Bible Commentaries

Jeremiah 6:20-21 — good way (v. 17). Yes God had placed the stumblingblocks in the way of evil which Judah elected to take with such disastrous consequences. It is, as if God had said, "Take your choice; choose your way, either (1) the ancient paths, the good way, or (2) the way with the stumbling-blocks."Anthony L. Ash, Psalms (Abilene, Texas: A.C.U. Press, 1987), p. 88.

Ezekiel 16:49-52 — hast justified thy sisters." These verses put the icing on the cake for Ezekiel's efforts to make her abominations known to Jerusalem. It must be admitted that the prophet had done a remarkably effective job of fulfilling his assignment (Ezekiel 16:2). As for the reasons why Jerusalem's sins were so much worse than those of her sisters Sodom and Samaria, they are resident in the privileges and obligations of the covenant. "To whom much is given, of him much is required" (Luke 12:48). The terrible

Daniel 2:14-16 — Esther defied tradition and custom by going unbidden into the presence of a Persian king at a later time shows how this was true. Therefore, we must conclude that all necessary formalities were observed on this occasion, just as they were in Daniel 2:24, below, and that they were merely passed over here by the abbreviated account. The great fact working for Daniel and the wise men was that the king had a burning desire to find out what the dream meant. Another indication that the account is abbreviated

Hosea 12:2 — Ephraim and Judah, since Jacob was the great ancestor of both. "The prophet pronounces his judgment upon both Israel and Judah."Paul T. Butler, Minor Prophets (Joplin: College Press, 1968), p. 558. "Jehovah hath also a controversy" "The language of Hosea 12:2 is technical."James Luther Mays, Hosea (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976), p. 162. Just as in Hosea 4:1, Hosea is presenting the case against all Israel (both houses) in the terminology of a formal indictment and trial, a trial at which the Lord

Hosea 5:4 — "Their doings will not suffer them to return unto their God; for the spirit of whoredom is within them, and they know not Jehovah." Polkinghorne is correct in his discernment that this passage relates to "the mortal sin of Mark 3:29, 1 John 5:16, etc. Hence they find that God has withdrawn himself so as not to receive their sacrifices (Hosea 5:15)."G. J. Polkinghorne, The New Layman's Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979), p. 931. The word Paul used

Hosea 8:11 — "Because Ephraim hath multiplied altars for sinning, altars have been unto him for sinning." The importance of this statement lies in the testimony which it furnishes to the existence of laws, or a code of laws, in Hosea's time.W. R. Harper, op. cit., p. 321. Of course, that code of laws was none other than the one given by the Lord himself in the Pentateuch. Hindley pointed out that: At any one time, only one altar was to be set up for the nation in the place which God would choose (Deuteronomy 12:26

Amos 1:9 — friendship between Israel and Tyre, dating back to the days of Solomon, and the brotherly covenant of mutual respect and honor which existed between the two peoples. "No king of Israel or Judah had ever made war on Phoenicia."C. F. Keil, op. cit., p. 247. The indifference and cruelty of Phoenicia, the great slave traders of the day, in their dealings with the covenant people of God, ultimately issued in God's destructive judgment against them. The friendliness between Tyre and Israel is mentioned

Amos 3:1 — O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up out of the land of Egypt. "Against the whole family" The indictment is against the entire covenant people, both Judah and Israel. Judah had already been warned of impending doom (Amos 2:4); and, as the principal thrust of the whole prophecy is against Israel, the prophet turned immediately to the business in hand. "Which I brought up out of Egypt" The thing which Amos was called to do lay totally beyond the thought-pattern of God's

Micah 2:8 — this verse was, "You strip the broad-dress-cloak from the upper garment, from those who pass by trustingly, turning away from war, i.e., peaceably disposed."Gleason L. Archer, op. cit., p. 754. The whole verse is, "an allusion to Mosaic law (Exodus 22:25), according to which the coat taken from the poor as a pledge was to be returned before sunset."C. F. Keil, op. cit., p. 445. Deane defended the the Hebrew text of the O.T. in this verse, stating that "there is no reason for altering it."W. J. Deane,

