SECOND EDITION

A NEW APPROACH TO TRANSLATION,

THOROUGHLY DOCUMENTED

WITH 58,504 NOTES

BY THE TRANSLATORS AND EDITORS

bible.org
netbible.com

Copyright © 1996-2017

All Rights Reserved

Build 20170414

By Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C.

The Names:
The NET Bible, New English Translation
Copyright © 1996 By Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C.
NET Bible® Is A Registered Trademark

The NET Bible Is Available For Use On The Internet At:
bible.org
netbible.com

Preface to the Second Edition

We give thanks to God for allowing us to produce a Second Edition of the NET Bible. We agree with the KJV translators’ preface of 1611 that “...nothing is begun and perfected at the same time, and the latter thoughts are thought to be the wiser”. The same undoubtedly stands true today - our team continually strives toward our goal of faithfulness to the original languages, so after our original Beta release at 4AM on 9/11/2001, we released the second Beta edition in 2003 and the First Edition in 2006. We stated our goal to continually update the online version and release a Second Edition in a decade with the accumulated updates.

For pastors who faithfully teach from the NET Bible every week and sent emails saying “I could not quote the NET Bible on this verse because …”, we have fixed a great number of these, but also stuck to our principles of faithfulness to the original autographs, rather than conforming to follow the historical consensus. We created a Second Edition because of a ingrained belief that Scripture is inspired (2 Timothy 3:16), every single detail matters (Matthew 5:18-19), and that faithfulness proves more important than tradition (Mark 7:8). Our goal is not to create a consensus translation, nor to tune it for popularity, but to strive for faithfulness to the original autographs in Hebrew, Greek, the few passages in Aramaic, and scattered words/phrases in other languages. Our translation team is grateful for the wide acceptance of the First Edition and we are very thankful for the effect the NET Bible has made on other translations.

When we began Bible.org, there was no free online Bible Study website, and no Google, Facebook, eBay, or Amazon either. When we began the NET Bible, there was no modern English translation online, nor could you post major collections of Bible studies online quoting any Modern English translation. The NET Bible and everything we do follows our “ministry first” approach, which predated and served as a new ministry and marketing model for Christian publishing. Now most translations are available online, for free.

We believe that all translations are God's word, just as we learned from when Jesus and the New Testament authors confirmed the Septuagint (LXX) as the word of God, even though it was done by 70 authors in a short period of time. Translators from that team and later centuries have taken comfort in the fact that God forgives and even endorses good translations that leave room for minor improvements.

The translators of any translation are often overcome with the humbling responsibility of translation because they know well that what they produce will be relied on as the Word of God by tens of millions. Translators endure various trials and carry this tremendous responsibility with varying degrees of personal sacrifice. We salute the translators of this and other translations for their lifelong pursuits of scholarship and service to the kingdom. In fact, this Second Edition would have been impossible without the faithful service of many translators working diligently for decades, often as volunteers. It was completed because the translators view it as a mission to offer a more faithful translation. With that said, a translator’s work is never done. There are always new discoveries, changes in English over time, and unanticipated misunderstandings. We understand that many verses had the potential for better translation, but were only noticed after millions of believers pondered them for years. If you find translation issues, please let us know at https://bible.org/comments so we can continue making improvements.

The most substantial editing work for this Second Edition centered on the essential task of creating an updated Strong’s Hebrew/Greek to English mapping of the entire translation. This allowed the discovery of discrepancies and inconsistencies as well as creating a collating base for comparing consistency across the entire Bible. We completed many items on our list of initiatives for the Second Edition: (1) Both OT and NT have updated Strong’s tagged using phrase tagging as well as multiple number tagging. (2) This detailed Strong’s tagging was used to detect and correct inconsistencies across the OT. (3) Divine names in the OT have been made more consistent. (4) Technical terms related to geography, feast names, and the tabernacle have been made more consistent. (5) References to explicit sexual body parts or sexual acts have been made more euphemistic like it is in the Hebrew and Greek. Sometimes a more transparent translation isn’t always better, such as reading the Christmas story with young children. (6) Important key passages were revised to make the translation more consistent and acceptable with the mainstream of evangelical views and thus more acceptable in the church. (7) Awkward/unidiomatic renderings were revised, and (8) Hebrew references in footnotes were corrected and standardized.

How substantial are the accumulated edits since the First Edition in 2006? A Word doc comparison listed 58,524 changes. This number is approximate and understated a bit because the insertion of a multi-word phrase counts as one insertion. On the other hand, it is overstated in that correction of a Hebrew transliteration font in a footnote counts as one deletion and one insertion. We did delete about 3300 footnotes which were deemed unnecessary and superfluous such as “δε has not been translated” or “και has not been translated due to differences in Greek and English style.”

We did not have any changes in translation philosophy between the first drafts and the new Second Edition, and our appreciation of the guidance and faithfulness of W. Hall Harris and the translators remains deep seated and grows stronger with time. This Second Edition solely comprehends tasks the team had in mind as unfinished and future when we closed down our work on the First Edition. With these tens of thousands of updates, we strove to make a fine translation better. As you know, the extensive use of translators’ notes has simultaneously removed stress for the translators as well as given innumerable insights to the reader by providing a way for the translators to add nuances normally lost in translation.

We pray that your walk with God will be enriched by the study of scripture and the application of God’s will on your life.

The editors, translators, staff, and sponsors of the NET Bible. May 16, 2017.

Preface to the First Edition

The NET BIBLE

The NET BIBLE is a completely new translation of the Bible with 60,932 translators’ notes! It was completed by more than 25 scholars—experts in the original biblical languages—who worked directly from the best currently available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. Turn the pages and see the breadth of the translators’ notes, documenting their decisions and choices as they worked. The translators’ notes make the original languages far more accessible, allowing you to look over the translator’s shoulder at the very process of translation. This level of documentation is a first for a Bible translation, making transparent the textual basis and the rationale for key renderings (including major interpretive options and alternative translations). This unparalleled level of detail helps connect people to the Bible in the original languages in a way never before possible without years of study of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. It unlocks the riches of the Bible’s truth from entirely new perspectives.

Produced for ministry

Our ministry, bible.org, was created to be a source of trustworthy Bible study resources for the world, so that everyone is guaranteed free access to these high quality materials. In the second year of bible.org’s ministry (1995) it became clear that a free online Bible would be needed on the bible.org website since copyrighted Bibles can’t be quoted in a huge collection of online studies.

The NET BIBLE project was commissioned to create a faithful Bible translation that could be placed on the Internet, downloaded for free, and used around the world for ministry. The Bible is God’s gift to humanity—it should be free. (Go to www.bible.org and download your free copy.) Permission is available for the NET BIBLE to be printed royalty-free for organizations like the The Gideons International who print and distribute Bibles for charity. The NET BIBLE (with all the translators’ notes) has also been provided to Wycliffe Bible Translators to assist their field translators. The NET Bible Society is working with other groups and Bible Societies to provide the NET BIBLE translators’ notes to complement fresh translations in other languages. A Chinese translation team is currently at work on a new translation which incorporates the NET BIBLE translators’ notes in Chinese, making them available to an additional 1.5 billion people. Parallel projects involving other languages are also in progress.

Now serving individuals in 170 different countries on an average day, bible.org is the largest Bible study resource on the Internet with over 40,000 pages of Bible study materials currently available online for free. All this is done to support local church ministries and to build an effective online community of believers. Our passion is to see every person become mature in Christ and competent to teach and train others.

Accountability, transparency, and feedback

The NET BIBLE is the first Bible ever to be beta-tested on the Internet. In this beta-testing process all working drafts of the NET BIBLE were posted on www.bible.org for public review and comment. The significance of this is that the NET BIBLE team, from day one, has been listening to its readers. The purpose of the public review and comment was not to achieve a consensus translation, but to be accountable, to be transparent, and to request that millions of people provide feedback on the faithfulness and clarity of the translation as well as on the translators’ notes. Countless valuable suggestions have been made by scholars, by junior high school students, by college professors, and by lay Christians who speak English as a second language. Because of the open approach of the NET BIBLE team, the resulting product has been enriched immeasurably. Each one of us comes to the Bible from a different perspective; scholars need to listen to the person in the pew as much as the layperson needs to listen to scholars. The translation reflects the latest scholarship, and the sources are cited in the translators’ notes and documented in the appendices. The NET BIBLE is a truly symbiotic effort between the insights of biblical scholars and the needs of lay Christians. The combined effect of the notes and the nine year public review process has reinforced the translation’s primary goal of faithfulness to the original languages. By creating a translation environment that is responsible both to the world’s scholars and to lay readers, the NET BIBLE was read, studied, and checked by more eyes than any Bible translation in history.

The most important translation concept

The most important translation of the Bible is not from the original languages to English, but from the printed page into your life. If you have never read through a complete book of the Bible, we suggest you begin by reading the Gospel of John. We encourage you to recognize that the Bible is not merely a book. It is God’s message to us all, and God continues to speak through it today. There is, after all, a reason far more Bibles have been produced than any book in history. Read it and see.

Copyright Innovations—Toward a New Model

We don’t like the copyright notice on thesecond page of the NET BIBLE, but we don’t yet know the best way to fix it. The reason for this dilemma is that we stand at the beginning of a new era made possible by the Internet. New approaches to ministry, publishing, distribution, and collaboration are made possible by the Internet. When the first Bibles and books began to be printed rather than copied by hand, new issues emerged (plagiarism, author’s rights, freedom of the press versus censorship, copyright laws, etc.). It is now time to recognize that the copyright and permissions conventions carried over from printed books must now be upgraded for the Internet age. The innovations will create new opportunities for ministry while also providing new opportunities for authors to support themselves. We believe that 1 Tim 5:17-18 (the author has the right to be paid) and Lev 23:22 (allow the poor and foreigner free access) can be simultaneously satisfied far better with a new Internet model.

The Problem: It’s difficult to quote a modern Bible translation legally

Bible.org’s ministry objective is to be used by God to mature Christians worldwide. To accomplish this we needed to quote a modern Bible translation in the production of thousands of trustworthy Bible Study resources that could be offered on the Internet for free. We predicted in 1995 that the number of Bible verses quoted in these studies would soon surpass available legal permission limits. We tried for a year, but could not obtain the necessary permissions. Lack of a legal ability to quote the Bible online makes online Bible studies impossible and threatened bible.org’s “Ministry First” model. Quite simply the only way we could secure permission to quote a modern Bible was to sponsor a new translation—the NET BIBLE. We now want to ensure that other ministries and authors don’t experience the same roadblocks. The NET BIBLE is not just for bible.org, but for everyone.

You may ask (as we have): “Why not just make the NET BIBLE public domain? Wouldn’t that solve the problem?” It does solve the permission problem but stifles ministry another way. When a publisher prints a public domain KJV they pay no royalties to anyone, but they still make millions of dollars in revenue—and don’t have to spend any of that money on ministry or charity. We didn’t create the NET BIBLE to save royalties for such publishers. We think a better approach is to leverage copyright laws to ensure that anyone selling NET BIBLES must support ministry.

How we intend to solve the problem

The first major step was taken 10 years ago when we posted the NET BIBLE on the Internet when no other major modern English Bible translations had done so. The other major Bible translations partially followed suit—all of them are now viewable on the Internet—but after 10 years, the NET BIBLE is still the only major modern translation that can be downloaded for free in its entirety and used seamlessly in presentations and documents.

We think it is time to take a few more steps. NET BIBLE study software will now be offered free to allow those who can’t afford Bible study tools to search the Bible electronically. We also will remove an important barrier for teachers, pastors, authors, and students of the Bible who plan to write and distribute their studies. Bible copyright policies typically require special permission before Internet posting, writing commentaries, allowing mission organizations to translate works into other languages, or when quotations exceed some verse limit. The result is that an author is forced to delay writing until permission is granted, use an old public domain text, or proceed illegally in order to serve missions. Other authors have found that a valuable work is simply not publishable because they lack permission for the Bible translation quoted in it. We want all authors to know that the NET BIBLE is a safe choice. We intend to make quoting the NET BIBLE easy for both commercial publications and ministry by making the vast majority of requests covered by an automatic “yes.” This new copyright permission policy, when implemented, will result in many more works being created for charitable use and Internet distribution. A second major historical reason used to justify prior written approval of papers, books, and commentaries quoting Bibles is to ensure that nothing embarrassing is written using a copyrighted Bible. We’d rather risk embarrassment than hamper thousands of worthwhile projects. We’ll let the Internet community label the rare bad works and bad authors. We’d rather remove barriers so that the other 99.9% of Christian authors can be more productive. We solicit your ideas for an optimal solution for Bible quotations in the Internet age.

Characteristics of a good solution

By making permissions easier, it becomes far easier to post, share, and publish works which quote the Bible.
It should be easy to say “yes” to all requests to quote and use the NET BIBLE (both charitable and commercial use).
The “yes” should be automatic for the vast majority of requests, so our organization gets out of the way of ministries, teachers, pastors, and authors. We don’t want them to delay before authoring, sharing, and implementing the Great Commission of Matt 28:19—and we don’t want their works which quote the Bible to be held hostage based on copyright permissions.
Incentives should be offered to authors who are willing to share their works for free, (even when they also sell books and software versions of the same title for income) while authors who only offer their works for sale should pay customary royalties. This encourages greater participation in the “ministry first” model.

It is time for ministry to be more free—and for a Bible which puts ministry first. The best way to encourage ministry is to give people the tools they need and remove barriers which encumber their work. Let us know how we can better serve your needs.

For the latest on “Ministry First” copyright innovations,
visit www.bible.org/ministryfirst

Introduction to the First Edition

Welcome to the First Edition of the NET BIBLE with all 60,932 translators’ notes! We want to thank the millions of online NET BIBLE users and the students, teachers, and churches who have made the NET BIBLE a part of their daily Bible study, reading, and worship. Their countless observations have been a valuable addition to the NET BIBLE team’s methodical editing of the translation during its 10-year development. More people from more countries have used and reviewed the NET BIBLE during its production than any Bible translation in history—and you are still invited to join that process! The First Edition signifies the transition from development and beta testing to official release of the translation. The NET BIBLE text (notes excluded) has now been frozen for 5 years. The next set of upgrades and improvements is planned for release in 2010. During the initial 10-year translation effort, the final 8 years were primarily spent editing and improving the translation of the biblical text. Consequently, the translators’ notes have not been edited to the same degree as the biblical text itself. Improvements and enhancements to the NET BIBLE’s notes therefore will be made on a continual basis.

What you have in your hands—or on your computer monitor, laptop, mobile phone or handheld —represents a new approach to Bible translation and a fresh approach to ministry for the new millennium. The NET BIBLE was planned from the very beginning to be available for free on the Internet. The decision to produce for the first time large quantities of Bibles on Gutenberg’s improved press in 1454-1455 sparked a revolution and provided a dramatic increase in the availability of Bibles and biblical study materials in many languages, but over five centuries later many people throughout the world cannot access Bibles and biblical study resources because of their high cost and because some governments attempt to prevent their citizens from ever encountering the Bible. The primary goal of the NET BIBLE project was to leverage the Internet to meet these two critical needs. The Internet represents the single best opportunity for ministry in history because electronic distribution via the Internet allows relatively free delivery of unlimited numbers of Bibles and unlimited amounts of biblical study resources to anyone worldwide who could otherwise not afford them or access them—for zero incremental cost. Organizations willing to share materials on the Internet will accomplish the Great Commission of Matthew 28:19-20 more efficiently than those which follow older ministry models alone. The impact of a publishing ministry can increase by leaps and bounds because it is no longer limited by the number of copies of materials it can afford to print and give away. The NET BIBLE was created to be the first major modern English translation available free on the Internet for download and use in Bible studies and other teaching materials so that the opportunities provided by the Internet could be maximized. Authors, teachers, pastors, and translators are now ensured that their life’s work can be offered anywhere—even shared freely on the Internet—using verses quoted from the NET BIBLE . They can now work to create high quality biblical study materials confident in knowing that permission has been granted for works of ministry that will be offered for free to others. We are pleased to be the first to do this, and we hope many others will join with us in this effort to put ministry first.

Read more on our model of ministry — go to www.bible.org/ministryfirst

Translators’ Notes—unprecedented transparency for serious Bible students

The 60,932 translators’ notes included with the NET BIBLE are another result of our Internet focus. Bible readers are often not aware that every translation makes many interpretive decisions for them. One goal of the NET BIBLE project was to find a way to help the reader see the decisions and choices that went into the translation. The answer was to include notes produced by the translators while they worked through the issues and options confronting them as they did the work of translation—thus providing an unprecedented level of transparency for users. In fact, the nature of the Internet allows unlimited notes. These notes provide an extended dialogue between translator and reader about the alternatives for translation, options for interpretation, and finer nuances which are usually lost in translation. After the drafts and first rounds of editing were completed, we discovered that the thousands of notes we had accumulated could be made to fit on the printed page in addition to the electronic format. What you are now reading, on printed paper or on a digital screen is the First Edition of the NET BIBLE complete with all the translators’ notes. Never before in the history of the Bible has a translation been published which includes explanatory notes from the translators and editors as to why the preferred translation was chosen and what the other alternatives are. Students of the Bible, future Bible translators, and biblical scholars will all benefit from these unparalleled translators’ notes. One of the goals of the NET BIBLE with the complete set of translators’ notes is to allow the general public—as well as Bible students, pastors, missionaries, and Bible translators in the field—to be able to know what the translators of the NET BIBLE were thinking when a phrase or verse was rendered in a particular way. Many times the translator will have made informed decisions based on facts about grammatical, lexical, historical, and textual data not readily available to English-speaking students of the Bible. This information is now easily accessible through the translators’ notes.

In short, the NET BIBLE that you now hold is different from all the Bible translations that have come before it. It represents a truly new departure in the way Bible translations are presented to the general public. With a translation as revolutionary as the NET BIBLE, you no doubt have some additional questions. The remainder of this Introduction addresses in question-and-answer format the most frequently asked questions, to help you understand what the NET BIBLE is about and how it differs from the many other Bible translations available to the English-speaking reader today.

tn	Translator’s Note Explains the rationale for the translation and gives alternative translations, interpretive options, and other technical information.
sn	Study Note Incudes comments about historical or cultural background, explanation of obscure phrases or brief discussions of context, discussions of the theological point made by the biblical author, cross references and references to Old Testament quotations or allusions in the New Testament, or other miscellaneous information helpful to the modern reader.
tc	Text-critial Note Discusses alternate (variant) readings found in the various manuscripts and groups of manuscripts of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament.
map	Map Note—gives map coordinates for site within the two map sections, “The Journeys of Paul” and “The Holy Land from the Heavens.”

What is the NET BIBLE?

The NET BIBLE is a completely new translation of the Bible, not a revision or an update of a previous English version. It was completed by more than 25 biblical scholars—experts in the original biblical languages—who worked directly from the best currently available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. Most of these scholars teach Old or New Testament exegesis in seminaries and graduate schools. Furthermore, the translator assigned to prepare the first draft of the translation and notes for each book of the Bible was chosen in every instance because of his or her extensive work in that particular book—not only involving teaching but writing and research as well, often extending over several decades. Many of the translators and editors have also participated in other translation projects. They have been assisted by doctoral students and advised by style consultants and Wycliffe field translators. Hence, the notes alone are the cumulative result of hundreds of thousands of hours of biblical and linguistic research applied to the particular problems of accurately translating and interpreting the text. The translators’ notes, most of which were created at the same time as the initial drafts of the translation itself, enable the reader of the NET BIBLE to “look over the shoulders” of the translators as they worked and gain insight into their decisions and choices to an extent never before possible in an English translation.

Why do we need yet another translation of the Bible?

With over 25 different English translations of the entire Bible and approximately forty of the New Testament, an obvious question is, why yet another one? As described above, the initial problem was that other modern translations have not been made available for free electronic distribution over the Internet. Electronic searchable versions of contemporary English translations tend to be very expensive. Anyone anywhere in the world with an Internet connection is able to use and print out the NET BIBLE without cost for personal study, preaching, teaching, and training others. In addition, anyone who wants to give away the Bible can print up to 1,000 copies of the NET BIBLE and distribute them for free without the need for written permission. Pastors without extensive libraries, missionaries and Bible translators in the field, and people in countries where access to Bible study materials are restricted or prohibited will all benefit from access to a contemporary English translation with extensive notes available on the Internet. (The notes accompanying the NET BIBLE can even help you understand other translations better.) Ultimately what you have in your hands or on your computer monitor with this copy of the NET BIBLE is God’s word, and we believe it should be available to everyone everywhere to read and study in a version that is accurate, readable, and affordable.

It is not just the new electronic media that justifies this translation, however. A great deal of scholarly literature has been produced on biblical interpretation and translation in the last quarter century. While virtually all other translations produced in the last two decades of the twentieth century were revisions of earlier versions, the NET BIBLE translators felt that an entirely different kind of translation was needed. In particular, the extensive translators’ notes that display for the reader the decisions and choices behind the translation ultimately chosen are virtually unique among Bible translations, in all languages, in the history of translation. The resulting translation itself is intended to capture the best of several worlds: readable and accurate and elegant all at the same time.

What is the cornerstone and guiding principle of our ministry?

Bible.org is guided by the principle of “Ministry First.” Our translation team desires to follow the Bible’s teaching with regard to the distribution of God’s word versus the sales of printed Bibles for massive profits. The NET BIBLE team has reflected on the model described in Leviticus 23:22 and asked how Bible publishers ensure that they “not completely harvest the corner of their field…for the poor and the foreigner.” Our ‘crop’ is a Bible translation. Even though some for-profit Bible publishers have allowed Bible societies to print and give away millions of Bibles, the amount of funds available to all Bible societies and publishers in all of history does not come close to being able to actually give a free printed Bible to all of the two billion people who have some ability to read English. This is why we feel so strongly that the NET BIBLE must not only be available for viewing on the Internet, but also for free downloading and use by everyone, worldwide, for free, forever. It is a cornerstone and guiding principle of our ministry. This approach helps us come closer to fulfilling the Great Commission of Matthew 28:19-20 by allowing all people of all nations on earth to learn what God has revealed in his word for them to understand and obey. Learning and following the Bible’s instructions must apply to Bible translators and publishers as well as Bible students. This is why we offer the NET BIBLE for free to the world—because we desire to offer Bibles and Bible study resources for free to those who cannot afford to pay for them. Now you know why the NET BIBLE is available for download and use in Bible studies free to all people, everywhere. These are exciting times, and while we are honored to have been the first modern English translation to do this, we are pleased to see that many other modern English translations are now posted on the Internet for free use as well. As a pioneer in this space, the NET BIBLE goes beyond just offering free online use and actually offers people around the world the ability to obtain a free download of the entire NET BIBLE in a popular word processing format as well as a searchable electronic NET BIBLE for free so that you can easily study for yourself and then write study materials quoting the NET BIBLE for use by others. We call this a “Ministry First” model, where ministry always takes priority.

