the Week of Proper 13 / Ordinary 18
Click here to join the effort!
Read the Bible
Easy-to-Read Version
Hebrews 4:8
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- InternationalDevotionals:
- EveryParallel Translations
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day.
For if Iesus had giuen them rest, then would he not afterward haue spoken of another day.
For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on.
For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.
We know that Joshua did not lead the people into that rest, because God spoke later about another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.
For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day.
If Joshua had really given the people rest, there would not be any need for God to talk about another day of rest.
For if Y'hoshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later of another "day."
For if Jesus had brought them into rest, he would not have spoken afterwards about another day.
For if Iesus had giuen them rest, then would he not after this haue spoke of an other day.
For if Joshua the son of Nun had given them rest, he would not afterward have spoken of another day.
If Joshua had given the people the rest that God had promised, God would not have spoken later about another day.
For if Joshua had caused them to rest, he would not have spoken about another day after these things.
For if Joshua gave them rest, then He would not have afterwards spoken about another day.
[This mention of a rest was not a reference to their entering into Canaan.] For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak about another day [of opportunity] after that.
For if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterward of another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have said anything about another day.
For if Yehoshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterward of another day.
For if JoshuaJesus) appears to be a word play on the name Joshua.">[fn] had given them rest, he would not have spoken later about another day.
---but if Jeshu-bar-Nun had established them in rest [fn] , he [fn] not have spoken afterwards of another day:
For if Joshua, the son of Nun, had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterwards of another day.
For yf Iesus had geuen them reste, then woulde he not afterwarde haue spoken of another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterward of another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterward of another day.
For if Joshua had given them the rest, he would not have afterward spoken of another day.
For if Joshua had given them the true rest, we should not afterwards hear God speaking of another still future day.
For if Jhesus hadde youun reste to hem, he schulde neuere speke of othere aftir this dai.
For if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterward of another day.
For if Jesus had given them rest, then he would not afterward have spoken of another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken afterward about another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.
Now if Joshua had succeeded in giving them this rest, God would not have spoken about another day of rest still to come.
If Joshua had led those people into God's rest, He would not have told of another day after that.
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later about another day.
For, if, unto them, Joshua had given rest, it had not in that case, concerning another day, been speaking, after, these things.
For if Jesus had given them rest he would never have afterwards spoken of another day.
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day.
For if Iosue had geven them rest then wolde he not afterwarde have spoke of another daye.
for if Joshua had given them rest, He would not concerning another day have spoken after these things;
For yf Iosua had geuen them rest, the wolde he not afterwarde haue spoken, of another daye.
for if Joshuah had given them rest, David would not afterwards have mentioned another day.
And so this is still a live promise. It wasn't canceled at the time of Joshua; otherwise, God wouldn't keep renewing the appointment for "today." The promise of "arrival" and "rest" is still there for God's people. God himself is at rest. And at the end of the journey we'll surely rest with God. So let's keep at it and eventually arrive at the place of rest, not drop out through some sort of disobedience.
The rest didn't happen when Joshua led them into the promised land. The rest is still promised to us today.
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
Jesus: that is, Joshua, Acts 7:45
had: Hebrews 11:13-15, Deuteronomy 12:9, Deuteronomy 25:19, Joshua 1:15, Joshua 22:4, Joshua 23:1, Psalms 78:55, Psalms 105:44
Reciprocal: Exodus 17:9 - unto Joshua Exodus 33:14 - rest Numbers 13:16 - Jehoshua Deuteronomy 3:28 - for he shall Deuteronomy 31:3 - and Joshua Joshua 11:23 - And the land Joshua 19:51 - These are 1 Chronicles 7:27 - Jehoshuah Nehemiah 8:17 - Jeshua Psalms 116:7 - thy rest Isaiah 63:14 - the Spirit Jeremiah 31:2 - when
Cross-References
At harvest time, Cain brought a gift to the Lord . He brought some of the food that he grew from the ground, but Abel brought some animals from his flock. He chose some of his best sheep and brought the best parts from them. The Lord accepted Abel and his gift.
The Lord asked Cain, "Why are you angry? Why does your face look sad?
Later, the Lord said to Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" Cain answered, "I don't know. Is it my job to watch over my brother?"
Then the Lord said, "What have you done? You killed your brother and the ground opened up to take his blood from your hands. Now his blood is shouting to me from the ground. So you will be cursed from this ground.
Now when you work the soil, the ground will not help your plants grow. You will not have a home in this land. You will wander from place to place."
