Bible Commentaries

Exodus 12:37-42 — hundred thousand… men" The bold denial of this number by men who really know nothing about it is characteristic of some writings. "That such a figure has no basis in fact is clear from almost every point of view."J. Coert Rylaarsdam, op. cit., p. 925. The author of that denial then went on to prove his point by asserting that: (1) such a large number could not have lived in Egypt; (2) they could not have survived in the desert, and (3) they could not have found enough room in Canaan! Millions of

1 Kings 8:46-53 — SOLOMON The theological views of Solomon are crystal clear in this prayer: (1)    The omnipotence of God is evident in his conviction that God was able to hear and answer prayer in any land on earth "far or near" (1 Kings 8:46). (2)    Although God's name was associated with the house Solomon built, God's "dwelling place" is emphatically declared to be "in heaven" (1 Kings 8:32; 1 Kings 8:34; 1 Kings 8:36; 1 Kings 8:39; 1 Kings 8:43; 1 Kings 8:45; 1 Kings 8:48)

2 Kings 25:1-3 — prophecies and warnings of God's great prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah, who had specifically warned Zedekiah that God had delivered apostate Israel into the hands of Babylon and that the people would serve the king of Babylon for seventy years (Jeremiah 25:11-12). Furthermore, Zedekiah had sworn with a solemn oath invoking the name of Jehovah that he would be faithful to his overlord the king of Babylon. Why then, did he rebel? (1) He did NOT believe what the prophets of God had prophesied. (2) He was

Psalms 59:1-5 — family; even his son Absalom hated him; even one of his counselors, Ahithophel betrayed him; and besides these, there were foreign enemies on all sides: Philistines, Edomites, Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Syrians, Mesopotamians, etc."Ibid., p. 12. As we have frequently noticed, many of these psalms deal with hatred, opposition, oppression, injustice, slander, violence, etc., encountered by one who trusts God and looks to him continually for deliverance from implacable enemies on all sides. "The

Leviticus 22:26-33 — Egypt, to be your God: I am Jehovah." Note the reiteration of "I am Jehovah" in each of the last four verses. This paragraph gives further instructions regarding the sacrifices. An alleged `contradiction' is sometimes claimed with reference to Leviticus 22:30, where the sacrifice was commanded to be eaten "on the same day"; whereas, in Leviticus 19:6, two days were allowed for eating it.Ronald E. Clements, op. cit., p. 59. The explanation is simple enough. The rules for the priests were MORE STRICT than

Micah 1:1 — the Holy Spirit, validating the entire book of Micah as the word of the Lord. Concerning this author, and other inspired writers of the Old Testament, an apostle of Jesus Christ declared that "Holy men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21), and that the prophets themselves, far from merely commenting upon current conditions as they discerned and interpreted them, were delivering the true words of God to men, "which the Spirit of God that was in them did testify" (1 Peter 1:11).

Deuteronomy 31:1-8 — idiom is valuable in that it sheds light on the many foolish theories based on 1 Peter 3:19, concerning what Jesus did while he was dead and buried! Again from Macknight: "If Christ is said by Paul to go and do what he did by his apostles (Ephesians 2:17), then the apostle Peter with equal propriety may say that Christ "went and preached" by the hands of Noah."Ibid. The true meaning here is that the speaking Moses did "was the consequence of his having arranged, disposed, or set himself to speak."W.

Luke 21:32-33 — pass away, till all things be accomplished Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. Throughout this discourse, Jesus was giving prophecies related to two future events: (1) the destruction of Jerusalem with its temple, and (2) his Second Coming in glory; therefore, Jesus' use of the word "generation" in this passage requires it to be understood in two senses. It has a perfect application to both events when so understood. This generation… meaning the people

John 1:14 — that others besides the author had opportunity to witness the Word incarnate; and thus the statement here has the weight of a confession by ALL the apostles of the deity and Godhead of Jesus Christ. The Word became flesh … connects with John 1:1-2 and means that God became a man. This is John's statement of the doctrine of the incarnation, the central mystery of our holy religion. As Hendriksen observed, however, The verb "became" has a very special meaning here. Not "became"

Romans 1:17 — analysis is, however, the overriding consideration in accepting the "righteousness" of this verse as a reference to God's intrinsic righteousness, rather than to man's forensic, or imputed righteousness, is found in Romans itself (Romans 3:25-26), where God's righteousness in "passing over the sins done aforetime" is the real key to the meaning of "righteousness" throughout the epistle, plainly referring to an attribute of God, and not to any imputed righteousness of