Read more on our model of ministry — go to www.bible.org/ministryfirst

The NET Bible Society is working with other groups and Bible Societies to provide the NET BIBLE translators’ notes to complement fresh translations in other languages. A Chinese translation team is currently at work on a new translation which incorporates the NET BIBLE translators’ notes in Chinese, making them available to an additional 1.5 billion people. These notes are even more essential in Chinese (and other languages) because they incorporate citations and applications of critical biblical reference materials that are unlikely to be translated into Chinese (and other languages) in the foreseeable future. These tools are not simply to make the translation better, but also to provide a window into the original languages using resources otherwise unavailable. Refer to the List of Cited Works in the appendices and the translators’ notes for examples. Parallel projects involving other languages are also in progress.

What is the NET BIBLE’s place in the history of English Bible translation?

The history of the Bible’s translation into English is a long and complicated one, and can only be summarized briefly here. Parts of the Bible appear to have been translated into Old English by Alfred the Great (died A.D. 901), including the Ten Commandments, parts of Exodus 21-23 and Acts 15, and a number of Psalms. Later in the tenth century Abbot Aelfric and perhaps others translated significant parts of the Old Testament into English, as well as the Gospels and some other New Testament books.

Want to help create a NET Bible in your native language?
For information go to www.bible.org/translation

By around 1300 parts of the Psalms and the New Testament were being translated into Middle English. These were precursors of the famous versions associated with John Wycliffe (died A.D. 1384). The tradition that Wycliffe himself translated the Bible into English is founded on a statement by his follower Jan Hus. Whether he actually did the translation himself or it was carried out by his followers, he doubtless exerted a great influence over it. These translations were based on the Latin Vulgate, originally the work of Jerome, which was finished at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. and which became the standard Bible of the Western church throughout the Middle Ages.

Several other events in Europe had a significant impact on the history of the English Bible at this point. First was the general revival of learning in Europe known as the Renaissance, which brought about renewed interest in Hebrew and Greek, the original languages of the Bible. Second was the construction of an improved printing press with metal moveable type some time prior to 1450 by Johannes Gutenberg (the first volume book printed on this improved press was the Gutenberg Bible printed ca. 1455). This innovation launched an explosion in the availability of Bibles, which spread to England when the first printing press for English Bibles was established in 1476. The third event occurred when Martin Luther nailed his ninety-five theses to the door of the church in Wittenberg in 1517, setting in motion the Protestant Reformation. These events combined to give considerable momentum to the translation of the Bible into everyday language. Luther’s New Testament, translated from the Greek into German, appeared in 1522, while William Tyndale’s, translated from the Greek into English, followed in 1525. Tyndale was arrested in Antwerp in 1535 and executed for translating the Bible into the vernacular, and his translation was vilified by the authorities. Yet almost every English translation for the next hundred years borrowed heavily from Tyndale’s work, including in particular the King James Version of 1611. Before this landmark in the history of English Bibles, however, there were other translations, like Coverdale’s in 1535 and the version called Matthew’s Bible in 1537. Both these Bibles received the royal license in 1537. The year 1539 saw the appearance of the so-called “Great Bible,” actually a revision of Matthew’s Bible by Coverdale, which by royal decree of Henry VIII was placed in every church in England.

The reign of Elizabeth I saw the production of two more English Bibles, the Geneva Bible (published in 1560 in Geneva, with a dedication to Elizabeth) and the Bishops’ Bible (1568, with a second edition in 1572). The former was the Bible used by Shakespeare, and was thoroughly Calvinistic in its translation and notes. It was so far superior in translation to the Great Bible that it became very popular, although the Anglican authorities were not pleased with its Calvinistic leanings. The Bishops’ Bible was prepared as a response, and as a result English-speaking Protestantism was left at the end of the sixteenth century with two competing Bibles. The problem was not resolved until the Hampton Court Conference of 1604, when King James authorized a new translation of the Bible and specifically prohibited the use of marginal notes commenting on doctrine (notes commenting on the sense of words were permitted, and the original King James Version contained thousands of these). Gradually this translation established itself as the English Bible par excellence, and the last edition of the Geneva Bible appeared in 1644.

Until 1885, when the Revised Version was published in England, the King James Version (known in England as the Authorized Version) reigned supreme. An American version of the revision, known as the American Standard Version, was published in 1901. The twentieth century saw the publication of a number of Bibles and New Testaments, among them James Moffatt’s (NT 1913; OT 1924) and E. J. Goodspeed’s (NT 1923), which combined with the Old Testament by A. Gordon, T. Meek, J. M. Powis Smith, and L. Waterman (1935) was published the same year as The Bible: An American Translation. One of the most important English translations of the twentieth century was the Revised Standard Version (NT 1946; complete Bible, 1952). This was a thoroughgoing revision of the KJV and ASV which many consider to be the first of the “modern” translations. The publication of the RSV was only the beginning of a flood of translations and paraphrases, including (among others) J. B. Phillips’ The New Testament in Modern English (1958), the Amplified Bible (1965), the Jerusalem Bible (1966), the New American Bible (1970), the New English Bible (1970), the New American Standard Bible (1971), The Living Bible (1971), and the New International Version (1973).

Over thirty years have passed since the release of the NIV New Testament. This major English translation is taken as a benchmark because (unlike many others) it was not a revision or update of an existing translation or a successor to a previous translation. During these thirty years neither biblical scholarship nor the English language itself has stood still. The NET BIBLE is the first completely new translation of the Bible to be produced in the age of the Internet with full computer networking support involving collaborative file sharing, data storage and retrieval, and the creation of task-specific databases. Biblical scholars exchanged not only e-mail but entire documents over computer networks and the Internet for constant editorial revision and correction. Electronic versions of standard lexical and grammatical reference works enabled translators and editors to work much more rapidly than if they were dependent on paper copies of these materials. Materials were posted on the Internet at www.bible.org from the very beginning, with seven complete books along with their accompanying translators’ notes available online in 1996, less than one full year after the beginning of the project. This allowed literally millions of people to “beta test” the translation and notes, making countless valuable suggestions to the translators and editors. The result was not a consensus translation (since all the comments and suggestions were carefully reviewed by the translators and editors), but a translation produced with an unparalleled level of transparency. This in turn created a high level of accountability, not to a particular group or denomination, but to the Church worldwide. The NET BIBLE truly is the first English translation for the next millennium, representing a step potentially more significant than the use of Gutenberg’s improved printing press for mass producing Bibles in 1455. The original authors of the Bible made the books and letters they had written available to everyone for free. That is what we are now doing electronically, and we believe that use of the Internet to distribute Bibles and Bible study resources globally represents the most efficient publishing and ministry model available in history. To a server on the Internet, distributing 6 billion copies—one for every person on earth!—costs almost nothing, unlike all previous methods of distributing Bibles. The Internet represents the single best opportunity for ministry in the history of the world. The mission of bible.org is to leverage the power of the Internet to provide people and ministries worldwide with universal access to the NET BIBLE and other trustworthy Bible study resources at an affordable cost—free!

How did the NET BIBLE project begin?

The project began on a rainy night in November 1995 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature. There a group of Old and New Testament scholars met over dinner at a fine Italian restaurant with the sponsor of the project. Later that same night in a hotel lobby they were joined by a larger group of scholars—to discuss at greater length a new translation of the Bible. The topic of conversation was the possibility of an English translation for electronic distribution over the Internet. A revision and update of some existing English translation was initially discussed, but in subsequent discussions the biblical scholars themselves insisted that a completely new translation was both possible and indeed preferable. The initial planning group was interdenominational and evangelical, although not made up of official representatives from church groups or denominations. A deliberate decision was made early on to devote special attention to the avoidance of doctrinal peculiarities or sectarian bias in the new translation.

What is unique and distinctive about the NET BIBLE?

Working with the format of electronic media, it soon became apparent to those of us involved in the translation project that we could do some things that had not been possible before, given the limitations of traditional print media.

First, the NET BIBLE includes extensive notes with the translation, notes created by the original translators as they worked through the issues and options concerning the translation of the original language texts of the Bible. These notes operate on more than one level—a technical level for pastors, teachers, and students of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek who are interested in the grammatical, syntactical, and text-critical details of the translation, and a more popular level comparable to current study Bibles offering explanatory details of interest to lay Bible students. In electronic format the length of these notes, a considerable problem with conventional printed Bibles, is no longer a major limitation.
Second, within the more technical notes the translation team has taken the opportunity to explain and give the rationale for the translation of a particular phrase or verse.
Third, the translators and editors used the notes to show major interpretive options and/or textual options for difficult or disputed passages, so that the English reader knows at a glance what the alternatives are.
Fourth, the translators and editors used the notes to give a translation that was formally equivalent, while placing a somewhat more functionally equivalent translation in the text itself to promote better readability and understandability. The longstanding tension between these two different approaches to Bible translation has thus been fundamentally solved.
Finally, the use of electronic media gives the translators and editors of the NET BIBLE the possibility of continually updating and improving the translation and notes. The translation itself will be updated in five-year increments, while the notes will undergo a continual process of expansion and refinement.

In short, the notes allow a running commentary on the translators’ decisions to a degree never seen before in any translation of the Bible. The NET BIBLE with the complete set of translators’ notes is not just a very readable modern translation, but a copy of the Bible with its own commentary attached containing an average of two notes for each verse. Those who have years of expertise in the study of the original biblical languages can now communicate that information directly to the English-speaking Bible reader in a convenient, compact fashion that does not require the Bible student to read through a shelf of commentaries or spend years learning the original biblical languages.

In addition to format and content, the broad framework of the project is unique among translations. The NET BIBLE is not funded by any particular denomination, church, or special interest group. This has directly impacted the content: Translators and editors were left free to follow where the text leads and translate as they thought best. There has never been pressure to make sure the text reads a certain way or conforms to a particular doctrinal statement. The NET BIBLE is responsible and accountable to the universal body of Christ, the church worldwide. Through publication on the Internet and free distribution of the text, the editors and translators have submitted the NET BIBLE to their brothers and sisters in Christ all over the world. The questions, comments, and feedback received from them are examined very carefully, and the translation and notes have been constantly reevaluated in response. This dynamic process has yielded a Bible that is honest to the original text of the Bible, yet valuable and acceptable to Bible readers everywhere.

How do you know something isn’t “lost in translation”?

How can you know for sure something wasn’t “lost in translation” in your Bible? As Acts 17:11 indicates, the Bereans “eagerly received the message, examining the scriptures carefully every day to see if these things were so.” Without firsthand competence in translating Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek or access to the minds of the translators and their decision-making processes, you can’t “see if these things were so” in order to know how accurate any translation is. The NET BIBLE assists readers in discerning biblical truth by offering 60,932 notes to explain and document the translators’ reasoning and the decisions they made throughout the lengthy process of translating and editing the NET BIBLE. The translators’ notes are intended to allow Bible students without extensive training in the original languages to be more confident in the English translation they use and to provide a new level of access and transparency into the text of the Bible.

What is the significance of the NET BIBLE’s name?

The name that was chosen reflects our goals to provide the Bible to the Internet audience in electronic form in addition to the more traditional printed media. Users of the Internet can easily relate to the name “NET BIBLE,” while the Internet itself provides the vehicle for access and distribution to the world.

How large was the NET BIBLE Translation Committee?

A major consideration during the initial planning stage was the size of the translation committee. More than one person should do the work of translation, to avoid the unintentional idiosyncrasies that inevitably result from a single individual working in isolation from a community of colleagues. At the same time, it was obvious to all of us that a smaller group of about 25 scholars who shared a number of basic assumptions and followed generally similar approaches to the biblical text in terms of interpretive method and general philosophy of translation would be able to work quickly and efficiently. This proved accurate and valuable and the time from the commencement of the project to the posting of the first complete New Testament on the Internet was a remarkable 32 months. The list of translators is included at the end of this preface.

How was the NET BIBLE actually made?

The procedure followed in the making of the NET BIBLE was to assign each book of the Old or New Testament to an individual scholar who was extremely familiar with the interpretation of that particular book and in most cases had years of experience in research, teaching, and writing about the book. These scholars produced an initial draft translation of the books assigned to them along with the initial set of translators’ notes (including some text-critical notes and study notes as well). This work was then submitted to the New Testament or Old Testament Editorial Committee for extensive editing and/or revision. In some cases revisions in form and content suggested by the respective committee were carried out by the original translator, while in other cases an editor reworked the draft translation as needed. The work was then resubmitted to the appropriate editorial committee for final approval. An English style consultant, working independently of the editorial committees, then reviewed the translation for smoothness, clarity, and elegance of contemporary English style. Changes suggested by the style consultant were checked against the original Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek before final incorporation into the translation. Generally between three and five different individuals edited and revised each book of the Bible. In this way the NET BIBLE First Edition was checked and revised repeatedly at many different levels for accuracy, clarity, and English style. Finally it was proofread a number of times and field-tested in various settings. Countless hours of research, translation, revision, and interaction thus went into the production of the NET BIBLE.

The New Testament was released as a first beta version in three separate printings in March, April, and June of 1998. It was then revised and released again in October of 1998, again as a first beta edition. During this time, the Old Testament was edited and released as a first beta version, along with still another revision of the New Testament. This First Beta Edition of the entire NET BIBLE (Old and New Testaments together) was completed and E-mailed to the printer just after 2 a.m. on September 11, 2001 (coincidentally a day many will long remember). The Second Beta Edition was released to the printer on September 2, 2003. After an additional two years of use, extensive comments from users, and ongoing improvements from the NET BIBLE editorial staff, the First Edition of the NET BIBLE was released to the printer on August 30, 2005.

Who decided what kind of translation the NET BIBLE was going to be?

No denomination, church, agency, or publisher determined the nature of the NET BIBLE translation beforehand. It was a translation conceived and designed by biblical scholars themselves who were primarily specialists in the biblical languages and in the exegesis (interpretation) of the biblical text. At the beginning of the project the Executive Steering Committee, composed of members of both the Old and New Testament Editorial Committees plus the Project Director, held extensive discussions before approving the “Guidelines for Translators” (now known as the “NET BIBLE Principles of Translation” and included in the printed edition as the first item in the Appendices) which set forth the basic character of the NET BIBLE translation and notes. Faithfulness to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek in which the biblical documents were originally written was the primary concern. This frequently extended even to the connectives (“for,” “then,” “so,” “now”) used to introduce clauses, sentences, and paragraphs in the original languages. These conjunctions are often omitted in contemporary English translations since current English style does not use them extensively to indicate transitions and argument flow. However, the Executive Steering Committee felt that in many cases it was important to preserve these connections so that the modern reader would understand the argument flow. (In some cases where this would result in awkward English style, these conjunctions have been indicated in the translators’ notes that accompany the text—another example of how the NET BIBLE text and translators’ notes work together to convey meaning.)

How would you characterize the NET BIBLE as a translation?

The ultimate objective of the NET BIBLE is to be accurate, readable, and elegant. Yet these three principles are all too often in conflict with one another. Even a universal taxonomy will not work, because some passages pose special problems (such as liturgical use, familiarity, connections with the Old Testament, theological richness, and the like) that would override any rigid taxonomy.

As an illustration of the complexity of competing principles, consider the Lord’s declaration in Mark 1:17: “I will make you fishers of men.” This wording, found in the KJV, RSV, NASB, NIV, REB, and ultimately going back to Tyndale, is familiar to churchgoers. But in contemporary English it communicates a meaning that deviates slightly from the point: Jesus did not want his apostles to evangelize only adult males, but all people (the Greek is ἁλιές ἀνθρώπων, halies anthrōpōn). But there is a second problem with this verse: “fishers of men” is archaic. The NRSV opts for “I will make you fish for people.” This resolves the two problems of the older translations, but introduces two others. First, it sounds as if Jesus will force (“make”) the disciples to “fish for people”; second, the conversion of the objective genitive (“of men”) to an object of the preposition (“for people”) results in a subtle shift from a focus on a new occupation to a mere activity. The NLT and TEV get past the first problem but not the second (“I will show you how to fish for people”; “I will teach you to catch people”). So, how best to solve the dilemma? The full meaning of Jesus’ declaration includes both nonexclusive evangelism and implications of an occupational shift. It is too cumbersome to express this as “I will make you fishermen of people,” though the archaism is removed. Nor is it correct to translate this as “I will make you fishers of mankind” because that would imply a mission to Gentiles which the disciples could not have conceived of at that time in redemptive history. This text illustrates the clash of the translational objectives of accuracy, readability, and elegance. We believe that the great value of the NET BIBLE is its extensive translators’ notes that wrestle with such issues, for the notes become a way for us to “have our cake and eat it too.” But on this passage—for now—we have settled on the translation, “I will turn you into fishers of people.” We have retained an archaism both because of its familiarity and because the alternative “fishermen” was too inelegant. The object complement construction was rendered “turn you into fishers” instead of “make you fishers” both because of its clarity and the hint of the disciples’ conversion as a prerequisite to their new occupation. We chose not to go with the more natural but less accurate rendering of “I will teach you to catch people.” In this passage, accuracy was more important than readability or elegance. But a decision was not easy; we are still open to suggestions.

Is a literal translation the best translation?

Although one of the general principles of this translation is to indicate in the notes a more literal rendering, not every departure from such is noted. For one thing, Greek (or Hebrew) and English are sufficiently different that to document every departure would be an exercise in futility. No translation is completely literal, nor should that be a desirable goal. A completely word-for-word literal translation would be unreadable. John 4:15, for example, would be rendered: “Says to him the woman, ‘Sir, give to me this the water that not I thirst nor I come here to draw.” Matthew 1:18 would say, “Of the but Jesus Christ the birth thus was. Being betrothed the mother of him, Mary, to Joseph, before of to come together them she was found in belly having from Spirit Holy.” Such examples are not isolated, but are the norm. Claims for a literal translation must necessarily have a lot of fine print.

Literal is also not necessarily faithful. The word order differences between English and Greek, the use of the article, case, infinitives, participles, voice, mood, and other grammatical features are often so different that gibberish is the result if an absolutely literal translation is attempted (as in the two examples cited above). Not only this, but the idioms of one language have to be converted into the receptor language. Thus, in Matthew 1:18, no English translation (not even the King James Version) would dare speak of Mary’s pregnancy as “she was having [it] in the belly.” Yet this is the literal Greek expression for pregnancy. But it is not English. Thus the real question in translation is not whether it is literal, but whether it is faithful. And fidelity requires converting the lexical, grammatical, idiomatic, and figurative elements (to mention but a few) of the original language into the corresponding package in the receptor language. At times this can be accomplished by maintaining an approximately literal force. At other times, a loose rendering is required if the sentence is to have any meaning in English at all. Of course, this can be overdone. There are two dangers to avoid in translation. First, a translation should not be so literal that it is not good English. The meaning of the original needs to be as faithfully rendered into good English as possible. Second, a translation should not be so loose that it becomes merely an interpretation or allows sectarian interests to overwhelm the resultant text. All translation is interpretation; it cannot be otherwise. But the issue is how much interpretation and how idiosyncratic an interpretation is.

Part of the problem is this: the more literal a translation is, the less readable it generally is; the more readable it is, the less faithful it is to the original meaning (at least in many cases). Some modern translations are quite readable but are not very faithful to the biblical author’s meaning. A major goal of good translation is of course readability—but not at the expense of the intended meaning. The philosophy of the NET BIBLE translators was to be interpretive when such an interpretation represents the best thinking of recent scholarship. Thus, for example, in Romans 6:4, the expression “newness of life” is taken to mean “new life” by grammarians and exegetes alike and is thus translated this way. But when an interpretive translation is unnecessary or might suggest sectarian bias, and when a more literal rendering results in good English, we have followed the latter course.

A major category of nonliteral translation involves certain conjunctions. For example, the Greek word καί (kai), meaning generally “and, even, also, yet, but, indeed,” is often left untranslated at the beginning of a sentence. When such is the case, there is usually no note given. However, if the possibility exists that an interpretive issue is involved, a note is given.

An additional consideration of the translation team was faithfulness (as far as possible without violation of current English style) to the style of the individual biblical authors. Even within the New Testament, written over a short span of time in comparison with the Old Testament, the authors exhibit their own unique literary styles. Paul’s style differs from Peter’s, and both differ from John’s. The translators and editors attempted to give the modern reader an impression of these stylistic differences where it was possible to do so without sacrificing accuracy, clarity, or readability.

Is the NET BIBLE suitable for use as more than a study Bible?

Beyond the primary objective of faithfulness to the original, a second major objective for the NET BIBLE was the clarity of the translation for the modern reader. This concern for clarity extended to the literary quality and readability of the NET BIBLE, and individual translators were encouraged to have their translations read aloud so that such factors as assonance and rhythm could be considered. Thus, although originally conceived as a study Bible, the NET BIBLE is designed to be useful for reading aloud, memorizing, teaching, and preaching, as well as private reading and study. The NET BIBLE is now being released as audio files in mp3 format. To find out for yourself how striking it sounds when read aloud, go to www.bible.org for a sample.

Hear the NET Bible, visit lumina.bible.org

What do you mean when you say the NET BIBLE was beta-tested?

Since the NET BIBLE is the first English translation done entirely in digital electronic form, an idea was borrowed from software developers—a beta test. How did we beta-test the Bible? Just like software is beta-tested—we let people try it and tell us where it could be improved.

Every working draft of the NET BIBLE has been posted on the Internet at www.bible.org from the very beginning of the project. More people have previewed, used and reviewed the working drafts of the NET BIBLE than any other Bible translation in history. These prepublication reviewers of the NET BIBLE have logged millions of review sessions and sent the translation committee countless comments. The committee always takes each of these comments from our readers seriously and many have led to substantial improvement in the translation and notes. Now the complete NET BIBLE is available in both electronic and printed form. You have the opportunity to learn from a truly detailed, totally new Bible translation, plus you have our invitation to help us continue to improve the NET BIBLE through its planned ongoing development. This is unique in history.

What other changes have our readers suggested?