Then the Lord said to Cain, "No, if anyone kills you, I will punish that person much, much more." Then the Lord put a mark on Cain to show that no one should kill him.
The punishment for killing Cain was very bad. But the punishment for killing me will be many times worse!"
Seth also had a son. He named him Enosh. At that time people began to pray to the Lord .
When Abner arrived at Hebron, Joab met him in the gateway, pulled him aside to talk in private, and then stabbed him in the stomach. So he got his revenge against Abner. Joab killed Abner because Abner had killed Joab's brother Asahel.
I had two sons. They were out in the field fighting. There was no one to stop them. One son killed the other son.
Gill's Notes on the Bible
For if Jesus had given them rest,.... That is, Joshua; for Hosheah, Joshua, and Jesus, are one and the same name; or Jesus himself, as two of Stephens's copies read; and so Joshua is called Jesus by the Septuagint interpreters on Exodus 17:10 and other places where he is mentioned; and also, by Josephus h, and Philo i the Jew. The Syriac version, lest any should mistake this for Jesus Christ, adds, "the son of Nun": who is certainly the person designed, as the apostle's reasoning shows; who was an eminent type of Jesus Christ: there is an agreement in their names, both signify a saviour, Joshua was a temporal saviour, Christ a spiritual one; and in their office they were both servants; and in their qualifications for their office, such as wisdom, courage, faithfulness, and integrity. Joshua was a type of Christ in many actions of his life; in the miracles he wrought, or were wrought for him; in the battles he fought, and the victories he obtained; in saving Rahab and her family; in receiving the Gibeonites, who came submissively to him; and in leading the children of Israel into Canaan's land, which he divided to them by lot: but though he brought them into a land of rest, into the typical rest, where they had rest for a while from their temporal enemies, yet he did not give them the true spiritual rest: had he,
then would he not afterward have spoken of another day; that is, God, in David's time, and by him, would not have so long after appointed another day of rest; meaning, not any particular day of the week, but the whole Gospel dispensation, in the times of the Messiah; wherefore the apostle concludes as follows.
h Antiqu. Jud. l. 4. c. 7. sect. 2. c. 8. sect. 46, 47, 48. & l. 5. c. 1. sect. 1. & passim. i De Charitate, p. 698, 699, 700.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
For if Jesus - Margin, “That is, Joshua.” The Syriac renders it, “Joshua the son of Nun.” “Jesus” is the Greek mode of writing “Joshua,” and there can be no doubt that Joshua is here intended. The object is to prove that Joshua did” not” give the people of God such a rest as to make it improper to speak of a “rest” after that time. “If Joshua had given them a complete and final rest; if by his conducting them to the promised land all had been done which had been contemplated by the promise, then it would not have been alluded to again, as it was in the time of David.” Joshua “did” give them a rest in the promised land; but it was not all which was intended, and it did not exclude the promise of another and more important rest.
Then would he not - Then “God” would not have spoken of another time when that rest could be obtained. The “other day” here referred to is that which is mentioned before by the phrase “today,” and refers to the time in which it is spoken of long after Joshua, to wit, in the time of David.
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse Hebrews 4:8. For if Jesus had given them rest — It is truly surprising that our translators should have rendered the Ιησους of the text Jesus, and not Joshua, who is most clearly intended. They must have known that the יהושע Yehoshua of the Hebrew, which we write Joshua, is everywhere rendered ιησους, Jesus, by the Septuagint; and it is their reading which the apostle follows. It is true the Septuagint generally write Ιησους Ναυη, or Υἱος Ναυη, Jesus Nave, or Jesus, son of Nave, for it is thus they translate יהושע בן נון Yehoshua ben Nun, Joshua the son of Nun; and this is sufficient to distinguish it from Jesus, son of David. But as Joshua, the captain general of Israel, is above intended, the word should have been written Joshua, and not Jesus. One MS., merely to prevent the wrong application of the name, has Ιησους ὁ του Ναυη, Jesus the son of Nave. Theodoret has the same in his comment, and one Syriac version has it in the text. It is Joshua in Coverdale's Testament, 1535; in Tindal's 1548; in that edited by Edmund Becke, 1549; in Richard Cardmarden's, Rouen, 1565; several modern translators, Wesley, Macknight, Wakefield, c., read Joshua, as does our own in the margin. What a pity it had not been in the text, as all the smaller Bibles have no marginal readings, and many simple people are bewildered with the expression.
The apostle shows that, although Joshua did bring the children of Israel into the promised land, yet this could not be the intended rest, because long after this time the Holy Spirit, by David, speaks of this rest the apostle, therefore, concludes,