Romans 8:37-38 — present, nor things to come, nor powers nor height, nor depth nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. All of the calamities mentioned here were suffered by Paul himself, as a glance at 2 Corinthians 11 will show; and, despite the fact of all things working together for good for Christians, the hardships and sufferings they endure prove that no exemption from life's sorrows has been provided for them. On the contrary, it was doubtless

2 Corinthians 11:32-33 — narrative at the end of it. Hughes commented on this as follows: Paul's rapture into the third heaven is hemmed in, as it were, on one side by the escape from Damascus, and on the other by the humiliating record of the "thorn in the flesh" (2 Corinthians 12:7 ff) … Paul was determined to keep himself in true perspective, that of a weak, unworthy mortal who owes everything to the grace of Almighty God. Philip E. Hughes, op. cit., p. 422. In this connection, it should be remembered

2 Corinthians 12:7 — centuries. The thorn has been speculatively identified as follows: Tertullian thought it was a headache. Tertullian, De Pudis, xiii, 16. Klausner believed it was epilepsy. Joseph Klausner, From Jesus to Paul (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1943), pp. 325-330. Ramsay identified it as recurrent malarial fever. Sir William M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1903), p. 97. Chrysostom said it was "all the adversaries of the Word. R. V. G. Tasker, op. cit.,

Joshua 6 overview — unbelievers who simply will not have it so! Note the following: "The Rahab clan in the city would open the gates or find some other way to let the invaders in.Samuel Holmes, Peake's Commentary on the Bible, Joshua (London: T. C. and E. C. Jack, Ltd., 1924), p. 251. A mine (of explosives) was planted under the walls while the men of Jericho were distracted by the Israelites marching around the city.A critic named Paulus, as quoted by Plummer, advanced this idea. Alfred Plummer, The Pulpit Commentary,

2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 — any sense as conditional. It is a Hebrew idiomatic way of arguing from a certainty. Rest … is not a verb but a noun, being the thing that God will recompense to the just, just as affliction will be meted out to the persecutors. The thought of 2 Thessalonians 1:5-7 was summed up thus by Adam Clarke: The sufferings of the just and the triumphs of the wicked in this life are a sure proof that there will be a future judgment in which the wicked shall be punished and the righteous rewarded Adam

Hebrews 1:2 — Son." The contrast in the manner of God's speaking to the Hebrew prophets and in that "at the end of these days" is vivid indeed. Their revelation came piecemeal, here a little and there a little, line upon line, precept upon precept (Isaiah 28:10-13); the revelation for the new covenant was brought in one vast body of truth. The old system was communicated through many persons, the new through the Son alone; and a proper understanding of that epic truth will dispel forever any notion that

Jude 1:3 — plans, we are not told; but it may be surmised that news from churches in which he was vitally interested might have been the decisive factor. Beloved … The only other example of a New Testament book beginning with this particular word is 3 John 1:2. "As Jude's subject was a very unpleasant one, he hastens to assure his readers of his affection for them, to prevent his strong language from offending them."Alfred Plummer, op. cit., p. 508. Exhorting you to contend earnestly … There

Revelation 17 overview — Christianity, especially when in combination with political power. We shall call this the Apostate Church interpretation. Albertus Pieters, Studies in the Revelation of St. John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1954), p. 250. Although Pieters "reluctantly" voted against this view, for reasons which he cited, and which in no sense justify his decision, he nevertheless admitted that, "This view is held by many of the very best expositors, among whom we may

2 Samuel 20:4-9 — him with it in the body, and shed his bowels to the ground, without striking a second blow; and he died." "Then the king said to Amasa" "This man was a nephew of David, the son of David's sister Abigail, and his father was an Ishmaelite (1 Chronicles 2:13-17).Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 1., p. 56. "Call the men of Judah together to me within three days, and be here yourself" This assignment should have been easy enough for Amasa, as he was specifically recognized as the leader of Absalom's army

2 Samuel 5:6-10 — of Our Lord's earthly ministry, especially the place where he made Atonement for the sins of mankind in his vicarious Death upon Calvary and his Resurrection from the dead, and as the type of that "Heavenly Jerusalem which is our mother" (Galatians 4:26). Regarding David's capture of this city, there is strong disagreement among able scholars regarding the exact time of its capture. As Willis said, "It is debated";John T. Willis, p. 312. and we do not consider the question to be possible of any dogmatic