Many readers of the First Beta Edition asked for a NET BIBLE that weighed less and was easier to carry. With the Second Beta Edition and now the First Edition this has been accomplished. The font size remains standard study Bible size, the font size for poetry sections has been increased, and the font style of the footnotes has been upgraded to support better readability. The First Edition also employs new footnote numbers that are much easier to read than in previous printings. Countless readers contacted us with suggestions about the translation and notes, and these have helped us improve the NET BIBLE in thousands of places.

The NET BIBLE was the first translation to be published in electronic form on the Internet before being published in traditional print media. The Old and New Testament Translation Committees have invited and received public comment on the NET BIBLE from laypersons, clergy, and biblical scholars. That process will continue even after this release of the First Edition. Editorial focus will now be shifted primarily toward the notes. We invite feedback from everyone to help us make the NET BIBLE even better (go to our online comments database at www.bible.org/comments).

What improvements were made during the beta process?

Many readers of the First Beta Edition asked for maps. In conjunction with RØHR Productions of Nicosia, Cyprus, we included maps of the Holy Land based on satellite imagery. We also introduced new “map” notes to locate places mentioned in the NET BIBLE text. An exciting combination of technologies was used to produce these incredible images and they represent a very interesting story in and of themselves.

Another major change introduced with the Second Beta Edition of the NET BIBLE was a significant update to the text-critical notes for the New Testament. After the printing of the First Beta Edition, it was suggested to the NET BIBLE team by the German Bible Society (Deutsche Bibelgesellchaft) in Stuttgart, Germany, that the information in the New Testament tc notes should be standardized to the Nestle-Aland 27th edition text which they publish in conjunction with the Institut für neutestamentliche Textforschung in Münster, Germany. (Prior to this point, the textual evidence in the tc notes had been drawn from NA²⁷, UBS⁴, and other sources.) Over the course of a year, part of which was spent in residence at the Institut in Münster, the Senior New Testament Editor revised all existing tc notes in the NET BIBLE New Testament and added scores more. In the Second Beta Edition all these tc notes were conformed to the Nestle-Aland 27th edition Greek New Testament (Novum Testamentum Graece), 8th revised printing including papyri 99-116. The changes to the notes are most noticeable with nomenclature for manuscript witnesses: All tc notes in the New Testament now use the same nomenclature as that used by NA²⁷, including the siglum Ï. The reader should consult NA²⁷ for discussion on this nomenclature. In addition, a double dagger (‡) is used in tc notes to indicate the several hundred places where the Greek text underlying the NET BIBLE differs from NA²⁷; at a glance the reader can now see when the text translated by the NET BIBLE New Testament differs from that of NA²⁷. This conformity to NA²⁷ increases the quality of the notes tremendously, as it aligns them with the standard critical text of the Greek New Testament used by scholars, pastors, and students all over the world. As a result NET BIBLE readers will be able to use NA²⁷ more effectively, and readers who use NA²⁷ will see more readily how the process of textual criticism is carried out. In 2004, a joint venture between the German Bible Society and bible.org produced the New English Translation—Novum Testamentum Graece New Testament which combines the full NA²⁷ text with apparatus and appendices along with the NET BIBLE text and a special edition of the translators’ notes and text-critical notes optimized to assist students of the original Greek. Additional information on this publication is available from www.bible.org/diglot.

Another significant change to the translators’ notes (tn) in the Second Beta Edition was the updating of all citations of BAGD to BDAG, thus keeping the NET BIBLE current with the most up-to-date reference materials. All of these changes have resulted in a better translation and an increase to 60,932 translators’ notes!

All of the biblical text was edited extensively for faithfulness to the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, as well as for English wording and style. In the final edit between the Second Beta Edition and the First Edition, approximately 1,500 new translators’ notes were added. There were also cases in the Second Beta Editon where the same note applied multiple times within a short section of a book. To decrease redundancy, approximately 600 duplicate notes were consolidated and deleted. From the First Beta Edition to the First Edition over 3,500 new notes of various kinds were added. These include translators’ notes (tn), study notes (sn), text-critical notes (tc), and map notes (map). The “map notes” [map] indicate where the particular location can be found in the map sections included in the NET BIBLE, “The Old Testament,” “The Journeys of Paul,” and “The Holy Land from the Heavens.” (For the First Edition a new section of Old Testament maps have been included for the first time.) Preceding the maps is an index which contains every site marked on the maps (although the maps do not include every biblical site). The map coordinates in the notes and index first indicate the larger map and then the individual grid location; if a site is shown on more than one map, multiple sets of coordinates will be listed. For example, one of the coordinates for the city of Jerusalem is Map5-B1; this should be read as “The Holy Land from the Heavens”—map 5—grid B1. Another coordinate for Jerusalem is JP1-F4; this should be read as “The Journeys of Paul”—map 1—grid F4.

Can I still submit suggestions for improvements now that the First Edition has been released?

Absolutely. The goal of this translation is to be accurate, readable, and elegant. While we think we’ve done a good job achieving that, we know we have not yet achieved perfection. If you come across a phrase or verse you feel needs further improvement, you can let us know through our online comments database at www.bible.org/comments. The comments database will remain online and input will be used for the first planned revision of the translated biblical text in 2010 and for the ongoing development of the notes.

You can submit a comment on any aspect of the translation and notes, from the clarity and elegance of the English to specific points of Greek or Hebrew grammar, to interpretive issues discussed in the notes. We welcome any and all comments which would help us improve the NET BIBLE. To illustrate that we aren’t solely interested in just one type of comment, below is a sampling of the types of comments we welcome. These are by no means exhaustive and you need not reference which category applies to you. These are merely examples to encourage you to participate in the ongoing development process.

I’m not an expert in Hebrew or Greek, but I don’t understand the English meaning of this verse. It uses awkward grammar or words that aren’t in normal English usage. (Translation reflecting normal English usage was the primary goal of the original King James Bible.)
I’m a scholar in the Bible’s original languages, and (a) I really think you could better translate this verse this way…; (b) here’s what your translation incorrectly implies in English which was not a nuance of the original; (c) here’s why people of my background will interpret the English phrase in a strange fashion.
There is reasonable difference of opinion about this verse’s implications among honest Bible students; a more balanced note is needed. (Here you may specify the view you would like to see represented.)
Other comments and endorsements: We would also like to hear of specific passages where you particularly like what we have done, or other features of the NET BIBLE that impress you. Additionally, we would be very pleased to have your endorsement of the NET BIBLE. Comments of this type can be sent by E-mail to comments@netbible.com or comments@bible.org.

Have suggestions and comments? Go to www.bible.org/comments

Will the NET BIBLE be updated on a regular basis?

Absolutely. No translation can achieve perfection, and even if it could, the English language itself would change and the translation would still become dated. The supplement to the Oxford English Dictionary, the standard reference source for English vocabulary, contains over 85,000 entries of words that did not exist in the English language when the OED was published in 1924. No one has any idea of the number of words and phrases that have dropped out of English usage in the same period. No one reading the KJV who comes across expressions like “meteyard” in Leviticus 19:35, “vain jangling” in 1 Timothy 1:6, or the “mean man” in Isaiah 2:9, 5:15, and 31:8 can fail to see how words change in meaning over time. Even terms like “usury” (Nehemiah 5:10; Ezekiel 18:17) or “she-camel” (Jeremiah 2:23)—both found in the NIV—are not familiar to many modern readers. Other English words like “thong” have developed new meanings which are problematic for their use in Bible translations (e.g., Judges 16:7 in the NIV).

Additional research, additional discoveries of new manuscripts, and archaeological discoveries that shed additional light on first century history and culture also contribute to the need for revision. Attempts to produce notes better suited to the needs of users will also result in frequent revision of the notes accompanying the NET BIBLE. Thus the production of the NET BIBLE is not a one-time undertaking to be completed and put aside, but an ongoing project with planned improvement and revision. The biblical text of the NET BIBLE itself will be revised in five-year increments beginning in 2010, while the notes will undergo continual revision, improvement, and expansion.

What position does the NET BIBLE take on gender-inclusive language?

Much concern has recently been expressed by people unhappy about modern translations of the Bible which employ “gender-inclusive” language. Some of the changes causing such concern involve the inclusion of references to women in almost all places where the biblical text refers to men, the pluralization of singular references to avoid the use of masculine pronouns like “he” or “him,” and even, in extreme cases, the application of such inclusive language to God himself. (This last idea is one completely foreign to the original authors of the canonical texts in question.)

Having said this, it is also true that many of the ancient texts of the Bible are less gender-specific than English translations often suggest. In many cases an ancient reader encountering a masculine noun or pronoun would have recognized it to be generic without having to be told. Modern readers (accustomed to the tendency of current English style to use inclusive language wherever possible) often assume the opposite to be true: if both genders are not explicitly mentioned, an assumption of exclusivity is frequently the result.

It is important to distinguish two approaches to gender inclusivity in the history of the Bible’s translation into English. The first approach we might call “Ideological Gender Inclusivity,” since it attempts, on an ideological basis, to remove “objectionable” elements like patriarchalism or even male metaphors for God himself. No such radical approach has been followed with the NET BIBLE. The other approach could be called “Gender-Accurate Translation,” which simply means translating terms without respect to gender when the intended meaning or application is broad and not gender-specific. This type of translation has been around at least since the publication of William Tyndale’s New Testament in 1526, when he rendered the phrase υἱοὶ θεοῦ (huioi theou, “sons of God”) as “children of God,” a gender neutral translation. Along these same lines the KJV of 1611 rendered בֵּן (ben, “son”) or its plural 2,822 times as “son” or “sons” and 1,533 times as “child” or “children,” resulting in a gender-neutral translation 35% of the time. A further example of gender-neutral translation can be found in Hosea 2:4, which refers to Gomer’s three children, two sons and one daughter. The Hebrew text of Hosea 2:4 literally reads “Upon her sons also I will have no pity, because they are sons of whoredom.” Yet the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), uses the Greek term for children, τέκνα (tekna, Hosea 2:6 [LXX], which is neuter gender), and among English translations the KJV, ASV, NIV, and NRSV all employ “children.”

With the NET BIBLE our concern was to be gender-accurate rather than gender-inclusive, striving for faithfulness to the original biblical texts while at the same time seeking to attain accuracy in terms of current English style. The English language constantly undergoes change. Acceptable conventions for dealing with gender-related language have undergone a great deal of change in the last few decades, and more change in this area will certainly come in the future. As the conventions of the English language change, new translations and revisions of existing translations will have to take this into account. This is especially important when the goal of the translation (like that of the NET BIBLE) is faithfulness to the original.

At the same time, we do not employ “Ideological Gender Inclusivity,” since we do not believe the Bible should be rewritten to incorporate gender-inclusive language foreign to the original. The Bible is a historical document rooted in a particular set of cultures and languages, each with their own conventions in the area of gender-related language. In addition, these languages and cultures are separated from us not by mere decades, but by millennia. In all cases the goal for the NET BIBLE was to be as accurate as possible with regard to gender-related language, faithfully reproducing the meaning of the original text in clear contemporary English. In some instances this meant allowing gender distinctions found in the original-language texts to stand in the translation, as for example in a historical setting—like Jesus crossing the Sea of Galilee with his disciples in a boat—when it is almost certain that only males were present. In other instances when a group of people are addressed by the Greek term anthrōpoi (literally, “men”) and it is clear from context that both men and women are addressed (with the term used in a generic sense), the translation “people” has been used. Here are some of the other typical features of the NET BIBLE’s handling of gender-related language:

Adelphoi (traditionally “brothers” or “brethren”) has been rendered as “brothers and sisters” in the epistles where the church is addressed at large. Ample evidence for this usage can be found in nonbiblical (secular) documents as mentioned in standard lexical reference tools like BDAG. This evidence is typically mentioned in the notes.
Participles have been translated “the one who” or (rarely) “the person who” with the following pronoun left as masculine, because English has yet to develop a gender-neutral pronoun for the third person. Only infrequently, when a participle refers to Deity, has it been translated “he who.”
There are a very few instances where anēr, which typically means “man” (i.e., adult male) or “husband” in Greek, has been rendered as “someone” (e.g., James 1:23) or (very rarely) as a generic (e.g., Acts 17:34, where Damaris, a woman, is explicitly mentioned as a member of the group).
In some cases in James, 1 John, and a few other places adelphos has been rendered as “fellow believer” or “fellow Christian” following usage outlined in standard lexical reference tools.

In most of these instances, further explanation of the way the gender-related language has been handled in the translation is given in a translators’ note.

Considerable time was spent discussing many significant New Testament texts with regard to gender issues. One example of such a text is 1 Timothy 2:5, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and anthrōpoi (men / mankind / humankind), the anthrōpos (man / person / human) Christ Jesus.” The NET BIBLE New Testament translation team discussed this intriguing example at length. The basic question was, “Is the key to Jesus’ role as mediator that he mediates for males, or for both men and women?” There was also the need to be sensitive to the word play in both halves of the verse involving anthrōpos. Typically the objection has been that a rendering like “human” in the second half compromises Jesus’ maleness which is also involved here. But the translators had to ask, “Which rendering might cause more confusion, a use of “men” in a generic sense, or a rendering like “humanity”? Which point is more central to this particular context, the redemption of humanity, or Jesus’ maleness? Everyone knows Jesus was a male human, so his maleness is not in question here! Deciding that the redemption of humanity was the primary point in the context, and that Jesus’ participation in humanity was central to his mediatory role, the translators opted for the rendering, “For there is one God and one intermediary between God and humanity, Christ Jesus, himself human.”

Finally, with regard to the issue of translational gender inclusivity it is important to note the flexibility shown by the New Testament authors themselves when citing Old Testament texts. A few examples will suffice: in Isaiah 52:7 the prophet states “how beautiful on the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news”; this was incorporated by Paul in Romans 10:15 as “the feet of those who proclaim the good news.” In Psalm 36:1 the psalmist writes, “There is no fear of God before his eyes,” while Paul quotes this in Romans 3:18 as “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” Again, the psalmist writes in Psalm 32:1, “Blessed is he whose lawless deeds are forgiven, whose sins are covered,” while Paul in Romans 4:7 has “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.” Even more striking is the citation by Paul in 2 Corinthians 6:18 of 2 Samuel 7:14, where God states, “I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me.” Paul renders this as “I will be a father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters.” Furthermore, it cannot be claimed that Paul is simply following the common version of the Greek Old Testament (the LXX) here, since the LXX follows the Hebrew text closely at this point, literally, “I will be to him for a father, and he will be to me for a son.” Although considerable flexibility is shown in Paul’s handling of this text, hardly anyone would charge him with capitulating to a feminist agenda!

What is the story behind these incredible photographic maps?

“THE HOLY LAND FROM THE HEAVENS” map supplement was a new addition to the Second Beta Edition of the NET BIBLE. There are two types of images in this section. Several of these images are photographs of the Holy Land taken from aircraft. The second type are satellite maps of the Holy Land. How these satellite images came to exist may be an interesting story to many readers.

When you compare these images to other satellite imagery or photographs, you will immediately notice their unique resolution and quality. This gives you, the reader, a great deal of information—relative altitude, topography, vegetation, available mountain passes, travel routes, etc.—and this information is often vital to understanding the Bible. As we searched for maps to include in the NET BIBLE, we found that the high quality map lithographs included in 16^th century Bibles had not been surpassed by the maps in contemporary study Bibles. Now they have. The images in “THE HOLY LAND FROM THE HEAVENS” are far better than any maps that have ever been included in any Bible.

What you see is essentially a photograph in the sense that all of the colors shown derive from a single satellite photograph, but it is so vastly improved that we feel we owe you an explanation. The process to create these images was quite complex. Every image began as a photograph taken by a U.S. LandSat 5 satellite on a cold, crystal clear morning in January. Every color is thus true and contextual, not a mixture of images from different days. It was a rare and specifically chosen day because there were virtually no clouds anywhere in the entire region. Because LandSat images are taken from directly above, contain no altitude data, and have only a 30 meter resolution—far worse than the result you see here—more needed to be done to make the images better. A resolution of 30 meters means is that a building which is 30 by 30 meters would appear as one single dot on the image, so objects smaller than this size would not be visible at this resolution.

To improve the images, data from a French SPOT satellite was integrated in order to increase the resolution to 10 meters, so that smaller features of the landscape could be seen. This was complicated because the SPOT satellite data is black and white, but has 10 meter resolution. Thus there are 9 pixels of data (9 dots) in the SPOT data for every single colored dot in the LandSat data. Since these two satellites took their pictures from different altitudes and different locations in the sky, combining the two images required continuous compensation for differences in altitude, focal length, and image skew—because these two images sources were never intended to be combined into a single image. Therefore it was required that the combined images be precisely aligned, that the edges of every mountain and valley be identical and not blurred, resulting in an extensive investment of money, love, time, and technology. Along the way, two photographic exposure settings were required so that the desert south was not overexposed and the vegetation of the north was not underexposed. So the base image had to be an integration of two exposure settings shot at the same time by the same satellite in order to achieve the photographic exposure perfection you see. Once the SPOT and LandSat photographs were integrated, the image was still a topographically boring look from above with no altitude data.

The next step was to “drape” these two-dimensional images over a 3-D relief model of the terrain which added topographical data. This required relatively complex math and a significant amount of computer time. On some maps, this kind of data is shown as contour lines overlaid onto the images and labeled with altitude numbers for each contour line. Using this approach, locations where the contour lines are very close represent steep slopes. This method is fine for hiking maps, but obscures a photographic image and certainly detracts from the beauty of high resolution color satellite images like these.

The final step, therefore, was to develop software which would remove the need for contour lines by rendering the entire image as if it had not been taken from directly above in space, but as if the observer was viewing the scene from the side window of a commercial airliner. In this manner, altitude information would appear photographically as height in a natural way rather than as numbers on a vertical view from above. One drawback of this oblique scene projection is that the opposite sides of large mountains and valleys are obscured. For this reason, there are two views presented for each scene to allow you to “see behind” each of the mountains—one looking from the southwest and another from the northeast. In this manner, none of the original data is lost in these photographs. You can see both sides of each mountain from 180 degree opposing photographs of each region. In addition, the natural distortion that occurs when projecting an oblique image is also accounted for by looking at the same region from two different perspectives.

Why these particular viewing perspectives (northeast and southwest)? Since the computer could have projected each image from any angle, these photographs could have been rendered as if shot looking in any compass direction—looking north or east for example. But these particular perspectives have been chosen for a specific reason. Depth perception and contour imaging clues interpreted in the brain are indicated by shadows in photographs. Although the original photographs were taken from above, the sun was not high overhead at the same time, so the shadows included in the original satellite photos dictate the optimum viewing angle of the scenes. Since the original photographs were taken early on a winter morning, the sun was low on the southeast horizon, casting long shadows to the northwest from the southeast. The eye understands an image best when viewed perpendicular to the direction of any shadows. Therefore, in order to produce the most illuminating three dimensional image, the observer must look at right angles to these shadows. These circumstances dictate that the best viewing perspectives for the reader will be looking northeast and southwest.

These images took more time and technology than have ever been used before in the creation of images for biblical studies. They are the result of over thirty years of diligent effort by RØHR Productions Ltd. whose goal is to create unsurpassed images of the Holy Land, images which enable the reader to better understand the land of the Bible—and provide teachers a far better than normal reference for guiding students through biblical narratives in their proper geographical context. Although we have modified these maps to suit the smaller format of the NET BIBLE they are all derived from the Holy Land Satellite Atlas: Volumes 1 and 2 (and the related 3-D Animation CD of the Holy Land), published by RØHR Productions Ltd. We are grateful for permission to use them in the NET BIBLE. The effort that went into the procurement and production of these images deserves your support. We encourage you to obtain RØHR’s family of imagery reference materials in order to support both your studies and RØHR’s ongoing efforts.

What are some of the distinctive characteristics of the NET BIBLE translation philosophy?

One distinctive characteristic is how the NET BIBLE strives for accuracy. The NET BIBLE seeks to be accurate by translating passages consistently and properly within their grammatical, historical, and theological context. The interplay and proper understanding of these three contexts has produced some distinctive translations within the NET BIBLE. By explaining these here we hope to help the Bible reader understand more fully the translation task undertaken to produce the NET BIBLE, but even more importantly to understand more fully the Bible itself.

As a translator approaches a passage there are a number of contexts which must be considered. They can be summed up under three broad terms: grammatical, historical, and theological. Grammatical context involves a natural, accurate understanding of the language of the original text which provides parameters for how language functions and which meanings are possible and probable for a given text. This is what most naturally comes to mind when translation work is done. It is the primary work of the translator to determine what meaning is expressed in the original language and how that can best be expressed in the target language. Understanding in this area has improved immensely over the last several years, especially with the advent of computer tools for language study. One of the primary goals of the NET BIBLE has been to stay abreast of current research in this area. The footnotes in the NET BIBLE often refer to recent articles, books, and dissertations which have new data regarding how biblical languages function. As our understanding of these languages improves, naturally it will affect the translation of particular passages.

Historical context involves an understanding of the peoples, cultures, customs, and history of the times in which the Bible was written. As with the grammatical context, the historical context provides parameters for understanding the meaning of passages in the Bible and how they should be translated. It looks at the historical background and events of the text to provide a good balance for possible interpretations and meanings of a text.

Theological context is the understanding of God and his work that a particular author would have at the time he wrote a particular passage of scripture. In a manner similar to historical context, theological context provides parameters for deciding upon the meaning of a text and the best way to translate it. The Bible was written over a period of about 2,500 years. During this time, theological understanding changed dramatically. Moses did not know and understand God the way Paul did. This does not mean that Moses knew God in a wrong way and that Paul knew him the right way; it simply means that God had revealed more about himself over time, so Paul had a fuller understanding of who God was and what he was doing in the world. When translating an earlier passage of scripture, the translator should take into account that the theological understanding of the author will be different from that of a later author.

As implied above, these three concepts form a limited hierarchy. Grammatical context is the most important because it deals with the nuts and bolts of the language which convey meaning which ultimately can be translated. For example, in English one cannot communicate to a reader that the sky is blue by writing “The tree is green.” The words and phrases which make up this sentence can only communicate a limited meaning, and this is defined by the grammar, the syntax of the phrases, the meanings of the individual words, and other similar considerations. Understanding the grammatical context is the most important task of the translator, for the meaning is found in these words and phrases. The translators and editors of the NET BIBLE translate a passage with precedence given to the grammatical context. The historical and theological context provide a reasonable system of checks and balances; they help the translator decide what is the most probable meaning of the original text and how that meaning should be translated. They do not drive the translation; instead they guide it so that the most probable meaning is conveyed.

