of the "verses for application" at the end of Chapter 13 "Aorist Active and Middle Indicative."

Οἱ δὲ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ἔπεισαν τοὺς ὄχλους ἵνα αἰτήσωνται τὸν Βαραββᾶν, τὸν δὲ Ἰησοῦν ἀπολέσωσιν.

Now the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and destroy Jesus.  [ESV]

At first, I noticed only that - as I'd been noting with many other verses at the time - there's a chiastic structure that indicates opposites:  αἰτήσωνται τὸν Βαραββᾶν, τὸν δὲ Ἰησοῦν ἀπολέσωσιν  "to ask for Barabbas, Jesus to destroy."  By themselves, these two verbs don't mean opposite things, but they do in this context.

(For what it's worth, the same structure is also in the Latin Vulgate:  "Princeps autem sacerdotum et seniores persuaserunt populis ut peterent Barabban Iesum vero perderent")

In thinking about the verse some more, I realized that this chiastic structure may also indicate the thoughts of the chief priests and elders, namely that they want to crucify Jesus (the structure of the chiasm resembles the shape of the cross).  Right after this, in verses 22-23, the crowd, incited by the chief priests and elders, calls for Jesus' crucifixion.  The chiastic structure here may act as a sort of foreshadowing of this.

Genesis 12:3

This is becoming a somewhat regular occurrence, but a couple months ago, I found yet an-other chiastic structure that illustrates opposites.  In Genesis 12:3, God says to Abram, "I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you" (NIV).  The direct object follows the verb in the clause "I will bless those who bless you," but it precedes the verb in the clause "whoever curses you I will curse."  The inversion in the structure matches the opposites of blessing and cursing.

This is also present in the Hebrew ("וַאֲבָֽרֲכָה מְבָרְכֶיךָ וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ אָאֹר"), but it's not in the Vulgate.

Matthew 6:24

Last month, I read a few chapters in Matthew, and I found an-other instance where a chiastic structure illustrates opposites.  In Matthew 6:24, Jesus says, "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.  You cannot serve God and money."  There's an inversion between "he will hate the one and love the other" and "he will be devoted to the one and despise the other," demonstrating these opposites.

This feature is also present in the Greek ("ἢ γὰρ τὸν ἕνα μισήσει καὶ τὸν ἕτερον ἀγαπήσει ἢ ἑνὸς ἀνθέξεται καὶ τοῦ ἑτέρου καταφρονήσει"), the Latin Vulgate ("aut enim unum odio habebit et alterum diliget aut unum sustinebit et alterum contemnet"), my German New Testament ("entweder er wird den einen hassen und den andern lieben, oder er wird an dem einen hängen und den andern verachten"), and my French New Testament ("Car, ou il haïra l'un, et aimera l'autre; ou il s'attachera à l'un, et méprisera l'autre").

Psalm 1:3-4

A little more than a month ago, I finished reading Proverbs in the NIV and started over again with the Psalms (in the ESV this time).  Previously, I'd noticed the contrast between the tree and the chaff in Psalm 1:3-4, but in reading it again last month, I realized that I'd been considering only one facet of this contrast.

3 He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields it fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither.  In all that he does, he prospers.  4 The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away.

I'd been focusing only on the agricultural nature of these similes and the contrast between the prosperity of the living tree and the inactivity of the worthless and dead chaff, but the two also differ in their positions:  the tree is firmly "planted," but the chaff is "drive[n] away" by the wind.  The man who delights in and meditates on the law of the Lord has an arboreal steadfastness that the wicked man does not.

Psalm 23:4

For Good Shepherd Sunday (the Fourth Sunday of Easter) at the end of April, the Psalm on Worship Anew was Psalm 23 (although the text below the video lists Psalm 43).  I was following along in the Latin Vulgate and noticed a feature specific to this translation.  Verse 4 is:  "sed et si ambulavero in valle mortis non timebo malum quoniam tu mecum es virga tua et baculus tuus ipsa consolabunter me."  In the ESV, this is:  "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me."  Often in Latin, the words in the prepositional phrase "with me" are combined (and inverted), so instead of "cum me," there's the single word "mecum."  Because of this idiosyncracy, there's a closer sense of God's accompaniment in this verse; "tu" and "me" are side-by-side.

Genesis 4:4-5

In mid-April, I finished reading The Lutheran Study Bible, the first time (hopefully of many) that I read the Bible straight through.  The same day I finished, I also started reading the NIV (my current plan is to alternate between the two, but I'll see what happens).

When I read Genesis 4, I noticed something interesting in these verses:  "3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD.  4 But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock.  The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor.  So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast."

Bridging verses 4 and 5, there's a chiastic structure in the description of how the Lord receives Abel and Cain and their respective offerings:  "The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor."  The structure highlights that the Lord's responses are opposite.

This feature is also present in Hebrew (I can't get the formatting to work correctly, so here's a link to the  passage in the STEP Bible) and in Latin ("et respexit Dominus ad Abel et ad munera eius ad Cain vero et ad munera illius non respexit").