Chapter, Paragraph

 1 Intro |           better if you use the R.V. I have only rarely pointed
 2 Intro |         differences between the R.V. and the A.V., but have
 3 Intro |      Revised Standard Version.~ R.V. — Revised Version.~ Young —
 4 1,4   |           prophets” (Amos 7:14, R.V. mg.).~ In contradistinction
 5 2,5   |           note tenses in 2:18f, R.V.). These verses (2:18-27)
 6 3,2   |       self-emptying (Phil. 2:7, R.V. — the “kenosis” theory)
 7 4,2   |         of the prophets” (7:14, R.V. mg.) goes beyond the rejection
 8 4,3   |         21:6; 22:8, 9, 28 — cf. R.V. text and mg.). No distinction
 9 4,6   |      understandable by men. The R.V. mg. in ver. 3 is correct.~
10 4,6   |        past. Siccuth and Chiun (R.V). are generally taken to
11 5,2   |           marginal notes in the R.V. testifies to difficulties
12 5,3   |            Baal-peor (Num. 25:3,R.V.mg.), Baal-zebub (IIKings
13 5,3   |          21f, Deut. 23:17, both R.V. nig.). This led in turn
14 5,4   |         about his marriage (the R.V. mg. is preferable in 1:
15 5,7   |         B.C.) or even Shalmaneser V (726-722 B.C.), or whether
16 6,5   |        revolt against Shalmaneser V, Tiglath-Pileser’s successor (
17 6,8   |    physically, cf. Judges 6:22 (R.V.), 13:22; ISam. 6:19; IISam.
18 6,8   |         in part (Rom. 11:7, 25, R.V.) came upon Israel because
19 6,1   |           a Quisling (ver. 12, R. V.).~ The result was that
20 6,8   |           should be read in the R.V.~ The second woe deals with
21 6,5   |        15f). Note carefully the R.V. mg. in 42:3f.~ The second
22 7,2   |         or Micaiah (Jer. 26:18, R.V.), was a native of Moresheth-gath (
23 7,5   |     present heathen world (read R.V. mg. in 4:5).~ The following
24 7,6   |          R.S.V.) as against the R.V., which follows the Hebrew
25 8,6   |    possible to justify both the R.V. text and mg. in ver. 10,
26 9,3   |     Sennacherib; in ver. 12 the R.V. mg. should be followed.
27 10,5  |          3 to ver. 15 as in the R.V. mg.~ Though the first effect
28 11,5  |           waking over them (see R.V. mg. for word-play). Much
29 11,7  |    worship of other gods (see ch. V, p. 36ff.).~ When Jeremiah
30 11,8  |        A.V.), but “pour it out”(R.V.).~ Note that already Jeremiah
31 11,2  |         was uncircumcised). The R.V. should be con­sulted here. “
32 11,2  |          their uncircumcision” (R.V). means there is no circumcised
33 11,2  |          missed nor made again (R.V. mg.), because that which
34 11,2  |         condemnation (8:8f, see R.V.). The scribes and the wise
35 11,4  |           was restrained (36:5, R.V., mg). from entering the
36 12,3  |        words in ver. 7; for the R.V. text see IISam. 3:21 (send
37 12,3  |         21 (send away), for the R.V. mg. see Exod 6:1 (let go,
38 13,7  |            the elders (ver. 11, R.V.).~ (c) The Canaanite fertility
39 13,8  |      wresting of judgment (9:9, R.V.), based on the belief that
40 13,8  |          had forsaken the land (R.V. mg,). Then the coals of
41 13,9  |          little while (ver. 16, R.V.),1 and would then bring
42 13,0  |         him into exile (ver. 4, R.V. mg.). Then in the evening
43 13,6  |         great rusty caldron (so R.V). in which the contents
44 14,5  |         either render as in the R.V. or perhaps better “the
45 15,1  |            6 — Gh. 4:1-14. Vision V — The Golden Lampstand.~
46 15,3  |        used of a man (Mal. 2:7, q.v.); for Hag. 1:13 see p.
47 15,4  |  rebuilding of the Temple, IV and V with Joshua and Zerubbabel,
48 15,4  |           both A.V. carpenters, R.V. smiths are too precise)
49 15,4  |      priests is a sign (ver. 8, R.V). of the future removal
50 15,4  |         the Messiah, the Shoot (R.V. mg , cf. 6:12 mg.; Isa.
51 15,4  |      carved by Jehovah Himself.~ ~V. The Golden Lampstand (Ch.
52 15,5  |           do not doubt that the R.V. mg. is correct in ver.
53 15,5  | priest-king as expressed by the R.V. text.~ ~
54 15,7  |   probably better to follow the R.V. mg. in ver. 10. The reference
55 16,4  |           hosts (ver. 7 — A.V., R.V. messenger; the context
56 16,4  |           of the covenant (3:2. R.V. mg.), i.e. the Angel of
57 16,6  |         repentance (ver. 6, see R.V. mg). or the ban. In the
58 17,8  |        had to be continued. The R.V. is correct in its rendering
59 17,1  |        with the end times.~ The R.V. of ver. 9 should be noted.
60 17,1  |        Similarly in ver. 13 the R.V. is correct in rendering “
61 17,1  |    ancient of days (Rev. 1:13f, R.V.).~ ~In the Prophet Daniel
62 17,2  |           of the end” (ver. 19, R.V.). Such an extension of
63 18,1  |    adopted by both the A.V. and R.V.; we should, however, do
64 18,2  |   addition, as reference to the R.V. mg. will sometimes, but
65 18,3  |   obscured in the A.V., but the R.V. sets out the long lines,
66 18,3  |            As translated by the R.V. the following verses have
67 18,3  |        division of lines in the R.V. translation.~ Ch. 4 resembles
68 18,3  |          faulty division in the R.V.~ Metrically ch. 3 is the
69 18,3  |        verses (indicated by the R.V). in which each verse begins
70 18,4  |          see especially ver. 7, R.V. Jerusalem’s lovers (vers.
71 18,5  |           more correct than the R.V., though its force might
72 18,7  |         iniquity. In ver. 7 the R.V. is probably correct in
73 18,7  |           be rendered as in the R.V. margin:~ Unless thou hast