A very important concept for understanding the translation philosophy of the NET BIBLE and how these three contexts work together is progressive revelation. Simply put, progressive revelation recognizes that God reveals himself—his nature as well as his word, plans, and purposes—over time. He did not reveal everything about himself and what he was doing in the world all at once; instead he graciously revealed more and more as time went on. Later revelation serves to complement and supplement what has come before. The relation of this reality to translation work creates a great deal of tension, especially as it relates to the theological context, because certain earlier passages are clarified by later ones. Does the translator translate the older passage with a view to the clarification that the later passage brings, or does the translator concentrate solely on the native context of the older passage? The translators and editors for the NET BIBLE have generally chosen to do the latter for a variety of reasons. A translation which takes into account the progress of revelation will be true to the three contexts discussed above. It is also very beneficial to the Bible reader to have the progress of revelation accurately represented in the translation of particular texts. This helps the reader see how God has worked through the centuries, and it helps the reader to stand more accurately in the place of the original recipients of the text. Both of these are very instructive and inspirational, and they help the reader to connect with the text in a more fulfilling way.

A discussion of particular passages in the NET BIBLE—how they have been translated and why—will illuminate these concepts. Explaining these examples will show how the translators and editors have put the aspects of the translation theory discussed above into practice. The translators and editors believe these issues are important for readers of the Bible to grasp, so all these passages have extensive notes regarding these issues. An example from both the Old and New Testaments will be given.

Isaiah 7:14. This verse has seen a great deal of discussion in the history of interpretation. The text of the verse from the NET BIBLE is as follows:

Look, this young woman is about to conceive and will give birth to a son. You, young woman, will name him Immanuel.

The most visible issue surrounding this verse is the translation of the Hebrew word עַלְמָה (‘almah). The NET BIBLE uses the phrase “young woman,” while many translations use the word “virgin.” The arguments center upon two main points: the actual meaning of the term as it is used in Hebrew, and the use of this verse in the New Testament. There is a great deal of debate about the actual meaning of the Hebrew word. However, in the New Testament when this verse is cited in Matthew 1:23 the Greek word παρθένος (parthenos) is used, and this word can mean nothing but “virgin.” Therefore, many people see Isaiah 7:14 as a prophecy about the virgin birth with Matthew 1:23 serving as a “divine commentary” on the Isaiah passage which establishes its meaning. The interplay of these issues makes a resolution quite complex. It is the opinion of the translators and editors that the Hebrew word used in Isaiah 7:14 means “young woman” and actually carries no connotations of sexual experience, so the grammatical context of the verse in the Old Testament is in our opinion fairly straightforward. Neither does the historical context of Isaiah 7:14 point to any connection with the birth of the Messiah: in its original historical context, this verse was pointing to a sign for King Ahaz that the alliance between Syria and Israel which was threatening the land of Judah would come to nothing. The theological context of Isaiah 7:14 is also limited: it is a presentation of God’s divine power to show himself strong on behalf of his people. The role or birth of the Messiah does not come into view here. So the historical and theological contexts of the verse support the grammatical: the word עַלְמָה (‘almah) means “young woman” and should be translated as such. Within the book of Isaiah itself, however, the author begins to develop the theological context of this verse, and this provides a connection to the use of the passage in Matthew. In Isaiah 8:9-10 the prophet delivers an announcement of future victory over Israel’s enemies; the special child Immanuel, alluded to in the last line of v. 10, is a guarantee that the covenant promises of God will result in future greatness. The child mentioned in Isaiah 7:14 is a pledge of God’s presence during the time of Ahaz, but he also is a promise of God’s presence in the future when he gives his people victory over all their enemies. This theological development progresses even further when another child is promised in Isaiah 9:6-7 who will be a perfect ruler over Israel, manifesting God’s presence perfectly and ultimately among his people. The New Testament author draws from this development and uses the original passage in Isaiah to make the connection between the child originally promised and the child who would be the ultimate fulfillment of that initial promise. The use of Isaiah 7:14 in Matthew 1:23 draws upon the theological development present in the book of Isaiah, but it does not change the meaning of Isaiah 7:14 in its original context.

Passages Involving πιίστις Χριστοῦ and Similar Expressions in Paul. The phrase πιίστις Χριστοῦ (pistis Cristou) is a difficult one to translate. The issue centers on the relationship of the genitive noun Χριστοῦ to the head noun πιίστις: is the genitive subjective or objective? That is, is the emphasis of this phrase on Christ as the one who exercises faith (subjective) or on Christ as the one in whom others have faith (objective)? Traditionally these phrases have been interpreted emphasizing Christ as the object of faith; “faith in Jesus Christ” is the traditional translation. However, in recent years an increasing number of New Testament scholars are arguing from both the grammatical and theological contexts that πιίστις Χριστοῦ and similar phrases in Paul (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20; 3:22; Eph 3:12; Phil 3:9) involve a subjective genitive and emphasize Christ as the one who exercises faith: “the faithfulness of Christ.” A wider glance at the use of the noun πιίστις in the rest of the New Testament shows that when it takes a personal genitive that genitive is almost never objective. Certainly faith in Christ is a Pauline concept, but Bible scholars have begun to see that in Paul’s theological thought there is also an emphasis on Christ as one who is faithful and therefore worthy of our faith. The grammatical and theological contexts are not decisive, and either translation is acceptable. The editors decided to follow the subjective genitive view because a decision had to be made—“faith of Christ,” a literal translation, communicates very little to the average reader in the context—and because scholarship in this area is now leaning toward this view. The question is certainly not closed, however, and if further research indicates that the grammatical or theological context proves decisive for the other view, the translation will be modified to reflect that.

In short, the translators and editors of the NET BIBLE are committed to following the text where it leads and translating it honestly. The translation philosophy leaves no other options: For the sake of Christ and the truth, the translators and editors are compelled to translate as they have done in the examples above and throughout the NET BIBLE. The 19^th century conservative Christian scholar Henry Alford stated it best: “a translator of Holy Scripture must be…ready to sacrifice the choicest text, and the plainest proof of doctrine, if the words are not those of what he is constrained in his conscience to receive as God’s testimony.”

For the specific guidelines employed by the translators and editors of the NET BIBLE, see “NET BIBLE Principles of Translation” included as the first item in the Appendices.

What is the Hebrew text behind the NET BIBLE Old Testament?

The starting point for the Hebrew text translated to produce the NET BIBLE Old Testament was the standard edition known as Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS), which represents the text of the Leningrad Codex B19^A (L), still the oldest dated manuscript of the complete Hebrew Bible. Thus the Hebrew text on which the present translation of the Old Testament is based does not represent a critical, or reconstructed, text in the same way the standard critical editions of the Greek New Testament do. It is generally recognized that the Hebrew text represented by the Leningrad Codex occasionally needs to be corrected based on other Hebrew manuscripts, early versions, and the biblical manuscripts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. In the case of the Old Testament such decisions were left up to the individual translators who prepared the initial drafts for consideration by the Old Testament Editorial Committee. The textual decisions made by the translators were then reviewed by the editors and a textual consultant, and in some cases were revised. Conjectural emendation was employed only where necessary to make sense of the Hebrew text in order to be able to translate it. Significant textual variants or emendations are noted in a text-critical note [tc]. These notes frequently include references to principal versional evidence where relevant. The text-critical notes on the Old Testament are not intended to be exhaustive, but to provide the reader with basic information about the major textual issues affecting the translation.

How are the verses in the Old Testament arranged?

Some of the divisions found in copies of the Hebrew Bible were already established by the end of the Masoretic era (ca. A.D. 900). While it is generally understood that the division of the Old Testament text into verses goes back to the early centuries of the Christian era, the standard verse division which has continued in use up to the present was fixed by the Ben Asher family around A.D. 900.

In the places where the Hebrew versification differs from that of the English Bible, the NET BIBLE follows standard English practice, but a study note [sn] gives the corresponding Hebrew versification. Unlike the Hebrew text, which treats the superscriptions to individual psalms as the first verse, the NET BIBLE follows most English Bibles in leaving the superscriptions unnumbered, and they are set in a slightly smaller font size to distinguish them from the text of the Psalm proper.

How is the Divine Name translated in the Old Testament?

The translation of the Divine Name represents special problems for all English Bibles. The most difficult issue is the handling of the so-called tetragrammaton, the four consonants which represent the name of God in the Old Testament. This was rendered traditionally as “Jehovah” in the King James Version, but it is generally recognized that this represents a combination of the consonants of the tetragrammaton, יהוה (YHWH), and the vowels from a completely different Hebrew word, אֲדֹנָי(’adonai, “master”), which were substituted by the Masoretes so that pronunciation of the Divine Name could be avoided: Whenever יהוה (YHWH), appeared in the text, the presence of the vowels from the word אֲדֹנָי (’adonai) signaled to the reader that the word אֲדֹנָי (’adonai) was to be pronounced instead.

Today most Old Testament scholars agree that the vocalization of the Divine Name would originally have been something like Yahweh, and this has become the generally accepted rendering. The Executive Steering Committee of the NET BIBLE spent considerable time discussing whether or not to employ Yahweh in the translation. Several Old Testament editors and translators favored its use, reasoning that because of its use in the lyrics of contemporary Christian songs and its appearance in Bible study materials, the name Yahweh had gained more general acceptance. In spite of this, however, the Committee eventually decided to follow the usage of most English translations and render the Divine Name as “LORD” in small caps. Thus the frequent combination אֶלֹהִים יְהוָה (Yahweh ’elohim) is rendered as LORD God.

Other combinations like יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת (Yahweh Tséva’ot), traditionally rendered “LORD of hosts,” has been translated either as “the LORD who rules over all” or “the LORD who commands armies” depending on the context. Such instances are typically indicated by a translators’ note [tn].

What is the Greek text behind the NET BIBLE New Testament?

As for the Greek text used in the NET BIBLE New Testament, an eclectic text was followed, differing in several hundred places from the standard critical text as represented by the Nestle-Aland 27th edition (each of these differences is indicated by a double dagger [‡] preceding the text-critical note). The translators who prepared the initial drafts of individual New Testament books made preliminary decisions regarding textual variants, and these were then checked and discussed by editors and a textual consultant. Where there are significant variant readings, these are normally indicated in a text-critical note [tc], along with a few of the principal witnesses (Greek manuscripts, ancient versions, and patristic writers) supporting the variants. While this listing of manuscript evidence is not intended to be exhaustive, readers familiar with the major witnesses will find this feature useful in making brief evaluations for themselves, sometimes with the aid of the textual apparatus in Nestle-Aland 27th edition of the Greek New Testament.

How is the New Testament text arranged?

Divisions in the New Testament text like chapters, paragraphs, and verses were added later in the process of handing the text down from one generation to the next. Verse divisions were added to the New Testament, for example, in 1551. They are not part of the original documents, and in many cases give the appearance of being rather arbitrary. However, they have become accepted over time, and are useful to students of the Bible as “aids to navigation” when reading through or referring to the text. The text of the NET BIBLE itself has been arranged in paragraphs determined by the translators and editors. In almost all cases the verse divisions follow standard English practice. In the few instances where there is a difference between the versification of the standard critical editions of the Greek New Testament and most English versions, this is indicated by a translators’ note [tn].

New Testament quotations from the Old Testament are indicated by a combination of boldface and italic type. Less direct allusions to Old Testament passages are indicated by italic type only. In both cases a study note [sn] gives the Old Testament reference.

What are the sectional headings in the Old and New Testaments?

As a further aid to readers and students of the Bible, descriptive sectional headings are given in italics. These were determined by the translators and editors in an attempt to be as helpful as possible, but should not be viewed as an integral part of the NET BIBLE text. They were not part of the original Hebrew and Greek texts that formed the basis for the translation.

How are quotation marks used?

Earlier printed editions of the Bible (the King James Version of 1611, for example) did not make use of quotation marks. Modern readers have come to expect them, however, so the NET BIBLE follows standard conventions of setting direct quotations with various combinations of single and double quotation marks. In cases where embedded quotations would require the use of more than three layers of quotation marks (instances are found in many of the Old Testament prophetic books which could run to five or more layers of embedded quotation), a more streamlined approach has been followed to eliminate excess layers of quotation marks by the use of colons and commas.

What types of notes are included in the NET BIBLE?

There are four basic kinds of notes employed in the NET BIBLE, “text-critical notes” [tc], “translators’ notes” [tn], “study notes” [sn], and “map notes” [map]. In the First Edition of the NET BIBLE the “translators’ notes” are generally more numerous and considerably more technical in nature than the “study notes” (although the latter will continue to be expanded and developed in future editions of the NET BIBLE).

The “text-critical notes” [tc] discuss alternate (variant) readings found in the various manuscripts and groups of manuscripts of the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament. These notes can indicate historically important readings, exegetically significant readings, or readings accepted by the translation that are different from standard critical editions. The basic Hebrew text followed by the translators of the NET BIBLE is that of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS). For the New Testament, in cases where the translation follows a different reading than that found in NA²⁷, a text-critical note [tc] preceded by a double dagger (‡) explains the major options and defends the reading followed in the translation.

The “translators’ notes” [tn] are the most numerous. They explain the rationale for the translation and give alternative translations, interpretive options, and other technical information. “Translators’ notes” generally fall into the following categories:

Notes introduced by “Or” need no further explanation. They introduce alternative translations that (unless accompanied by additional discussion in the note) are regarded by the translators and editors as more or less equally viable alternatives to the translation used in the text, with the choice between them made for reasons of style, euphony, other characteristics of contemporary English usage, or slight exegetical preference.
Notes introduced by “Heb,” “Aram,” or “Grk” give a gloss that approximates formal equivalence to the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek text. This gloss was not employed in the translation, however, because it was inconsistent with English style or could possibly be misunderstood by the modern reader. Such glossses do not represent the “core” meaning of the word(s).
Translators’ notes are also used to indicate major lexical, syntactical, and exegetical options for a given passage. In such cases the form of the note may vary, but in general the major options will be listed and in most cases a brief evaluation is included in the note. Standard reference materials and, on occasion, relevant periodical literature are frequently mentioned in the notes. Abbreviations for these materials, as well as abbreviations for both biblical books and nonbiblical literature, generally follow the standard abbreviations established by Patrick H. Alexander et al., eds., The SBL Handbook of Style: For Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Early Christian Studies (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999). Full bibliographic citations are given for periodical literature. Standard reference works and special studies, such as commentaries and monographs, are referenced by abbreviations or shortened citations; full bibliographic citations are given in the List of Cited Works.
In some cases where a rather lengthy note occurs on multiple occasions within the same book, the note will be given in full only on its first occurrence in the book, while succeeding repetitions of the note will refer back to the first occurrence by phrase and verse. This is intended to conserve space by avoiding excessive repetition of identical notes within the same book.

The “study notes” [sn] are explanatory notes intended for the nonspecialist engaged in the reading or study of the Bible. This category includes comments about historical or cultural background, explanation of obscure phrases or brief discussions of context, discussions of the theological point made by the biblical author, cross-references and references to Old Testament quotations or allusions in the New Testament, or other miscellaneous information helpful to the modern reader.

The “map notes” [map] indicate for the reader where the particular location can be found in the map sections included in the NET BIBLE. Preceding the maps is an index which contains every site on the maps, although the maps do not include every biblical site. The map coordinates in the notes and index first indicate the larger map and then the individual grid location; if a site is shown on more than one map, multiple sets of coordinates will be listed. For example, one of the coordinates for the city of Jerusalem is Map5-B1; this should be read as “The Holy Land from the Heavens”—map 5—grid B1. Another coordinate for Jerusalem is JP1-F4; this should be read as “The Journeys of Paul”—map 1—grid F4.

What is the NET BIBLE team’s request?

No matter how bad or good a translation may be, it will do you no good at all unless you read and study it! The words of the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach) are appropriate here: “You are therefore urged to read with good will and attention, and to be indulgent in cases where, in spite of our diligent labor in translating, we may appear to have rendered some phrases imperfectly.” As the NET BIBLE team it is our desire and earnest prayer that the Lord add his blessing to our endeavor at the translation of his word.

The NET BIBLE Project Director

for the Translators, Editors, and Sponsor of the NET BIBLE

The NET Bible^® Team
First Edition Translators, Editors, and Consultants

Old Testament Translators and Editors

Pentateuch:

Richard E. Averbeck, Ph.D.
(Dropsie College)

Robert B. Chisholm, Th.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Dorian Coover-Cox, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Eugene H. Merrill, Ph.D.
(Columbia University)

Allen P. Ross, Ph.D.
(Cambridge University)

Historical Books:

Robert B. Chisholm, Th.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Dorian Coover-Cox, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Gordon H. Johnston, Th.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Richard A. Taylor, Ph.D.
(Catholic University of America)

Wisdom Books:

Robert B. Chisholm, Th.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Gordon H. Johnston, Th.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Allen P. Ross, Ph.D.
(Cambridge University)

Steven H. Sanchez, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Major and Minor Prophets:

William D. Barrick, Th.D.
(Grace Theological Seminary)

M. Daniel Carroll R., Ph.D.
(University of Sheffield)

Robert B. Chisholm, Th.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Dorian Coover-Cox, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Donald R. Glenn, M.A.
(Brandeis University)

Michael A. Grisanti, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

W. Hall Harris III, Ph.D.
(University of Sheffield)

Eugene H. Merrill, Ph.D.
(Columbia University)

Steven H. Sanchez, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Brian L. Webster, Ph.D.
(Hebrew Union College—Jewish Institute of Religion)

New Testament Translators and Editors

Gospels and Acts:

Darrell L. Bock, Ph.D.
(University of Aberdeen)

Michael H. Burer, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

W. Hall Harris III, Ph.D.
(University of Sheffield)

Gregory J. Herrick, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

David K. Lowery, Ph.D.
(University of Aberdeen)

Pauline Letters:

John D. Grassmick, Ph.D.
(University of Glasgow)

W. Hall Harris III, Ph.D.
(University of Sheffield)

Gregory J. Herrick, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Harold W. Hoehner, Ph.D.
(Cambridge University)

David K. Lowery, Ph.D.
(University of Aberdeen)

Jay E. Smith, Ph.D.
(Trinity Evangelical Divinity School)

General Letters and Revelation:

Buist M. Fanning III, D.Phil.
(Oxford University)

W. Hall Harris III, Ph.D.
(University of Sheffield)

Gregory J. Herrick, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

David K. Lowery, Ph.D.
(University of Aberdeen)

Daniel B. Wallace, Ph.D.
(Dallas Theological Seminary)

Translation Consultants

Wayne Leman, M.A.
(University of Kansas)

James Routt, Ph.D.
(Cambridge University)

English Style Consultant

W. Hall Harris III, Ph.D.
(University of Sheffield)

NET Bible Executive Steering Committee

W. Hall Harris III, Ph.D.,
Project Director and Managing Editor

Michael H. Burer, Ph.D.,
Editor and Assistant Project Director

Robert B. Chisholm, Th.D., Senior OT Editor

Daniel B. Wallace, Ph.D., Senior NT Editor

Buist M. Fanning, Ph.D., NT Editor

Donald R. Glenn, M.A., OT Editor

Gordon H. Johnston, Th.D., OT Editor

Steven H. Sanchez, Ph.D., OT Editor

Richard A. Taylor, Ph.D., OT Editor

Project Management and Production

W. Hall Harris III, Ph.D.,
Project Director and Managing Editor

Michael H. Burer, Ph.D.,
Editor and Assistant Project Director

J. Hampton Keathley IV, Th.M.,
Technical Director

Todd Lingren, M.A.,
Director of Publication

The NET Bible^® Team
Second Edition Translators, Editors, and Consultants

James Davis, Ph.D.,

Managing Editor

Brian Webster, Ph.D.,

Old Testament Editor

Harold Holmyard, Ph.D.,

Old Testament Consultant

Technical Staff

Brian Seagraves

Frank Walton

Hampton Keathley IV

Due to the rapidly expanding list of endorsements of the NET BIBLE, a current list may be seen at netbible.com/endorse. The current list of editors and contributors may be seen at netbible.com/editors.

NET BIBLE Principles of Translation

1. Text

Old Testament: For the OT the translators started with the MT (Masoretic Text) found in the current edition of BHS (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia). In particularly difficult passages the translator may have followed a variant reading found in the versions, alternative Hebrew tradition (e.g., DSS), or in some cases, conjectural emendation. Such variations from the MT were noted by the individual translator and reviewed by the OT textual consultant.

New Testament: For the NT the Greek text to be used by individual translators was decided by the textual consultant. The full Greek text will be published at a later date.

Traditional passages: For passages which lack adequate textual authority (i.e., are almost certainly not part of the autographs) the words were included in the translation in double square brackets with a note giving a brief discussion of the problem.

2. Interpretive Decisions and Tools

Interpretive decisions, where necessary to translate a passage, were made by the translators and editors. The alternative renderings, where exegetically significant, have been indicated in the notes.

Standard technical (critical) commentaries and relevant periodical articles were consulted in the translation process. These are often cited in the notes.

Current standard lexical tools were consulted as needed. For the OT, these included such works as BDB, KB3, and TDOT; for the NT, BDAG, Louw-Nida, and TDNT.

Computerized concordance programs and electronic search engines were used extensively in the production of this translation.

3. Form of Translation

No translation can ever achieve complete formal equivalence. Even a translation which sometimes reflects Hebrew and Greek word order at the expense of English style has to resort to paraphrase in some places. On the other hand, no translation achieves complete dynamic equivalence either. Thus this translation, like every other, ends up somewhere between the two extremes. These considerations are reflected by the following specific qualifications:

In vocabulary and grammatical forms every attempt has been made to reflect the different styles of the different authors of the Bible. Paul’s letters should not sound like John’s or Peter’s or that of Hebrews in the English translation where possible.

The level of English style is formal (not, however, technical) except in passages where somewhat more informal style would be more in keeping with the content. In general the use of contractions (“don’t,” “isn’t”) has been avoided, except in quoted speech.

The language of average adults had priority. The translation attempts to use good literary style but is not overly formal or embellished.

The translation is intended to be understandable to non-Christians as well as Christians, so liturgical language or Christian “jargon” has been avoided.

Archaisms have also been avoided (e.g., “letter” was used instead of “epistle” in the NT). This includes the absolute avoidance of “thou” and “thee,” since there were no distinctions in the original Hebrew or Greek between pronouns used to address people and those used to address Deity. On a related note, pronouns which refer to Deity are not capitalized for this same reason.

Long, complicated sentences in the original languages have been broken up into shorter sentences more acceptable in contemporary English. However, an attempt has been made to maintain the connections present in the original languages wherever possible.

Idiomatic expressions and figurative language in the original languages have been changed when they make no sense to a typical modern English reader or are likely to lead to misunderstanding by a typical modern English reader. The literal reading has been placed in a note giving a brief explanation (a translator’s note).

Nouns have been used for pronouns where the English pronoun would be obscure or ambiguous to a modern reader. This has been indicated in a note.

Questions expecting a negative answer have been phrased to indicate this to the English reader.

Clearly redundant expressions such as “answered and said” have been avoided unless they have special rhetorical force in context. The literal reading is frequently indicated in a note.

Introductory expressions like “verily, verily” have been translated idiomatically, the single ἀμήν as “I tell you the truth” and the double ἀμήν (peculiar to John’s Gospel) as “I tell you the solemn truth.”

Introductory particles like ἰδού (“behold”) have been translated to fit the context (sometimes “listen,” “pay attention,” “look,” or occasionally left untranslated).

Use of quotation marks (which did not exist in the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts) conforms to contemporary American English usage.

The basic unit of translation is the paragraph. Verse numbers are included in boldface type. Poetry is set out as poetry.

Greek historical presents have been translated by English simple past tenses since English has no corresponding use of the present tense.

In places where passive constructions create ambiguity, obscurity, or awkwardness in contemporary English, either the agent has been specified from context or the construction has been changed to active voice in the English translation, with an explanatory note.

Ellipses have been filled out according to current English requirements (e.g., 1 John 2:19). This is normally explained in a note.

Proper names have been standardized in accordance with accepted English usage.

4. Additional Features of the Translation and Notes

Any place supplementary information is required (e.g., word-plays, historical details, cultural differences, etc.) this is provided in a brief study note.

Any technical terms (corban, Mark 7:11) used in the translation are explained in a study note.

Any unfamiliar terms for weights, measures, and coins have been explained in a study note, although in general these have been expressed in contemporary American units, with metric units given parenthetically in the notes.

A limited system of cross-referencing to principal parallel texts, cross-references, or significant allusions is found in the notes.

Descriptive section headings have been provided by the translators and editors as an aid to the reader.

Greek and Hebrew in the translator’s notes use Greek and Hebrew fonts, often followed by transliteration. The occasional reference to a Greek or Hebrew word in a study note is transliterated.

Abbreviations of biblical books and reference material follow Patrick H. Alexander et al., eds., The SBL Handbook of Style: For Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Early Christian Studies (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999) with only a few exceptions.

Abbreviations for Biblical Books
and Nonbiblical Literature

Old Testament

Gen	Genesis
Exod	Exodus
Lev	Leviticus
Num	Numbers
Deut	Deuteronomy
Josh	Joshua
Judg	Judges
Ruth	Ruth
1 Sam	1 Samuel
2 Sam	2 Samuel
1 Kgs	1 Kings
2 Kgs	2 Kings
1 Chr	1 Chronicles
2 Chr	2 Chronicles
Ezra	Ezra
Neh	Nehemiah
Esth	Esther
Job	Job
Ps(s)	Psalms
Prov	Proverbs
Eccl	Ecclesiastes
Song	Song of Songs
Isa	Isaiah
Jer	Jeremiah
Lam	Lamentations
Ezek	Ezekiel
Dan	Daniel
Hos	Hosea
Joel	Joel
Amos	Amos
Obad	Obadiah
Jonah	Jonah
Mic	Micah
Nah	Nahum
Hab	Habakkuk
Zeph	Zephaniah
Hag	Haggai
Zech	Zechariah
Mal	Malachi

Books of the Old Testament Apocrypha

Bar	Baruch
Add Dan	Additions to Daniel
Pr Azar	Prayer of Azariah
Bel	Bel and the Dragon
Sg Three	Song of the Three Young Men
Sus	Susanna
1-2 Esd	1-2 Esdras
Add Esth	Additions to Esther
Ep Jer	Epistle of Jeremiah
Jdt	Judith
1-4 Macc	1-4 Maccabees
Pr Man	Prayer of Manasseh
Ps 151	Psalm 151
Sir	Sirach/ Ecclesiasticus
Tob	Tobit
Wis	Wisdom of Solomon

New Testament

Matt	Matthew
Mark	Mark
Luke	Luke
John	John
Acts	Acts
Rom	Romans
1 Cor	1 Corinthians
2 Cor	2 Corinthians
Gal	Galatians
Eph	Ephesians
Phil	Philippians
Col	Colossians
1 Thess	1 Thessalonians
2 Thess	2 Thessalonians
1 Tim	1 Timothy
2 Tim	2 Timothy
Titus	Titus
Phlm	Philemon
Heb	Hebrews
Jas	James
1 Pet	1 Peter
2 Pet	2 Peter
1 John	1 John
2 John	2 John
3 John	3 John
Jude	Jude
Rev	Revelation

Other Ancient Documents

Two citation systems for Philo and Josephus are used in the notes. The older (classical) system is listed first, and the Loeb citation system then follows in parentheses.

1 En.	1 Enoch, a Jewish pseudepigraphic work that includes what are thought to be Christian interpolations in chaps. 37-71 (also called Ethiopic Enoch)
1 Kgdms	1 Kingdoms, the book of the LXX which corresponds to 1 Samuel
1QH	Thanksgiving Hymns, hymns composed for worship within the Qumran community
1QS	Rule of the Community, one of the first Dead Sea Scrolls recovered. This scroll details rules for admission into the Qumran community.
2 Bar.	2 Baruch, a Jewish apocalyptic work written early in the second century
2 En.	2 Enoch, an Jewish pseudepigraphic work that expands upon Gen 5:21-32
4QMMT	Miqsat Maʿaseh Torah from Qumran Cave 4, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Ag. Ap.	Against Apion, a defense of the Jewish people written by Josephus, a Jewish historian who lived from a.d. 37/38 until the early years of the second century.
Ant.	Jewish Antiquities, a history of the Jewish people written by Josephus (see Ag. Ap. above)
b.	Indicates a tractate from the Babylonian Talmud, which contains the Mishnah and rabbinic interpretive expansions. Collected ca. a.d. 500-550.
CD	A copy of the Damascus Document, which is one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, found in the Cairo genizah
Embassy	On the Embassy to Gaius, a philosophical work by Philo, a Jewish philosopher who lived from 20 b.c. to a.d. 50
Praep. Ev.	Praeparatio evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel), a work by Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, who lived ca. a.d. 260-341
Flaccus	Against Flaccus, a philosophical work by Philo (see Embassy above)
Heir	Who is the Heir?, a philosophical work by Philo (see Embassy above)
Herm.	Shepherd of Hermas, a Christian work written in Rome sometime during the 1st and 2nd centuries a.d.
Ibn Ezra	Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, a medieval Jewish scholar who wrote many works, including a commentary on the Hebrew Bible. Lived a.d. 1092/1093 to a.d.1167.
Ign.	Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, who died as a martyr in Rome early in the second century. Following will be the abbreviation for one of his seven letters.
J. W.	Jewish War, a history of the events surrounding the war between Rome and the Jews ca. a.d. 70 written by Josephus (see Ag. Ap. above)
Jub.	Jubilees, a Jewish pseudepigraphic work that expands upon the narratives in Genesis and Exodus
Letter of Aristeas	An ancient letter which purports to explain the origins of the LXX. Posited by most scholars to have been written ca. 170 b.c.
Life	The Life, an autobiography of Josephus (see Ag. Ap. above)
m.	Indicates a tractate from the Mishnah, a codification of Jewish rabbinic oral tradition collected ca. a.d. 200-220
Pirqe Avot	A collection of the sayings from Jewish sages and rabbis
Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer	A collection of Jewish rabbinic tradition compiled ca. a.d. 750-850
Posterity	On the Posterity of Cain, a philosophical work by Philo (see Embassy above)
Rabbah	Jewish rabbinic commentary on books of the Bible, e.g., Genesis Rabbah
Sib. Or.	Sibylline Oracles, a collection of poetic prophecies contained within the Jewish pseudepigrapha
Sifre Deut	Sifre on Deuteronomy, a collection of rabbinic interpretations on the book of Deuteronomy compiled ca. a.d. 350-400
Smr	Samaritan Pentateuch, the version of the first five books of the Old Testament accepted as canonical by the Samaritans
t.	Indicates a tractate from the Tosefta, a codification of Jewish rabbinic oral tradition collected ca. a.d. 220-230
T. Gad	Testament of Gad, one of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, a group of works written between 109 and 106 b.c. and inspired by Jacob’s testament in Gen 49
T. Reu.	Testament of Reuben, one of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (see T. Gad above)
T. Sol.	Testament of Solomon, a story about Solomon building the Temple, written sometime during the 1st to 3rd centuries a.d.
Tg.	Indicates a Targum, an Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible which often included interpretive comments
Tg. Onq.	Targum Onqelos, an Aramaic translation of the Pentateuch, regarded as the official targum of these books
Tg. Ps.-J.	Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, an Aramaic translation of the Pentateuch
y.	Indicates a tractate from the Jerusalem Talmud (which actually took shape in Galilee ca. a.d. 400-425), a work which contains the Mishnah and rabbinic interpretive expansions

Abbreviations for Bible Versions

English Versions

NET	The NET BIBLE / New English Translation (NT, 1998; First Beta Edition, 2001; Second Beta Edition, 2003; First Edition, 2005)
TNIV	Today’s New International Version (NT, 2001)
NLT	New Living Translation (1996)
CEV	The Contemporary English Version (1995)
NIrV	New International Reader’s Version (1995)
*Message*	E. H. Peterson, The Message: The New Testament in Contemporary Language (1993)
NCV	New Century Version (1991)
REB	Revised English Bible (1989)
NRSV	New Revised Standard Version (1989)
NJB	New Jerusalem Bible (1985)
NJPS	Tanakh (1985), produced by the Jewish Publication Society
NKJV	New King James Version (1979)
TEV	Today’s English Version, also known as Good News for Modern Man (1976)
NIV	The New International Version (NT, 1973; OT, 1978)
LB	The Living Bible (1971)
NASB	New American Standard Bible (1971; update 1995)
NAB	The New American Bible (1970)
NEB	The New English Bible (1970)
JB	Jerusalem Bible (1966)
Amplified	The Amplified Bible (1965)
BBE	C. K. Ogden, The Bible in Basic English (1965)
JPS	The Torah (1962), The Prophets (Nevi’im) (1978), The Writings (Kethuvim) (1982), produced by the Jewish Publication Society
MLB	Modern Language Bible: New Berkeley Version (1959; rev. 1969)
Phillips	J. B. Phillips, The New Testament in Modern English (1958)
RSV	Revised Standard Version (NT, 1946; OT, 1952)
Knox	R. A. Knox, The New Testament in English (1945)
AT	The Bible—An American Translation (1927)
Moffatt	James Moffatt, A New Translation of the Bible (1926)
TCNT	The Twentieth Century New Testament (1898-1901; rev. 1904)
ASV	American Standard Version (1901)
RV	Revised Version (NT 1881; OT 1885)
YLT	Young's Literal Translation (1862; rev. 1898)
KJV (=AV)	The King James Version, known in Britain as the Authorized Version (1611)
AV (=KJV)	The Authorized Version, known in America as the King James Version (1611)
Douay	Douay-Rheims Version, a translation for the Roman Catholic Church (NT 1582; OT 1609-1610)

Ancient Versions

MT	Masoretic Text (the traditional rabbinical text of the Hebrew Bible, dating from the medieval period)
LXX	Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament, translated between 250-100 b.c.)

General Abbreviations

NET BIBLE Footnote Types

tn	Translator’s Note—explains the rationale for the translation and gives alternative translations, interpretive options, and other technical information.
sn	Study Note—includes comments about historical or cultural background, explanation of obscure phrases or brief discussions of context, discussions of the theological point made by the biblical author, cross references and references to Old Testament quotations or allusions in the New Testament, or other miscellaneous information helpful to the modern reader.
tc	Text-critical Note—discusses alternate (variant) readings found in the various manuscripts and groups of manuscripts of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament.
map	Map Note—gives map coordinates for site within the two map sections, “The Journeys of Paul” and “The Holy Land from the Heavens.”

Journals

ABR	Australian Biblical Review
ADAJ	Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan
AION	Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli
AJBA	Australian Journal of Biblical Archaeology
AJSL	American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature
ArOr	Archiv Orientální
ASTI	Annual of the Swedish Thelogical Institute
AUSS	Andrews University Seminary Studies
BA	Biblical Archaeologist
BAR	Biblical Archaeology Review
BASOR	Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BBR	Bulletin for Biblical Research
BETS	Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society
Bib	Biblica
BiBh	Bible Bhashyam
Bijdr	Bijdragen: Tijdschrift voor filosofie en theologie
BJRL	Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester
BN	Biblische Notizen
BRev	Bible Review
BSac	Bibliotheca Sacra
BT	The Bible Translator
BTB	Biblical Theology Bulletin
BV	Biblical Viewpoint
BZ	Biblische Zeitschrift
CBQ	Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CentBib	Central Bible Quarterly
CTJ	Calvin Theological Journal
CTM	Concordia Theological Monthly
CTR	Criswell Theological Review
ErIsr	Eretz-Israel
EvQ	Evangelical Quarterly
ExpTim	Expository Times
FO	Folia orientalia
GOT	Glasgow Oriental Transactions
GTJ	Grace Theological Journal
HAR	Hebrew Annual Review
HBT	Horizons in Biblical Theology
HS	Hebrew Studies
HTR	Harvard Theological Review
HUCA	Hebrew Union College Annual
IEJ	Israel Exploration Journal
Int	Interpretation

JANESCU	Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University
JAOS	Journal of the American Oriental Society
JBL	Journal of Biblical Literature
JCS	Journal of Cuneiform Studies
JETS	Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
JJP	Journal of Juristic Papyrology
JJS	Journal of Jewish Studies
JNES	Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JNSL	Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages
JPOS	Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
JQR	Jewish Quarterly Review
JRAS	Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
JSNT	Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSOT	Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSS	Journal of Semitic Studies
JTS	Journal of Theological Studies
JTVI	Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute
Jud	Judaica
Leš	Lešonénu
LTQ	Lexington Theological Quarterly
MAOG	Mitteilungen der Altorientalischen Gesellschaft
Mus	Muséon: Revue d’études orientales
NovT	Novum Testamentum
NTS	New Testament Studies
Or	Orientalia
OTS	Old Testament Studies
PEQ	Palestinian Exploration Quarterly
RA	Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale
RB	Revue biblique
RevExp	Review and Expositor
RHPR	Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses
RHR	Revue de l’histoire des religions
RQ	Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte
RSR	Recherches de science religieuse
Sem	Semitica
SJT	Scottish Journal of Theology
ST	Studia theologica
SwJT	Southwestern Journal of Theology
TA	Tel Aviv
TB	Theologische Bücherei: Neudrucke und Berichte aus dem 20. Jahrhundert
TGUOS	Transactions of the Glasgow University Oriental Society
TJ	Trinity Journal
TLZ	Theologische Literaturzeitung
TRu	Theologische Rundschau
TynBul	Tyndale Bulletin
TZ	Theologische Zeitschrift
UF	Ugarit-Forschungen
VT	Vetus Testamentum
WTJ	Westminster Theological Journal
WW	Word and World
ZÄS	Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde
ZAW	Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
ZDMG	Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft
ZNW	Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

Commentary and Monograph Series

AB	Anchor Bible
AfO	Archiv für Orientforschung
AGJU	Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums
AnBib	Analecta biblica
AnOr	Analecta orientalia
AOAT	Alter Orient und Altes Testament
ArBib	The Aramaic Bible
ATD	Das Alte Testament Deutsch
BASORSup	Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research: Supplement Series
BECNT	Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
BibOr	Biblica et orientalia
BKAT	Biblischer Kommentar, Altes Testament
BSC	Bible Student’s Commentary
CBC	Cambridge Bible Commentary
CBQMS	Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series
CC	Continental Commentaries
CNT	Commentaire du Nouveau Testament
ConBOT	Coniectanea biblica: Old Testament Series
DissAb	Dissertation Abstracts
DJD	Discoveries in the Judaean Desert
DJDJ	Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan
DSBS	Daily Study Bible Series
EGGNT	Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament
FCI	Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation
FOTL	Forms of the Old Testament Literature
FRLANT	Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments
GBS	Guides to Biblical Scholarship
HNTC	Harper’s New Testament Commentaries
HSM	Harvard Semitic Monographs
IBC	Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching
ICC	International Critical Commentary
JAARSup	Journal of the American Academy of Religion: Supplement Series
JBLMS	Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series
JPSTC	Jerusalem Publication Society Torah Commentary
JSNTSup	Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series
JSOTSup	Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series
KAT	Kommentar zum Alten Testament
LHD	The Library of History and Doctrine
MNTC	Moffatt New Testament Commentary
NAC	New American Commentary
NCBC	New Century Bible Commentary
NICNT	New International Commentary on the New Testament
NICOT	New International Commentary on the Old Testament
NIGTC	New International Greek Testament Commentary
NovTSup	Supplements to Novum Testamentum
NTL	New Testament Library
OBO	Orbis biblicus et orientalis
OBT	Overtures to Biblical Theology
OTL	Old Testament Library
OTM	Oxford Theological Monographs
PTMS	Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series
SB	Sources bibliques
SBA	Studies in Biblical Archaeology
SBG	Studies in Biblical Greek
SBLDS	Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series
SBT	Studies in Biblical Theology
ScrHier	Scripta hierosolymitana
SD	Studies and Documents
SHR	Studies in the History of Religions
SJLA	Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity
SNTSMS	Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series
SoBB	Soncino Books of the Bible
SOTBT	Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology
SOTSMS	Society for Old Testament Studies Monograph Series
SPCKTC	Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge Theological Collections
SSN	Studia semitica neerlandica
StPB	Studia post-biblica
SUNT	Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments
TBC	Torch Bible Commentaries
TCS	Texts from Cuneiform Sources
TOTC	Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries
TU	Texte und Untersuchungen
VAB	Vorderasiatische Bibliothek
VTSup	Supplements to Vetus Testamentum
WBC	Word Biblical Commentary
WEC	Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary
WUNT	Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament

Text-critical Terms

al	Abbreviation for alii, a Latin phrase meaning “others,” referring to manuscripts
ms (mss)	manuscript (manuscripts)
pc	Abbreviation for pauci, “a few (others),” referring to manuscripts
pm	Abbreviation for permulti, “a great many (others),” referring to manuscripts
vid	Abbreviation for videtur, a Latin word meaning “apparently” or “so it appears,” referring to an uncertain reading in a manuscript

Miscellaneous Abbreviations

abs.	absolute
acc.	accusative
ANE	Ancient Near East (noun), Ancient Near Eastern (adjective)
ca.	approximately (from Latin circa)
cf.	compare (from Latin confer)
chap.	chapter
dat.	dative
ed.	editor; edited by; edition
e.g.	for example (from Latin exempli gratia)
ET	English text (when versification in the English Bible differs from the Greek or Hebrew text)
expr.	expression
ff.	following
fig.	figurative; figuratively
gen.	genitive
GT	Greek text (when versification differs from the English Bible)
HT	Hebrew text (when versification differs from the English Bible)
i.e.	that is (from Latin id est)
loc. cit.	in the place cited (from Latin loco citato), usually referring to a Bible verse or passage cited in a commentary or other work
ms (mss)	manuscript (manuscripts)
nom.	nominative
NT	New Testament
pl.	plural
q.v.	which see (from Latin quod vide)
sc.	supply (from Latin scilicet)
sing.	singular
suppl.	supplement
s.v.	under the word (from Latin sub verbo or sub voce)
trans.	translated; translator
v.	verse
viz.	namely (from Latin videlicet)
w.	with

List of Cited Works

Works Cited by Abbreviation

AHw	Soden, Wolfram von. Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. 3 vols. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1965-1981.
ANEP	Pritchard, James B., ed. The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1954.
ANET	Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3d ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.
BDAG	Bauer, W. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3d ed. Revised and edited by F. W. Danker. Translated by W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
BDB	Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1979.
BDF	Blass, F. and A. Debrunner. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Translated and edited by Robert W. Funk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.
BHK	Kittel, R., ed. Biblia Hebraica. Stuttgart: Würtemburgische Bibelanstalt, 1905-1906, 1925, 1937, 1951, 1973.
BHS	Elliger, K. and W. Rudolph, eds. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983.
BKCNT	Walvoord, John F., and Roy B. Zuck, eds. The Bible Knowledge Commentary. New Testament Edition. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1983.
BKCOT	Walvoord, John F., and Roy B. Zuck, eds. The Bible Knowledge Commentary. Old Testament Edition. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1985.
BRL2	Galling, Kurt, ed. Biblisches Reallexikon. 2d ed. Handbuch Zum Alten Testament 1/1. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1977.
CAD	Gelb, Ignace J., ed. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1956-.
CTA	Herdner, A., ed. Corpus des tablettes en cunéiformes alphabétiques découvertes à Ras Shamra-Ugarit de 1929 à 1939. Mission de Ras Shamra 10. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1963.
DCH	Clines, D. J. A., ed. Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993-.
DISO	Jean, Charles-François, and Jacob Hoftijzer, eds. Dictionnaire des inscriptions sémitiques de l’ouest. Leiden: Brill, 1965.
DJG	Green, J. B., and S. McKnight, eds. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1992.
DNWSI	Hoftijzer, J., and K. Jongeling, eds. Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1995.
DPL	Hawthorne, Gerald F., and Ralph P. Martin, eds. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1993.
EA	Knudtzon, J. A. Die el-Amarna-Tafeln. Vorderasiatische Bibliothek. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1915. Reprint, Aalen: Otto Zeller, 1964. Continued in Rainey, A. F. El-Amarna Tablets, 359-379. 2d rev. ed. Alter Orient Und Altes Testament 8. Kevelaer: Butzon und Bercker, 1978.
EAEHL	M. Avi-Yonah, ed. Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. 4 vols. Jerusalem: Massada 1975.
EBC	Gaebelein, Frank E., ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976-1992.
ExSyn	Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
GKC	Kautzsch, E., ed. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Translated by A. E. Cowley. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1910.
HALOT	Koehler, L., W. Baumgartner, and J. J. Stamm. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated and edited under the supervision of M. E. J. Richardson. 5 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1994-2000.
IBHS	Waltke, B. K., and M. O’Connor. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990.
IDB	Buttrick, George A., ed. The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. 4 vols. New York: Abingdon, 1962.
IDBSup	Crim, Keith R, ed. The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible: Supplementary Volume. Nashville: Abingdon, 1976
ISBE	Bromiley, G. W., ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979-1988.
Jastrow	Jastrow, Marcus. A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. 2d ed. New York: G. P. Putnam, 1903.
Joüon	Joüon, Paul. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Translated and revised by T. Muraoka. 1st edition with corrections. 2 vols. Subsidia biblica 14/1-2. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1993.
K&D	Keil, C. F., and F. Delitzsch. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. Translated by J. Martin et al. 27 vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1857-1878.
KBL	Koehler, L., and W. Baumgartner. Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros. 2d ed. Leiden: Brill, 1958.
L&N	Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Nida, eds. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains. New York, NY: United Bible Societies, 1988.
LSJ	Liddell, H. G., and R. Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. 9^th ed. Revised and augmented by H. S. Jones, with the assistance of R. McKenzie. With a revised Supplement. Oxford: Clarendon, 1996.
MHT	Moulton, J. H. A Grammar of New Testament Greek. 4 vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1908-1976: Vol. 1 (1908) Prolegomena, by J. H. Moulton. 1^st ed. (1906); 3d ed. (1908); Vol. 2 (1929): Accidence and Word Formation, by W. F. Howard; Vol. 3 (1963): Syntax, by N. Turner; Vol. 4 (1976): Style, by N. Turner.
MM	Moulton, J. H., and G. Milligan. Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1930. Repr., Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1997.
NA²⁵	Nestle, E., and K. Aland, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 25^th ed. Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt, 1963.
NA²⁶	Aland, K., M. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 26^th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979.
NA²⁷	Aland, B., K. Aland, J. Karavidopoulos, C. M. Martini, and B. M. Metzger, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27^th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993.
NBD³	Wood, D. R. W., ed. New Bible Dictionary. 3d ed. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1996.
NIDOTTE	VanGemeren, W. A., ed. New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
PGL	Lampe, G. W. H., ed. Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford; New York: Clarendon, 1968.
TCGNT	Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2d ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: 1994.
TDNT	Kittel, G. and G. Friedrich. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-1976.
TDOT	Botterweck, G. Johannes and Helmer Ringgren, eds. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Translated by J. T. Willis, G. W. Bromiley, and D. E. Green. 8 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-.
THAT	Jenni, Ernst, ed., with assistance from Claus Westermann. Theologisches Handwörterbuch zum Alten Testament. 2 vols. Stuttgart: C. Kaiser, 1971-1976.
ThWAT	Botterweck, G. Johannes, and Helmer Ringgren, eds. Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1970.
TLG	Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, a computerized database of all ancient Greek literature from Homer (8^th century b.c.) to the 6^th century AD.
TWOT	Harris, R. Laird, Gleason L. Archer, and Bruce K. Waltke, eds. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. 2 vols. Chicago: Moody, 1980.
UBS³	Aland, K., M. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, eds. The Greek New Testament. 3d ed., corrected. Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1983.
UBS⁴	Aland, B., K. Aland, J. Karavidopoulos, C. M. Martini, and B. M. Metzger, eds. The Greek New Testament. 4^th ed., corrected. Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1994.
UT	Gordon, Cyrus H. Ugaritic Textbook. Revised reprint. Analecta orientalia 38. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1998.
WUS	Aistleitner, Joseph. Das Wörterbuch der ugaritischen Sprache. Edited by Otto Eissfeldt. 3d ed. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1967.
ZPEB	Tenney, Merrill C., ed. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.

Works Cited by Name and Short Title

Fauna and Flora of the Bible. 2d ed. Helps for Translators. New York: United Bible Societies, 1980.

The Illustrated Family Encyclopedia of the Living Bible. Chicago: San Francisco Productions, 1967.

Aharoni, Yohanan. The Land of the Bible: A Historical Geography. Translated and edited by A. F. Rainey. 2d ed. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979.

Aharoni, Yohanan and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Edited by Anson F. Rainey and Ze’ev Safrai. 3d ed. New York: Macmillan, 1976.

Albright, W. F. Archaeology and the Religion of Israel. 3d ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1953.

________. From the Stone Age to Christianity: Monotheism and the Historical Process. 2d ed. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1957.

________. “Archaic Survivals in the Text of Canticles.” Pages 1-7 in Hebrew and Semitic Studies. Edited by D. Winton Thomas and W. D. McHardy. Oxford: Claredon, 1963.

________. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan: A Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1968.

Aldred, Cyril. The Egyptians. Ancient Peoples and Places 18. New York: Praeger, 1961.

Allen, Leslie C. The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976.

________. Psalms 101-150. Word Biblical Commentary 21. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983.

________. Ezekiel. 2 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 28-29. Dallas: Word, 1990-1994.

Alter, R. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 1981.

Andersen, Francis I. Job. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1976.

Andersen, Francis I., and David Noel Freedman. Hosea. Anchor Bible 24. New York: Doubleday, 1980.

________. Amos. Anchor Bible 24A. New York: Doubleday, 1989.

André, Gunnel. Determining the Destiny: PQD in the Old Testament. Coniectanea biblica: Old Testament Series 16. Lund: Gleerup, 1980.

Archer, G. L. The Book of Job: God’s Answer to the Problem of Understanding Suffering. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982.

Arnold, Bill T., and John H. Choi. A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Aune, David E. Revelation. 3 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 52ABC. Dallas: Word, 1997-1998.

Baker, J. A. The Book of Job: Unity and Suffering. Sheffield: JSOT, 1978.

Baldwin, Joyce. “Jonah.” Pages 543-90 in The Minor Prophets. Edited by Thomas E. McComiskey. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993.

Barclay, William. The Gospel of John. 2 vols. Daily Study Bible Series. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1956.

Barr, James. Biblical Words for Time. 2d ed. Studies in Biblical Theology: First Series 33. London: S.C.M., 1969.

________. Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament. Rev. ed. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1987.

Barre, M. L., and J. S. Kselman. “New Exodus, Covenant, and Restoration in Psalm 23.” Pages 97-127 in The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman. Edited by C. F. Meyers and M. O’Connor. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1983.

Barrett, C. K. The Gospel According to St. John. 2d ed. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978.

________. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Edited by Henry Chadwick. Harper’s New Testament Commentaries. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1957. Repr., Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1987.

________. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994-1998.

Barstad, H. The Religious Polemics of Amos. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 34. Leiden: Brill, 1984.

Barth, Markus. Ephesians: Translation and Commentary on Chapters 1-3 and 4-6. 2 vols. Anchor Bible 34, 34A. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1974.

________. The People of God. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 5. Sheffield: JSOT, 1983.

Barthélemy, Dominique, D. W. Gooding, J. Lust, and E. Tov. The Story of David and Goliath: Textual and Literary Criticism. Orbis biblicus et orientalis 73. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986.

Barthélemy, Dominique, Adrian Schenker, and John Alexander Thompson. Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project. 5 vols. 2d ed. New York: United Bible Societies, 1979-1980.

Barthes, Roland. “The Struggle with the Angel: Textual Analysis of Genesis 32:23-33.” Pages 21-33 in Structural Analysis and Biblical Exegesis: Interpretational Essays. Edited by Roland Barthes. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series 3. Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1974.

Bartlett, J. R. “The Moabites and the Edomites.” Pages 229-58 in Peoples of Old Testament Times. Edited by D. J. Wiseman. Oxford: Clarendon, 1973.

Barton, J. Amos’s Oracles Against the Nations. Society for Old Testament Studies: Monograph Series 6. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980.

Bauckham, Richard. Jude, 2 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary 50. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983.

Bauer, Hans, and Pontus Leander. Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramäischen. Halle/Saale: Max Niemeyer, 1927.

Beale, G. K. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.

Berlin, Adele. Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994.

________. Zephaniah. Anchor Bible 25A. New York: Doubleday, 1994.

Bernard, J. H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1928.

Best, Ernest. Mark: The Gospel As Story. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1983.

Beyer, Klaus. Semitische Syntax im Neuen Testament. Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962.

Biggs, Robert D. Sà.zi.ga: Ancient Mesopotamian Potency Incantations. Texts From Cuneiform Sources 2. Locust Valley, N.Y.: J. J. Augustin, 1967.

Blank, S. H. “‘Perish the Day!’ A Misdirected Curse (Job 3:3).” Pages 61-63 in Prophetic Thought: Essays and Addresses. Edited by Sheldon H. Blank. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1977.

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Ezra-Nehemiah. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1988.

Block, Daniel I. The Book of Ezekiel. 2 vols. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Bock, Darrell L. Luke. 2 vols. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament 3AB. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994-1996.

Boling, Robert G. Judges. Anchor Bible 6A. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1975.

Bonsirven, Joseph. Épîtres de Saint Jean: Introduction, traduction et commentaire. New ed. Commentaire du Nouveau Testament 9. Paris: Beauchesne, 1954.

Borger, Riekele. Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, Königs von Assyrien. Archiv für Orientforschung 9. Graz: Im Selbstverlage des Herausgebers, 1956.

Borowski, Oded. Agriculture in Iron Age Israel. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1986.

Boström, Gustav. Proverbiastudien: die Weisheit und das fremde Weib in Spr. 1-9. Lunds universitets årsskrift. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1935.

Brichto, H. C. The Problem of “Curse” in the Hebrew Bible. Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 13. Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature, 1963.

Briggs, Charles A., and Emilie Grace Briggs. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1906-1907.

Bright, John. Jeremiah. Anchor Bible. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965.

________. A History of Israel. 4th ed. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 2000.

Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel According to John. 2 vols. Anchor Bible 29, 29A. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1966-1970.

________. The Epistles of John. Anchor Bible 30. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1982.

Brownlee, William Hugh. Ezekiel 1-19. Word Biblical Commentary 28. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1986.

Bruce, F. F. The Acts of the Apostles. London: Tyndale, 1951.

________. The Book of the Acts. Rev. ed. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Buchanan, George Wesley. The Consequences of the Covenant. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 20. Leiden: Brill, 1970.

Budd, Philip J. Numbers. Word Biblical Commentary 5. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984.

________. Leviticus. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Bullinger, E. W. Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, Explained and Illustrated. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898. Repr., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1968.

Burney, C. F. The Book of Judges. 2d ed. London: Rivingtons, 1920.

Burrows, Eric. The Oracles of Jacob and Balaam. London: Burns Oates & Washbourne, 1938.

Bush, Frederic W. Ruth, Esther. Word Biblical Commentary 9. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1996.

Buth, Randall. “Methodological Collision Between Source Criticism and Discourse Analysis.” Pages 138-54 in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics. Edited by Robert D. Bergen. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994.

Butler, Trent C. Joshua. Word Biblical Commentary 7. Waco, Tex: Word, 1983.

Caird, G. B. The Revelation of St. John the Divine. Edited by Henry Chadwick. Harper’s New Testament Commentaries. New York: Harper & Row, 1966.

Camp, Claudia V. Wisdom and the Feminine in the Book of Proverbs. Bible and Literature Series 11. Decatur, Ga.: Almond Press, 1985.

Campbell, Edward Fay. Ruth. Anchor Bible 7. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1975.

Carr, G. Lloyd. The Song of Solomon. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries 17. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1983.

Caspari, C. P. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. 3d ed. Translated and edited by William Wright. 3d edition revised by William Robertson Smith and Michael Jan de Goeje. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1933.

Cassuto, Umberto. A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: From Adam to Noah. Translated by Israel Abrahams. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1961.

________. The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch. Translated by Israel Abrahams. 1st English ed. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1961.

________. A Commentary on the Book of Exodus. Translated by Israel Abrahams. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1967.

Cathcart, Kevin J. Nahum in the Light of Northwest Semitic. Biblica et orientalia 26. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1973.

Cathcart, Kevin J., and R. P. Gordon. The Targum of the Minor Prophets. The Aramaic Bible 14. Wilmington, Del.: M. Glazier, 1989.

Childs, Brevard S. Memory and Tradition in Israel. Studies in Biblical Theology 37. Naperville, Ill.: Allenson, 1962.

________. The Book of Exodus: A Critical, Theological Commentary. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1974.

Chirichigno, G. C. Debt-Slavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 141. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.

Chisholm, Robert B. “A Theology of the Psalms.” Pages 257-304 in A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody, 1991.

________. “Evidence From Genesis.” Pages 35-54 in A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody, 1992.

________. From Exegesis to Exposition: A Practical Guide to Using Biblical Hebrew. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.

Christensen, Duane L. Deuteronomy 1-11. Word Biblical Commentary 6A. Dallas: Word, 1991.

Clark, Gordon R. The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 157. Sheffield: JSOT, 1993.

Clements, R. E. Isaiah 1-39. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Clines, David J. A. Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.

________. Job. Word Biblical Commentary 17. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1989.

Coats, George W. Rebellion in the Wilderness. Nashville: Abingdon, 1968.

Cody, Aelred. A History of Old Testament Priesthood. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1969.

Cogan, Mordechai, and Hayim Tadmor. II Kings. Anchor Bible 11. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1988.

Cohen, Abraham. Proverbs. Soncino Books of the Bible. London: Soncino, 1945.

________. The Five Megilloth. Soncino Books of the Bible. London: Soncino, 1946.

________. The Psalms. Edited by Ephraim Oratz. 2d ed. Soncino Books of the Bible. New York: Soncino, 1992.

Cohen, Harold R. Biblical Hapax Legomena in the Light of Akkadian and Ugaritic. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 37. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars, 1978.

Cole, R. A. Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1973.

Collins, John Joseph. Daniel. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.

Cook, Albert Spaulding. The Root of the Thing: A Study of Job and the Song of Songs. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1968.

Craigie, Peter C. The Book of Deuteronomy. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976.

________. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

________. Psalms 1-50. Word Biblical Commentary 19. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983.

Craigie, Peter C., Page H. Kelley, and Joel F. Drinkard, Jr. Jeremiah 1-25. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1991.

Cramer, J. A., ed. Catenae in euangelia Lucae et Joannis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1841.

Cranfield, C. E. B. The Epistle to the Romans. Edited by J. A. Emerton and C. E. B. Cranfield. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975-1979.

Crenshaw, James L. A Whirlpool of Torment: Israelite Traditions of God As an Oppressive Presence. Overtures to Biblical Theology 12. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.

Cross, Frank M. “The Divine Warrior in Israel’s Early Cult.” Pages 11-30 in Biblical Motifs: Origins and Transformations. Edited by A. Altman. Philip W. Lown Institute of Advanced Judaic Studies, Brandeis University: Studies and Texts 3. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966.

Cross, Frank M., and David Noel Freedman. Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 21. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars, 1975.

Cullmann, Oscar. Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr: A Historical and Theological Study. 2d ed. The Library of History and Doctrine. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962.

Cumont, Franz Valery Marie. After Life in Roman Paganism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1922. Repr., New York: Dover, 1959.

Currid, John D. Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997.

Dahood, Mitchell J. Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology. Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici 113. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963.

________. Psalms. Anchor Bible 16-17A. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1966.

Dalman, Gustaf. Arbeit und Sitte in Palästina. Schriften des Deutschen Palästina-Instituts. Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1928.

Davidson, A. B. The Book of Job. New ed. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1918.

Davies, Graham I. The Way of the Wilderness: A Geographical Study of the Wilderness Itineraries in the Old Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

________. Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions: Corpus and Concordance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison, Jr. Matthew. 3 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988-1997.

Davis, John James. Biblical Numerology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1968.

Day, John. Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old Testament. University of Cambridge Oriental Publications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Decker, Rodney J. Temporal Deixis of the Greek Verb in the Gospel of Mark with Reference to Verbal Aspect. Edited by D. A. Carson. Studies in Biblical Greek 10. New York: Peter Lang, 2001.

de Waard, Jan. A Handbook on Isaiah. Textual Criticism and the Translator 1. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1997.

DeWit, C. The Date and Route of the Exodus. London: Tyndale, 1960.

Dhorme, E. A Commentary on the Book of Job. Translated by Harold Knight. London: T. Nelson, 1967.

Dillmann, August. Genesis, Critically and Exegetically Expounded. Translated by William B. Stevenson. 2 vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1897.

Dittenberger, Wilhelm, ed. Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum. Lipsiae: S. Hirzelium, 1915-1924.

Dobbs-Allsopp, F. W. Lamentations. Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Preaching and Teaching. Louisville, Ky.: John Knox, 2002.

Dodd, C. H. The Johannine Epistles. Moffatt New Testament Commentary. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1946.

Dods, Marcus. “The Gospel of St. John.” Pages 653-872 in The Expositor’s Greek Testament. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. 5 vols. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1897-1910.

Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966.

Driver, G. R. Canaanite Myths and Legends. Edited by J. C. L. Gibson. 2d ed. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1978.

Driver, S. R. A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew and Some Other Syntactical Questions. 3d ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1892.

________. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Deuteronomy. 3d ed. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1902.

________. The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1906.

________. The Book of Exodus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1911.

________. Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1960.

Driver, S. R., and George Buchanan Gray. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Job. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1921.

Dunn, J. D. G. Romans. 2 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 38AB. Dallas: Word, 1988.

________. “Once More, ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ.” Pages 730-44 in SBL Seminar Papers, 1991. Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 30. Atlanta: Scholars, 1991.

Durham, John I. Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary 3. Dallas: Word, 1987.

Eaton, J. H. Kingship and the Psalms. Studies in Biblical Theology: Second Series 32. Naperville, Ill.: Allenson, 1976.

Eaton, M. A. Ecclesiastes. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1983.

Ehrman, Bart D. The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Eichrodt, Walther. Theology of the Old Testament. Translated by J. A. Baker. Old Testament Library. London: S.C.M., 1961-1967.

Eissfeldt, O. “Renaming in the Old Testament.” Pages 70-83 in Words and Meanings. Edited by P. R. Ackroyd and B. Lindars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968.

Ellis, E. Earle. “The Silenced Wives of Corinth (I Cor. 14:34-5).” Pages 213-20 in New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis. Edited by Eldon Jay Epp and Gordon D. Fee. Oxford: Clarendon, 1981.

Engnell, I. “‘Knowledge’ and ‘Life’ in the Creation Story.” Pages 103-19 in Wisdom in Israel and in the Ancient Near East. Edited by Martin Noth and D. Winton Thomas. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 3. Leiden: Brill, 1955.

Falk, Marcia. Love Lyrics From the Bible: A Translation and Literary Study of the Song of Songs. Bible and Literature Series 4. Sheffield: Almond, 1982.

Fanning, Buist M. Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek. Oxford Theological Monographs. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Edited by F. F. Bruce. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

________. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Fensham, F. Charles. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Figart, Thomas O. A Biblical Perspective on the Race Problem. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973.

Fishbane, Michael A. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Clarendon, 1985.

________. Biblical Text and Texture: A Literary Reading of Selected Texts. Oxford: Oneworld, 1998.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Aramaic Inscriptions of Sefîre. Biblica et orientalia 19. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967.

________. The Gospel According to Luke. 2 vols. Anchor Bible 28, 28A. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1981-1985.

________. Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Edited by W. F. Albright and David Noel Freedman. Anchor Bible 33. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1993.

Fohrer, Georg. Introduction to the Old Testament. Nashville: Abingdon, 1968.

Fokkelman, J. P. Narrative Art in Genesis: Specimens of Stylistic and Structural Analysis. Studia semitica neerlandica 17. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1975.

Fox, Michael V. The Song of Songs and the Ancient Egyptian Love Songs. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.

Fraser, J. G. Folklore in the Old Testament. London: Macmillan, 1919. Repr., New York: Hart, 1975.

Freedman, David Noel. “Strophe and Meter in Exodus 15.” Pages 163-203 in A Light Unto My Path: Old Testament Studies in Honor of Jacob M. Myers. Edited by Howard N. Bream, Ralph D. Heim, and Carey A. Moore. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1974.

Freedman, David Noel, and K. A. Mathews. The Paleo-Hebrew Leviticus Scroll (11QpaleoLev). Philadelphia: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1985.

Freedman, David Noel, and A. Welch. “Amos’s Earthquake and Israelite Prophecy.” Pages 188-98 in Scripture and Other Artifacts. Edited by M. Coogan, J. C. Exum, and L. E. Stager. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994.

Freedman, H. Jeremiah. Soncino Books of the Bible. London: Soncino, 1949.

Freeman, Hobart E. An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophets. Chicago: Moody, 1969.

Gamble, Harry Y. The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans: A Study in Textual and Literary Criticism. Studies and Documents 42. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.

Garrett, Duane. Rethinking Genesis. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991.

Garstang, John. Joshua-Judges. New York: Smith, 1931.

Gemser, B. “The rîb – or Controversy – Pattern in Hebrew Mentality.” Pages 120-37 in Wisdom in Israel and in the Ancient Near East. Edited by M. Noth and D. Winton Thomas. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 3. Leiden: Brill, 1955.

George, Timothy. Galatians. New American Commentary 30. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994.

Gerleman, Gillis. Ruth, Das Hohelied. 2d ed. Biblischer Kommentar, Altes Testament 18. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1981.

Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Psalms, Part 1. Forms of the Old Testament Literature 14. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

________. Leviticus: A Commentary. Translated by Douglas W. Stott. Old Testament Library. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1996.

Gill, D., and C. Gempf, eds. The Book of Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting. Vol. 2 of The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Edited by Bruce Winter. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

Ginsberg, Harold Louis. The Legend of King Keret: A Canaanite Epic of the Bronze Age. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research: Supplement Series 2-3. New Haven, Conn.: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1946.

Glasson, T. F. Moses in the Fourth Gospel. Studies in Biblical Theology 40. Naperville, Ill.: A. R. Allenson, 1963.

Glazier-McDonald, Beth. Malachi, the Divine Messenger. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 98. Atlanta: Scholars, 1987.

Glickman, S. Craig. A Song for Lovers. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1976.

Glueck, N. “Incense Altars.” Pages 325-29 in Translating and Understanding the Old Testament. Edited by H. T. Frank and W. L. Reed. Nashville: Abingdon, 1970.

Goldingay, John. Daniel. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1989.

Goppelt, Leonhard.Theology of the New Testament. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981-1982.

Gordis, Robert. The Song of Songs and Lamentations. Rev. ed. New York: Ktav, 1974.

________. The Book of Job. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1978.

Gordon, C. H. “Biblical Customs and the Nuzu Tablets.” Pages 21-33 in The Biblical Archaeologist Reader. Edited by George E. Wright, David Noel Freedman, and Edward F. Campbell. 4 vols. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor, 1961-1983.

Gottwald, Norman K. Studies in the Book of Lamentations. Studies in Biblical Theology 14. London: S.C.M., 1954.

________. The Tribes of Yahweh: A Sociology of the Religion of Liberated Israel, 1250-1050 B.C.E. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1979.

Goulder, M. D. The Song of Fourteen Songs. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 36. Sheffield: JSOT, 1986.

Gowan, Donald E. When Man Becomes God: Humanism and Hybris in the Old Testament. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series 6. Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1975.

Gray, George Buchanan. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Numbers. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1903.

________. Sacrifice in the Old Testament: Its Theory and Practice. New York: Ktav, 1971.

Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. Edited by Gordon D. Fee. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Greenberg, Moshe. Ezekiel. 2 vols. Anchor Bible. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983-1997.

Greenstone, Julius H. Proverbs. The Holy Scriptures. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1950.

Hafemann, Scott J. Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: The Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument From Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3. Edited by Martin Hengel and Otfried Hofius. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 81. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995.

Hagner, Donald A. Matthew. 2 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 33AB. Dallas: Word, 1993-1995.

Haldar, Alfred. Studies in the Book of Nahum. Uppsala: Lundequistska bokhandeln, 1947.

Hamlin, J. E. “The Liberator’s Ordeal: A Study of Exodus 4:1-9.” Pages 33-42 in Rhetorical Criticism: Essays in Honor of James Muilenburg. Edited by Jared J. Jackson and Martin Kessler. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series 1. Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1974.

Haran, M. “The Passover Sacrifice.” Pages 86-116 in Studies in the Religion of Ancient Israel. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 23. Leiden: Brill, 1972.

Harland, J. P. “Sodom and Gomorrah.” Pages 41-75 in The Biblical Archaeologist Reader. Edited by George E. Wright, David Noel Freedman, and Edward F. Campbell. 4 vols. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor, 1961-1983.

Harris, Murray J. Colossians & Philemon. Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991.

Harris, W. Hall. The Descent of Christ: Ephesians 4:7-11 and Traditional Hebrew Imagery. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 32. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

Harrison, R. K. Healing Herbs of the Bible. Leiden: Brill, 1966.

________. Leviticus. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1980.

________. Numbers. Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary. Chicago: Moody, 1990.

Hartley, John E. The Book of Job. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

________. Leviticus. Word Biblical Commentary 4. Dallas: Word, 1992.

Hayes, John Haralson, and Stuart A. Irvine. Isaiah, the Eighth Century Prophet: His Times and His Preaching. Nashville: Abingdon, 1987.

Hays, Richard B. The Faith of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1-4:11. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 56. Chico, Calif.: Scholars, 1983.

Heater, Homer. A Septuagint Translation Technique in the Book of Job. Catholic Biblical Quarterly: Monograph Series 11. Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association, 1982.

Heidel, Alexander. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946.

Heider, George C. The Cult of Molek: A Reassessment. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 43. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1985.

Hepper, F. N. Illustrated Encyclopedia of Bible Plants. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.

Herbert, A. S. Genesis 12-50. Torch Bible Commentaries. London: S.C.M., 1962.

Hillers, Delbert R. Treaty-Curses and the Old Testament Prophets. Biblica et Orientalia 16. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964.

________. Lamentations. Anchor Bible 7A. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1979.

________. Micah. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.

Hindson, Edward E. The Philistines and the Old Testament. Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1972.

Hoehner, Harold W. Herod Antipas. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 17. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

________. Ephesians. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.

Hoffner, H. A., Jr. “Hittites.” Pages 127-55 in Peoples of the Old Testament World. Edited by Alfred J. Hoerth, Gerald L. Mattingly, and Edwin M. Yamauchi. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996.

Holladay, William L. Jeremiah. 2 vols. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986-1989.

________. A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Houtman, Cornelis. Exodus. Edited by Johan Rebel and Sierd Woudstra. 4 vols. Historical Commentary on the Old Testament. Kampen: Kok, 1993-.

Howard, David M. “Philistines.” Pages 231-50 in Peoples of the Old Testament World. Edited by Alfred J. Hoerth, Gerald L. Mattingly, and Edwin M. Yamauchi. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.

Hubbard, B. J. The Matthean Redaction of a Primitive Apostolic Commissioning: An Exegesis of Matthew 28:16-20. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 19. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars, 1974.

Hubbard, Robert L., Jr. The Book of Ruth. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Hübner, Hans. Gottes Ich und Israel: zum Schriftgebrauch des Paulus in Römer 9-11. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 136. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984.

Huey, F. B. Jeremiah, Lamentations. New American Commentary 16. Nashville: Broadman, 1993.

Huffmon, H. B. “Exodus 23:4-5: A Comparative Study.” Pages 271-78 in A Light Unto My Path: Old Testament Studies in Honor of Jacob M. Myers. Edited by Howard N. Bream, Ralph D. Heim, and Carey A. Moore. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1974.

Hyatt, J. Philip. Exodus. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Isserlin, B. S. J. The Israelites. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1998.

Jacob, Benno. The Second Book of the Bible: Exodus. Translated by Walter Jacob. Hoboken, N.J.: Ktav, 1992.

Jacob, E. “Sagesse et Alphabet: Pr. 31:10-31.” Pages 287-95 in Hommages À André Dupont-Sommer. Edited by A. Caquot and M. Philonenko. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1971.

Jacob, Edmond. Theology of the Old Testament. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1958.

James, E. O. The Tree of Life: An Archaeological Study. Studies in the History of Religions 11. Leiden: Brill, 1966.

Japhet, Sara. I & II Chronicles. Old Testament Library. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1993.

Johnson, Aubrey R. The Vitality of the Individual in the Thought of Ancient Israel. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1949.

________. “The Primary Meaning of √גאל.” Pages 67-77 in Congress Volume: Copenhagen, 1953. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 1. Leiden: Brill, 1953.

Junker, Hubert. Die zwolfe kleinen Propheten. Bonn: Hanstein, 1938.

Kaminsky, Joel. Corporate Responsibility in the Hebrew Bible. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 196. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.

Käsemann, Ernst. Commentary on Romans. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Keel, Othmar. The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Translated by Timothy J. Hallett. New York: Seabury, 1978.

Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1993.

Keown, Gerald L., Pamela J. Scalise, and Thomas G. Smothers. Jeremiah 26-52. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1995.

Kessler, Martin. “Rhetorical Criticism of Genesis 7.” Pages 1-17 in Rhetorical Criticism: Essays in Honor of James Muilenburg. Edited by Jared Jackson and Martin Kessler. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1974.

Kidner, Derek. The Proverbs: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. London: Tyndale, 1964.

________. Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Chicago: InterVarsity, 1967.

Kikawada, I. M., and A. Quinn. Before Abraham Was: The Unity of Genesis 1-11. Nashville: Abingdon, 1985.

Kilmer, Anne D. “The Mesopotamian Counterparts of the Biblical Nephilim.” Pages 39-43 in Perspectives on Language and Text. Edited by Edgar W. Conrad and Edward G. Newing. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1987.

King, L. W. Chronicles Concerning Early Babylonian Kings: Including Records of the Early History of the Kassites and the Country of the Sea. Studies in Eastern History 2-3. London: Luzac, 1907.

King, Philip J. Amos, Hosea, Micah: An Archaeological Commentary. Philadelphia: Westminister, 1988.

Kissane, Edward J. The Book of Isaiah. Dublin: Richview, 1941.

Kitchen, K. A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Chicago: InterVarsity, 1966.

________. “The Philistines.” Pages 53-78 in Peoples of Old Testament Times. Edited by D. J. Wiseman. Oxford: Clarendon, 1973.

________. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003.

Klein, Ernest. A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English. New York: Macmillan, 1987.

Klein, Ralph W. 1 Samuel. Word Biblical Commentary 10. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1983.

Kline, Meredith G. Treaty of the Great King: The Covenant Structure of Deuteronomy. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963.

________. The Structure of Biblical Authority. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.

Knight, George W., III. The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Edited by I. Howard Marshall and W. Ward Gasque. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992.

König, Eduard. Stilistik, Rhetorik, Poetik in Bezug auf die biblische Litteratur. Leipzig: Dieterich, 1900.

Kramer, Samuel Noah. The Sacred Marriage Rite: Aspects of Faith, Myth, and Ritual in Ancient Sumer. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1969.

Kugel, James L. The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.

Labuschagne, C. J. “The Emphasizing Particle GAM and Its Connotations.” Pages 193-203 in Studia biblica et semitica. Wageningen: H. Veenman, 1966.

________. The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament. Pretoria Oriental Series 5. Leiden: Brill, 1966.

Lambdin, Thomas O. Introduction to Biblical Hebrew. New York: Scribner, 1971.

Lane, Edward William. An Arabic-English Lexicon. Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1968.

Lane, William L. The Gospel According to Mark. Edited by F. F. Bruce. New International Commentary on the New Testament 2. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

Lang, B. Frau Weisheit. Dusseldorf: Patmos, 1975.

Layard, Austen Henry. Nineveh and Its Remains. New York: G. P. Putnam, 1849.

Levin, Étan. The Aramaic Version of Jonah. 3d ed. New York: Sepher-Hermon, 1981.

Levine, Baruch A. In the Presence of the Lord: A Study of Cult and Some Cultic Terms in Ancient Israel. Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 5. Leiden: Brill, 1974.

________. Leviticus. Jerusalem Publication Society Torah Commentary 3. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989.

Lichtheim, Miriam. Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings. 3 vols. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.

Lincoln, Andrew T. Ephesians. Word Biblical Commentary 42. Dallas: Word, 1990.

Lindars, Barnabas. Judges 1-5. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995.

Liver, J. “Korah, Dathan and Abiram.” Pages 189-217 in Studies in the Bible. Edited by Chaim Rabin. Scripta hierosolymitana 8. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1961.

Loewe, R. “Divine Frustration Exegetically Frustrated.” Pages 137-58 in Words and Meanings. Edited by Peter R. Ackroyd and Barnabas Lindars. London: Cambridge University Press, 1968.

Loewenstamm, Samuel E., ed. Thesaurus of the Language of the Bible. 3 vols. Jerusalem: Bible Concordance Press, 1957-1968.

Long, V. Philips. The Art of Biblical History. Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation 5. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.

Longacre, R. “Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose: A Discourse-modular Approach.” Pages 50-98 in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics. Edited by Robert D. Bergen. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994.

Longman, Tremper III. “Nahum.” In The Minor Prophets. Edited by Thomas E. McComiskey. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993.

________. The Book of Ecclesiastes. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.

Löw, Immanuel. Die Flora Der Juden. 4 vols. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1967.

Luckenbill, Daniel David. Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1926.

MacDonald, W. G. “Christology and ‘The Angel of the Lord’.” Pages 324-35 in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation. Edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Maier, Walter Arthur. The Book of Nahum. Saint Louis: Concordia, 1959.

Malina, Bruce J. The Palestinian Manna Tradition: The Manna Tradition in the Palestinian Targums and Its Relationship to the New Testament Writings. Leiden: Brill, 1968.

Mann, Thomas W. Divine Presence and Guidance in Israelite Traditions: The Typology of Exaltation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977.

________. The Book of the Torah: The Narrative Integrity of the Pentateuch. Atlanta: John Knox, 1988.

Marshall, I. Howard. The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary 3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Maurice, Frederick Denison. The Doctrine of Sacrifice, Deduced From the Scriptures: A Series of Sermons. London: Macmillan, 1893.

McCaffrey, James. The House With Many Rooms: The Temple Theme of Jn. 14, 2-3. Analecta biblica 114. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1988.

McCarter, P. Kyle, Jr. I Samuel. Anchor Bible 8. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1980.

________. II Samuel. Anchor Bible 9. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984.

________. Textual Criticism: Recovering the Text of the Hebrew Bible. Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.

McKane, William. Proverbs: A New Approach. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970.

________. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Jeremiah. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986-1996.

McLaughlin, J. L. The “Marzeah” in the Prophetic Literature: An Examination of the References and Allusions in Light of the Extra-Biblical Evidence. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 86. Leiden: Brill, 2001.

McNeile, A. H. The Book of Numbers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1911.

Meeks, Wayne A. The Prophet-King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 14. Leiden: Brill, 1967.

Mendenhall, George E. The Tenth Generation: The Origins of the Biblical Tradition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973.

Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987.

________. Deuteronomy. New American Commentary 4. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994.

Merwe, C. H. J. van der, J. A. Naudé, and Jan H. Kroeze. Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar. Biblical Languages – Hebrew 3. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999.

Mettinger, Tryggve N. D. In Search of God: The Meaning and Message of the Everlasting Names. Translated by Frederick H. Cryer. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988.

Metzger, Bruce M. “The Punctuation of Rom. 9:5.” Pages 95-112 in Christ and the Spirit in the New Testament: In Honour of Charles Francis Digby Moule. Edited by B. Lindars and S. Smalley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.

Meyers, Carol L. The Tabernacle Menorah: A Synthetic Study of a Symbol From the Biblical Cult. American Schools of Oriental Research Dissertation Series 2. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars, 1976.

Milgrom, Jacob. Studies in Levitical Terminology. Near Eastern Studies 14. Berkeley: University of California, 1970.

________. Studies in Cultic Theology and Terminology. Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 36. Leiden: Brill, 1983.

________. Numbers. Jerusalem Publication Society Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1990.

________. Leviticus. 3 vols. Anchor Bible 3. New York: Doubleday, 1991-2001.

Miller, Cynthia L. The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Linguistic Analysis. Harvard Semitic Monographs 55. Atlanta: Scholars, 1996.

Miller, Patrick D. Sin and Judgment in the Prophets: A Stylistic and Theological Analysis. Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 27. Chico, Calif.: Scholars, 1982.

Monier-Williams, Monier. A Sanskrit-English Dictionary Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages. New ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1899.

Montgomery, James A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1964.

Moo, Douglas J. Romans 1-8. Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary. Chicago: Moody, 1991.

________. The Epistle to the Romans. Edited by Gordon D. Fee. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Moore, Carey A. Esther. Anchor Bible 7B. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1971.

Moore, George Foot. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Judges. 2d ed. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1908.

Moran, William L. “A Kingdom of Priests.” Pages 7-20 in The Bible in Current Catholic Thought. Edited by John L. McKenzie. Saint Mary’s Theology Studies 1. New York: Herder and Herder, 1962.

Morris, H. M. The Remarkable Record of Job. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.

Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to John. Rev. ed. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

________. The Gospel According to John. Rev. ed. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Moscati, Sabatino. An Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages: Phonology and Morphology. Porta linguarum orientalium: Neue Serie 6. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1980.

Motyer, J. A. The Prophecy of Isaiah. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1993.

Moule, C. F. D. The Phenomenon of the New Testament. Studies in Biblical Theology: Second Series 1. London: S.C.M., 1967.

Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. Edited by F. F. Bruce. New International Commentary on the New Testament 17. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.

Murphy, Roland Edmund. The Song of Songs. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990.

Murray, John. The Epistle to the Romans. Edited by F. F. Bruce. 2 vols. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959-1965.

Neusner, Jacob. The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism. Leiden: Brill, 1973.

Niditch, Susan. War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Niehaus, Jeffrey J. God At Sinai: Covenant and Theophany in the Bible and Ancient Near East. Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

Nineham, D. E. Historicity and Chronology in the New Testament. Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge Theological Collections 6. London: SPCK, 1965.

Nolland, John. Luke. 3 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 35ABC. Dallas: Word, 1989-1993.

Noordtzij, A. Numbers. Bible Student’s Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983.

North, Christopher R. The Second Isaiah. Oxford: Clarendon, 1964.

Noth, Martin. Exodus. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962.

________. Numbers. Translated by James D. Martin. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968.

O’Brien, Peter T. Colossians, Philemon. Edited by David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker. Word Biblical Commentary 44. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1982.

________. The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Edited by I. Howard Marshall and W. Ward Gasque. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991.

________. The Letter to the Ephesians. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.

Olmstead, A. T. History of Assyria. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968.

Olyan, S. M. “The Oaths of Amos 8:14.” Pages 121-49 in Priesthood and Cult in Ancient Israel. Edited by G. A. Anderson and S. M. Olyan. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 125. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.

Orelli, Conrad von. The Prophecies of Jeremiah. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1889.

Ortlund, Raymond C. Whoredom: God’s Unfaithful Wife in Biblical Theology. New Studies in Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Orton, David E. The Understanding Scribe: Matthew and the Apocalyptic Ideal. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 25. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989.

Osburn, Carroll D. “The Text of 1 Corinthians 10:9.” Pages 201-11 in New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis. Edited by Eldon Jay Epp and Gordon D. Fee. Oxford: Clarendon, 1981.

Oswalt, John N. The Book of Isaiah. 2 vols. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986-1998.

Parke-Taylor, Geoffrey H. Yahweh: The Divine Name in the Bible. Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1975.

Paterson, J. A. The Book of Numbers. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1900.

Patterson, Richard Duane. Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah. Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary. Chicago: Moody, 1991.

Paul, Shalom M. Amos. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.

Perowne, T. T. The Proverbs. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899.

Pfeiffer, Charles F., and Howard Frederic Vos. The Wycliffe Historical Geography of Bible Lands. Chicago: Moody, 1967.

Pitard, Wayne Thomas. Ancient Damascus: A Historical Study of the Syrian City-State From Earliest Times Until Its Fall to the Assyrians in 732 B.C.E. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1986.

Plaut, W. Gunther. Book of Proverbs. Jewish Commentary for Bible Readers: Union Adult Series. New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1961.

Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1915.

Polley, M. E. Amos and the Davidic Empire: A Socio-Historical Approach. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.

Polzin, R., and D. Robertson. Studies in the Book of Job. Semeia 7. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars, 1977.

Pope, Marvin H. Song of Songs. Anchor Bible 7C. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1977.

Post, George Edward. Flora of Syria, Palestine and Sinai: A Handbook of the Flowering Plants and Ferns, Native and Naturalized From the Taurus to Ras Muhammad and From the Mediterranean Sea to the Syrian Desert. Edited by John Edward Dinsmore. 2d ed. Beirut: American, 1932.

Pritchard, James B., ed. The Ancient Near East. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973.

Propp, William H. C. Exodus 1-18. Anchor Bible 2. New York: Doubleday, 1999.

Räisänen, Heikki. Paul and the Law. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 29. Tübingen: Mohr, 1983.

Redford, Donald B. A Study of the Biblical Story of Joseph (Genesis 37-50). Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 20. Leiden: Brill, 1970.

Reymond, Philippe. L’eau, sa vie, et sa signification dans l’Ancien Testament. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 6. Leiden: Brill, 1958.

Ridderbos, J. Isaiah. Bible Student’s Commentary. Grand Rapids: Regency Reference Library, 1985.

Ringgren, Helmer. Religions of the Ancient Near East. Translated by John Sturdy. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1973.

Ringgren, Helmer, and Walther Zimmerli. Sprüche/Prediger. 3d ed. Das Alte Testament Deutsch. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980.

Roberts, J. J. M. Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1991.

Robertson, A. T. A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research. 4th ed. Nashville: Broadman, 1934.

Robertson, Archibald, and Alfred Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. 2d ed. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1914.

Robinson, H. Wheeler. Inspiration and Revelation in the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1946.

Rodriguez, Angel M. Substitution in the Hebrew Cultus. Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertations Series 3. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1979.

Rosenthal, Franz. A Grammar of Biblical Aramaic. 6th ed. Porta Linguarum Orientalium 5. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1995.

Ross, Allen P. Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition of Genesis. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.

Rowley, Harold Henry. Job. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Rudolph, Wilhelm. Des Buch Ruth, das Hohe Lied, die Klagelieder. Kommentar zum Alten Testament 17. Gütersloh: G. Mohn, 1962.

Sachs, Curt. The History of Musical Instruments. New York: W. W. Norton, 1940.

Saggs, H. W. F. The Greatness That Was Babylon: A Survey of the Ancient Civilization of the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. 2d ed. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1988.

Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus. Jerusalem Publication Society Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991.

Sasson, Jack M. Ruth. 2d ed. The Biblical Seminar 10. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.

Schaberg, Jane. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit: The Triadic Phrase in Matthew 28:19b. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 61. Chico, Calif.: Scholars, 1982.

Schley, Donald G. Shiloh: A Biblical City in Tradition and History. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 63. Sheffield: JSOT, 1989.

Schnackenburg, Rudolf. The Gospel According to St. John. 3 vols. New York: Seabury, 1968-1982.

Schramm, E. M. “Poetic Patterning in Biblical Hebrew.” Pages 175-78 in Michigan Oriental Studies in Honor of George G. Cameron. Edited by Louis Lawrence Orlin. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1976.

Scott, R. B. Y. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes. 2d ed. Anchor Bible 18. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970.

Segal, Judah Benzion. The Hebrew Passover From the Earliest Times to A.D. 70. London Oriental Series 12. New York: Oxford University Press, 1963.

Sherwin-White, A. N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. The Sarum Lectures, 1960-1961. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963.

________. “The Trial of Christ.” Pages 97-116 in Historicity and Chronology in the New Testament. Edited by D. E. Nineham. Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge Theological Collections 6. London: SPCK, 1965.

Silva, Moisés. Philippians. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.

Simons, J. The Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament. Studia Francisci Scholten Memoriae Dicata 2. Leiden: Brill, 1959.

Simpson, William Kelly, ed. The Literature of Ancient Egypt: An Anthology of Stories, Instructions, and Poetry. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972.

Skehan, Patrick W. Studies in Israelite Poetry and Wisdom. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 1. Washington: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1971.

Skinner, John. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. 2d ed. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1930.

Smick, E. B. “A Study of the Structure of the Third Balaam Oracle.” Pages 242-52 in The Law and the Prophets. Edited by John H. Skilton. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1974.

Smith, Gary V. Amos. Library of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Regency Reference Library, 1989.

Smith, Ralph L. Micah-Malachi. Word Biblical Commentary 32. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1984.

Snaith, Norman Henry. The Jewish New Year Festival: Its Origins and Development. London: SPCK, 1947.

________. Leviticus and Numbers. New Century Bible Commentary. London: Nelson, 1967.

Soggin, J. Alberto. Judges. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981.

Speiser, E. A. Genesis. Anchor Bible 1. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1964.

________. “The Wife-Sister Motif in the Patriarchal Narratives.” Pages 62-81 in Oriental and Biblical Studies. Edited by J. J. Finkelstein and M. Greenberg. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia, 1967.

Spurrell, George James. Notes on the Text of the Book of Genesis. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1896.

Stadelmann, Luis I. J. The Hebrew Conception of the World. Analecta Biblica 39. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1970.

Stamm, Johann Jakob, and M. E. Andrew. The Ten Commandments in Recent Research. Studies in Biblical Theology: Second Series 2. Naperville, Ill.: A. R. Allenson, 1967.

Stein, Robert H. Luke. New American Commentary 24. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Streck, Maximilian. Assurbanipal und die letzten assyrischen könige bis zum untergange Niniveh’s. 3 vols. Vorderasiatische Bibliothek 7. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1918.

Stuart, Douglas K. Hosea-Jonah. Word Biblical Commentary 31. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987.

Sutcliffe, Edmund F. The Old Testament and the Future Life. London: Burns Oates & Washbourne, 1946.

Swartley, Willard M. Slavery, Sabbath, War, and Women: Case Issues in Biblical Interpretation. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald, 1983.

Szpek, Heidi M. Translation Technique in the Peshitta to Job. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 137. Atlanta: Scholars, 1992.

Theissen, Gerd. Psychologische Aspekte paulinischer Theologie. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 131. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983.

Thomas, D. W. “בְּלִיַּעַל in the Old Testament.” Pages 11-19 in Biblical and Patristic Studies in Memory of Robert Pierce Casey. Edited by J. Neville Birdsall and Robert W. Thomson. New York: Herder, 1963.

Thompson, J. A. “Numbers.” Pages 168-200 in New Bible Commentary: Revised. Edited by D. Guthrie and J. A. Motyer. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.

________. “The Date of the Book of Joel.” Pages 453-64 in A Light Unto My Path: Old Testament Studies in Honor of Jacob M. Myers. Edited by Howard N. Bream, Ralph D. Heim, and Carey A. Moore. Gettysburg Theological Studies 4. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1974.

________. Deuteronomy. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. London: InterVarsity, 1974.

________. The Book of Jeremiah. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Thompson, K. C. “I Corinthians 15, 29 and Baptism for the Dead.” Pages 647-59 in Studia Evangelica, Vol. 2, Part I. Edited by F. L. Cross. Texte und Untersuchungen 87. Berlin: Akademie, 1964.

Thompson, R. Campbell, and Richard Wyatt Hutchinson. A Century of Exploration At Nineveh. London: Luzac, 1929.

Thompson, R. J. Penitence and Sacrifice in Early Israel outside the Levitical Law: An Examination of the Fellowship Theory of Early Israelite Sacrfice. Leiden: Brill, 1963.

Tigay, Jeffrey H., ed. Empirical Models for Biblical Criticism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1985.

________. Deuteronomy. Jerusalem Publication Society Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1996.

Toy, Crawford H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Proverbs. International Critical Commentary. 1899. Repr., Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1970.

Tromp, Nicholas J. Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Nether World in the Old Testament. Biblica et orientalia 21. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1969.

Ulrich, Eugene Charles. The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus. Harvard Semitic Monographs 19. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars, 1978.

Van Dam, Cornelis. The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1997.

Vaulx, Jacques de. Les Nombres. Sources bibliques. Paris: Gabalda, 1972.

Vaux, Roland de. Studies in Old Testament Sacrifice. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1964.

________. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Edited by Astrid Beck and David Noel Freedman. Translated by John McHugh. The Biblical Resource Series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Vergote, Jozef. Joseph en Égypte. Louvain: Publications Universitaires, 1959.

Vermès, Géza. Scripture and Tradition in Judaism. Studia post-biblica 4. Leiden: Brill, 1961.

Vogt, Ernst. Lexicon linguae aramaicae Veteris Testamenti documentis antiquis illustratum. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1971.

von Rad, Gerhard. Genesis: A Commentary. Translated by John H. Marks. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961.

________. Biblical Interpretations in Preaching. Translated by John E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1977.

________. God At Work in Israel. Translated by John H. Marks. Nashville: Abingdon, 1980.

Waterfield, Gordon. Layard of Nineveh. New York: F. A. Praeger, 1963.

Watson, Wilfred G. E. Classical Hebrew Poetry. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 26. Sheffield: JSOT, 1984.

Watts, John D. W. Isaiah. 2 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 24-25. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1985-1987.

Webb, Barry G. The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 46. Sheffield: JSOT, 1987.

Weinfeld, Moshe. Deuteronomy 1-11: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. 1st ed. Anchor Bible 5. New York: Doubleday, 1991.

Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

________. Numbers. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries 4. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1981.

________. “The Religion of the Patriarchs.” Pages 157-88 in Essays on the Patriarchal Narratives. Edited by A. Millard and D. Wiseman. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1983.

________. Genesis. 2 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 1, 2. Dallas: Word, 1987-1994.

Wenham, John William. The Enigma of Evil: Can We Believe in the Goodness of God? Grand Rapids: Academie, 1985.

Westcott, B. F., and F. J. A. Hort. The New Testament in the Original Greek. 2 vols. Cambridge: Macmillan, 1881.

Westermann, Claus. Blessing in the Bible and the Life of the Church. Overtures to Biblical Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978.

________.Genesis. Translated by John J. Scullion. 3 vols. Minneapolis, Minn.: Augsburg, 1984-1986.

________. Basic Forms of Prophetic Speech. Translated by Hugh Clayton White. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991.

White, John Bradley. A Study of the Language of Love in the Song of Songs and Ancient Egyptian Poetry. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 38. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars, 1978.

Whybray, R. N. The Heavenly Counsellor in Isaiah xl 13-14: A Study of the Sources of the Theology of Deutero-Isaiah. Society for Old Testament Study Monograph Series 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.

________. The Book of Proverbs. Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

________. Isaiah 40-66. Edited by Ronald E. Clements and Matthew Black. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981.

Widengren, Geo. Sakrales Königtum im Alten Testament und im Judentum. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1955.

Wildberger, Hans. Isaiah. 3 vols. Continental Commentaries. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.

Williams, Ronald J. “The Passive Qal Theme in Hebrew.” Essays on the Ancient Semitic World. Edited by John W. Wevers and Donald B. Redford. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970.

________. Hebrew Syntax: An Outline. 2d ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976.

Williamson, H. G. M. Ezra, Nehemiah. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1985.

Wilson, J. A. “Egypt.” Pages 39-133 in Before Philosophy: The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man. Edited by Henri Frankfort, H. A. Groenewegen-Frankfort, J. A. Wilson, and Thorkild Jacobsen. Baltimore: Penguin, 1949.

Wilson, R. D. “Yahweh [Jehovah] and Exodus 6:3.” Pages 29-40 in Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1972.

Wilson, Robert R. Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.

Winnett, F. V. The Mosaic Tradition. Near and Middle East Series 1. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1949.

Wiseman, D. J., ed. Peoples of Old Testament Times. Oxford: Clarendon, 1973.

Wolff, Hans Walter. Hosea. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974.

________. Joel and Amos. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.

________. Anthropology of the Old Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Wood, D. R. W., ed. New Bible Dictionary. 3d ed. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1996.

Wright, David P. The Disposal of Impurity: Elimination Rites in the Bible and in Hittite and Mesopotamian Literature. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 101. Atlanta: Scholars, 1987.

Wright, Ruth V., and Robert L. Chadbourne. Gems and Minerals of the Bible. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.

Wuellner, Wilhelm H. The Meaning of “Fishers of Men.” The New Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1967.

Yadin, Yigael. The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands in the Light of Archaeological Study. Translated by M. Pearlman. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. “Cultic Prostitution.” Pages 213-23 in Orient and Occident: Essays Presented to Cyrus H. Gordon on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by Harry A. Hoffner. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 22. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1973.

________. Foes From the Northern Frontier: Invading Hordes From the Russian Steppes. Studies in Biblical Archaeology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982.

Young, Edward J. My Servants, the Prophets. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952.

________. The Book of Isaiah. 3 vols. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965-1972.

Zerwick, Maximilian. Biblical Greek: Illustrated by Examples (Graecitas Biblica). Translated by and adapted from the 4th Latin edition by Joseph Smith. Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici 114. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963.

Zimmerli, Walther. Ezekiel. Translated by Ronald E. Clements. 2 vols. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979-1983.

Zöckler, Otto. The Proverbs of Solomon. Translated and edited by Charles A. Aiken. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Old Testament 10. New York: Charles Scribner, 1870.

Zuntz, Günther. The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition Upon the Corpus Paulinum. The Schweich Lectures of the British Academy. London: Oxford University Press, 1953.

Abbreviations and Introduction
to Principal Manuscript Evidence
for the Greek New Testament

No ancient literature has survived in its original form; everything we have is derived from copies of the originals. The NT is no exception. However, in comparison with any other ancient literature, the NT is without a peer—both in terms of the chronological proximity and the surviving number. Several ancient authorities are preserved in only a handful of manuscripts. Not so with the NT. There are approximately 5,500 Greek witnesses, ranging in date from the second century AD into the middle ages. Besides the Greek evidence, there are nearly 30,000 versional copies (e.g., Latin, Coptic, and Syriac), and over 1,000,000 quotations from the NT in the church Fathers. NT textual criticism has always had an embarrassment of riches unparalleled in any other field.

The Greek Witnesses

The Greek witnesses are by far the most important, since in large measure they represent some of our earliest witnesses and since they involve direct reproduction from Greek to Greek. There are four kinds of Greek witnesses: papyri, uncials (or majuscules), minuscules (or cursives), and lectionaries. The first three are important enough to warrant some discussion here.

Papyri

These documents are written on the cheap writing materials of the ancient world that were roughly equivalent to modern paper. Literally thousands of papyrus fragments have been found of which approximately 100 contain portions of the New Testament. Actually, taken together, these 100 fragments constitute over half of the New Testament and all but four are in the form of codices (i.e., four are scrolls rather than the book-form [codex]). All NT papyri were written with uncial or capital letters. They range in date from the early second century through the eighth century. About 50 of them are to be dated before the fourth century. Though many of them are somewhat fragmentary, and at times the copying was looser than one would like (i.e., they were done before the canon was officially recognized), they are nevertheless extremely important for establishing the text of the New Testament—if for no other reason than the fact that they represent some of the most ancient witnesses we possess. Five important papyri are illustrated in the chart below. The symbol for each papyrus is P followed by a number (e.g., P⁴⁵). The most important papyri cited in the NET NT footnotes are as follows:

Papyri	Name	Date	NT Books Covered	General Characteristics
P⁴⁵	Chester Beatty papyrus	3^rd century AD	Gospels, Acts 4-17	Mark (Caesarean); Matt, Luke, John (intermediate between Alexandrian and Western texttypes)
P⁴⁶	Chester Beatty papyrus	ca. AD 200	10 Pauline Epistles (all but Pastorals) and Hebrews	Overall closer to Alexandrian than Western
P⁴⁷	Chester Beatty papyrus	3^rd century AD	Revelation 9:10-17:2	Alexandrian; often agrees with Sinaiticus (א)
P⁶⁶	Bodmer Papyrus	ca. AD 200	John	Mixed text between Western and Alexandrian
P⁷⁵	Bodmer papyrus	early 3^rd century	Luke and John	Alexandrian, often agrees with B

Uncials

There are approximately 300 uncials known to exist today that contain portions of the New Testament and one uncial that contains the entire NT. Like the papyri, these manuscripts were written with uncial or capital letters, but unlike the papyri they were written on animal skins or vellum. For the most part they are beautiful manuscripts, elegantly written and routinely done in scriptoria and often for special purposes. Generally speaking, they range in date from the fourth through the ninth centuries. Our oldest complete copy of the NT is an uncial manuscript, א (see chart below). The symbol for each uncial is either a capital letter (in Latin or Greek letters [though one ms has a Hebrew letter, א]) or a number beginning with 0 (e.g., 01, 0220, etc.). The most important uncials cited in the NET NT footnotes are as follows:

Uncial	Name	Date (approx.)	NT Books Covered	General Characteristics
א (01)	Aleph or Sinaiticus	4^th century	The entire NT	Alexandrian; best in epistles
A (02)	Alexandrinus	5^th century	Most of the NT	Important in the Epistles and Revelation
B (03)	Vaticanus	4^th century	Most of NT except Hebrews 9:14ff, the Pastorals, Phlm, Rev	Alexandrian; best in Gospels
C (04)	Ephraemi Rescriptus	5^th century	Portions of every book except 2 Thess and 2 John	mixed
D (05)	Bezae/ Cantabrigiensis	5^th century	Gospels and Acts	Western
D (06)	Claromontanus	6^th century	Pauline Epistles and Hebrews	Western
F(010)	Augiensis	9^th century	Pauline Epistles	Western
G (012)	Boernerianus	9^th century	Pauline Epistles	Western
L (019)	Regius	8^th century	Gospels	Often agrees with Vaticanus
W (032)	Washingtonianus	early 5^th century	Gospels	mixed; earliest representation of Byzantine texttype. Alexandrian in John 5:12-21:25.
Θ (038)	Koridethi	9^th century	Gospels	The text of Mark is similar to that used by Origen and Eusebius in the third and fourth centuries at Caesarea
Ψ (044)	Athous Laurae	8^th/ 9^th century	Gospels/Acts/ Paul/General Epistles	Contains Alexandrian, Western, and Byzantine influences

Minuscules

There are approximately 2,813 NT Greek minuscule manuscripts known to us today. These copies range in date from the ninth to sixteenth centuries, were produced on vellum or paper, and were written in cursive or a lower-case, flowing hand. They are the best representatives of the medieval ecclesiastical text, that is, the Byzantine text. There are approximately 150-200 that deviate from the Byzantine standard, almost always representing an earlier transmissional stream and hence quite important for NT textual criticism. The symbols for the minuscules are of three kinds: (a) Arabic numbers (e.g., 1, 565, 1739), each of which represents one manuscript; (b) “family 1,” [Ë¹] “family 13” [Ë¹³] (involving a group of closely associated manuscripts); (c) Byz (involving the majority of Byzantine minuscules). The following are among the more important witnesses cited in the NET NT notes:

Minuscule	Date (approx.)	NT Books Covered	General Characteristics
33	9^th century	Gospels, Acts, Paul, Catholic Epistles	Alexandrian
81	AD 1044	Acts, Paul, Catholic Epistles	Very important for establishing the text of Acts. Agrees substantially with the Alexandrian texttype.
1739	10^th century, but probably goes back to a late 4^th century ms	Acts, Paul, Catholic Epistles	Alexandrian
Family 1 (Ë¹)	12^th-14^th centuries	Gospels	Caesarean (of the 3^rd or 4^th centuries)
Family 13 (Ë¹³)	11^th-15^th centuries	Gospels	Important in the discussion of the authenticity of the pericope adulterae (i.e., John 7:53-8:11)

Versional Evidence

Versions were initially prepared for missionary purposes. The history and transmission of versions are often quite complex, and scholars often do not agree on or do not know the particular dates or characteristics of the versions. The chart below contains the major versions cited in the notes; the most important abbreviations are listed, but not all abbreviations are indicated. For more information on the versional evidence for the NT, consult B. M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (3d ed.; New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 67-86; B. M. Metzger, The Early Versions of the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1977); and B. D. Ehrman and M. W. Holmes, eds., The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis (Studies and Documents 46; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 75-187.

Version	Abbreviations	Date (approx.)	General Characteristics
Vulgate and part of the Itala witnesses	lat	2^nd to 3^rd century	Western, Alexandrian, and others
Itala	it	3^rd century	Western
Vulgate	vg	4^th century and later	extensive cross-contamination of texttypes
Syriac	syr	2^nd to 6^th centuries	Old Syriac (syr^c and syr^s) is generally Western. The Peshitta (syr^p) has a mixed text in Gospels and Epistles, Western in Acts. The Harclean version (syr^h) of Acts is Western. The Palestinian Syriac (syr^pal) is generally Caesarean.
Coptic	cop	3^rd and 4^th centuries (Sahidic dialect is 4^th to 5^th centuries; Bohairic dialect is 9^th century)	generally Alexandrian in the entire tradition; Sahidic (sa) and Bohairic (bo) are Alexandrian with numerous Western readings
Armenian	arm	5^th century	generally Caesarean but sections are Byzantine, and the mss of Paul show strong Alexandrian affinities
Georgian	geo	5^th century	mixed texttypes; generally Caesarean, but becoming strongly Byzantine in later mss
Ethiopic	eth	exact date unknown, but most likely within the 4^th to 5^th centuries	mixed text, but generally early Byzantine
Slavonic	slav	9^th century	Byzantine

Patristic Evidence

A tremendous source for evidence of the Greek NT are citations found in early Church Fathers. They help to locate and date various readings and texttypes found in the manuscripts and versions. This field is quite complex for two broad reasons: (1) It is often difficult to determine if what the Father actually wrote has been preserved in the extant manuscripts or if corruption has occurred. (2) It is often difficult to determine if a Father is citing a text verbatim, paraphrasing it, or alluding to it. All of the Fathers cited in the notes are listed below. For more information on the patristic evidence for the NT, consult B. M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (3d ed.; New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 86-92; and B. D. Ehrman and M. W. Holmes, eds., The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis (Studies and Documents 46; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 189-236.

Ambrose of Milan, d. 397

Ambrosiaster of Rome, active 366-384

Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, d. 373

Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, d. 430

Chromatius, d. 407

Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, d. 407

Clement of Alexandria, d. before 215

Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, d. 258

Cyril of Alexandria, d. 444

Cyril-Jerusalem, d. 386

Didymus of Alexandria, d. 398

Ephraem the Syrian, d. 373

Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis, d. 403

Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, d. 339 or 340

Hesychius of Jerusalem, d. after 451

Hilary of Poitiers, d. 367

Hippolytus of Rome, d. 235

Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, d. ca. 202

Jerome, d. 420

Justin Martyr, d. ca. 165

Marcion of Rome, 2^nd century

Origen of Alexandria and Caesarea, d. 254

Pseudo-Athanasius, dates unknown

Serapion, d. after 362

Severian, d. after 408

Tertullian of Carthage, d. after 220

Theodore of Mopsuestia in Cilicia, d. 428

Victorinus-Pettau, d. 304

Hebrew and Greek Transliteration

Throughout the notes most Hebrew and Greek words or phrases will be transliterated into English. General guidelines for transliteration are as follows: Hebrew and Greek words or phrases in study notes will always be transliterated. Hebrew and Greek in translator’s notes and text-critical notes will usually be transliterated, but there are some exceptions. Only the first occurrence of a word in any note will be transliterated. Hebrew and Greek words contained in citations of lexical tools (e.g., BDAG 2 s.v. ἄβυσσος) will not be transliterated, nor will Hebrew or Greek words and phrases contained in direct quotations. When appropriate (based on the context within the note) the translation of the word or phrase will follow the transliteration. If a Hebrew or Greek phrase in the notes is extensive, in many cases it will not be transliterated for stylistic reasons to avoid unnecessary length and awkwardness. As per the Unicode® specification for the Hebrew language, furtive patakh has the same placement as the patakh.

Hebrew/English Transliteration


Hebrew Letter	Transliteration	Pronunciation
	Medial	Final
alef	א		’	glottal stop (no sound)
bet	בּ		b	b as in bat
bet (spirant)	ב		v	v as in victor
gimel	ג		g	g as in good
dalet	ד		d	d as in dog
he	ה		h	h as in hat
vav	ו		v	v as in victor
zayin	ז		z	z as in zoo
khet	ח		kh	Scottish ch as in loch
tet	ט		t	t as in top
yod	י		y	y as in young
kaf	כּ		k	k as in king
kaf (spirant)	כ	ך	kh	Scottish ch as in loch
lamed	ל		l	l as in long
mem	מ	ם	m	m as in mice
nun	נ	ן	n	n as in nice
samek	ס		s	s as in see
ayin	ע		’	glottal stop (no sound)
pe	פּ		p	p as in pit
pe (spirant)	פ	ף	f	f as in food
tsade	צ	ץ	ts	ts as in hats
qof	ק		q	k as in king
resh	ר		r	r as in red
sin	שׂ		s	s as in see
shin	שׁ		sh	sh as in shoe
tav	ת		t	t as in top


Hebrew Vowels	Transliteration	Pronunciation
patakh	ַ	a	a as in father
furtive patakh	(see above)	a	a as in father
qamets	ָ	a	a as in father
final qamets he	ָה	ah	a as in father
3ms suffix	ָיו	ayv	av as in avant garde
segol	ֶ	e	e as in met
tsere	ֵ	e	e as in they
tsere yod	ֵי	e	e as in they
segol yod	ֶי	e	e as in they
short hireq	ִ	i	i as in unique
long hireq	ִ	i	i as in unique
hireq yod	ִי	i	i as in unique
qamets khatuf	ָ	o	o as in loft
holem	ֹ	o	o as in role
full holem	וֹ	o	o as in role
short qibbuts	ֻ	u	u as in rule
long qibbuts	ֻ	u	u as in rule
shureq	וּ	u	u as in rule
khatef patakh	ֲ	a	a as in am
khatef segol	ֱ	e	e as in met
khatef qamets	ֳ	o	o as in loft
vocal shewa	ְ	é	e as in met
silent shewa	ְ	omitted	none

Greek/English Transliteration


Greek Letter	English	Pronunciation
	Upper Case	Lower Case
Alpha	Α	α	a	a as in father
Beta	Β	β	b	b as in bat
Gamma	Γ	γ	g	g as in good
Delta	Δ	δ	d	d as in dog
Epsilon	Ε	ε	e	e as in get
Zeta	Ζ	ζ	z	dz as in adds
Eta	Η	η	ē	e as in they
Theta	Θ	θ	th	th as in think
Iota	Ι	ι	i	i as in thin or think
Kappa	Κ	κ	k	k as in king
Lambda	Λ	λ	l	l as in long
Mu	Μ	μ	m	m as in mice
Nu	Ν	ν	n	n as in nice
Xi	Ξ	ξ	x	x as in ax
Omicron	Ο	ο	o	o as in got
Pi	Π	π	p	p as in pit
Rho	Ρ	ρ	r	r as in red
Sigma	Σ	σ (final = ς)	s	s as in see
Tau	Τ	τ	t	t as in top
Upsilon	Υ	υ	u	u as the oo in book
Phi	Φ	φ	ph	ph as in phase
Chi	Χ	χ	ch	Scottish ch as in loch
Psi	Ψ	ψ	y	ps as in tipsy
Omega	Ω	ω	ō	o as in boat
Rough breathing mark		῾	J	ἡμῖν = Jēmin ὥστε = Jōste υἱός = Juios

谁能寄居你的圣山？（这些章节标题都是使用人工智能从英语翻译过来的）Close

谁能寄居你的圣山？
（这些章节标题都是使用人工智能从英语翻译过来的）