Habakkuk 1:17 — states raised up against them) would continue to devastate the earth as long as God's mercy for all men (in the purpose of redeeming some of them) would prevail. The answer to this question by the prophet, "He himself gave by inspiration in Habakkuk 2."Robert Jamieson, op. cit., p. 828. That answer lay in the prophecy of the doom of Babylon, "The remnant of the peoples shall plunder thee"; but such an answer did not promise any alleviation of the distress of humanity derived from rampant unrighteousness

Zephaniah 1:10-11 — inhabitants of Maktesh; for all the people of Canaan are undone; all they that are laden 'with silver are cut off." "The fish gate" This was one of the north entrances to Jerusalem (Nehemiah 3:1-6). The second quarter was where Huldah the prophetess lived (2 Kings 22:14). Maktesh is not elsewhere mentioned in the Bible. Perhaps all of these places were in the north sector of the city, indicating that the invasion would come from the north. "The hills" probably refers to the terrain upon which the city was

Zechariah 1:14 — remained, and the word of the Lord would yet "go forth from Jerusalem" on the Day of Pentecost when the Gospel Age began. Zion" The use of this term appears to be significant. This was the ancient name (pre-Israelite) of the hill captured by David (2 Samuel 5:7); and, as Baldwin said, "It sometimes stands for the people of Jerusalem in their religious privilege and responsibility."Joyce G. Baldwin, op. cit., p. 99. We believe that to be the reason why the term is used here. The true covenant with

Zechariah 10:3 — he-goats of the people led Israel in the rejection of their Messiah, the anger of God fell upon them and their city again, Jerusalem being utterly destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70. That Zechariah certainly had that in mind is evident from Zechariah 12:2. "The he-goats" "These are the emblems of headstrong wantonness and offensive lust."Robert Jamieson, Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961), p. 860. Our Lord spoke of the reprobate as "the

Matthew 1:22-23 — (Isaiah 7:14) fully understood this as applying to the virgin birth of Christ is irrelevant. God's great prophets did not always know the true meaning of the words God gave them. Peter did not know the full meaning of what he prophesied on Pentecost (Acts 2:38-39); and a miracle was required later (Acts 10) to convince Peter that the Gentiles should be permitted entry into the church. See 1 Peter 1:11-12. In this verse, Matthew uses for the first time an expression found ten times in his gospel and nowhere

Matthew 5:3 — for all necessary and desirable blessing. The poor in spirit are the opposite of the proud, conceited, arrogant and disdainful. Only the poor in spirit can enter God's kingdom. Others will never feel their need nor know their poverty until too late. (2) Another conception of the poor in spirit is seen in the account of this beatitude by Luke (Luke 6:20), "Blessed are ye poor." Dummelow expressed it thus, "A Christian, whether rich or poor, must have the spirit of poverty, i.e., he must

Matthew 7:1 — of miscellaneous exhortations and is not easily conformable to any formal outline. Judge not that ye be not judged. (Matthew 7:1) The word "judge" in this place is translated from a Greek word, [@krino], also found in such passages as John 12:48; Acts 17:31; and 2 Timothy 4:1, indicating that the type of judging forbidden in this place is that of presuming to determine salvation, or the lack of it, in others. Not even Christ did this while on earth. "I came not to judge the world but

Mark 10:35 — in this incident. This was not to "spare the Twelve" as the Markan theorists allege; for Matthew did not spare the Twelve at all, even relating the indignation of the group against "the brethren," not against their mother (Matthew 20:24). Of course, this request was childish in that they supposed Jesus would agree to their request even before they had stated it. The request itself, stated immediately afterward, had all kinds of things wrong with it: (1) It showed a lack of faith

Mark 14:3 — ANOINTED FOR HIS BURIAL This is a second anointing of Jesus, the other being recorded in Luke 7:37-50; but "it is absurd to represent the two anointings as the same."A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1922), p. 187, footnote. Simon, a leper had been healed by Jesus; but he retained the name to distinguish him from other Simons, that being a very common name. Simon evidently made this dinner in honor of the Lord. A woman having an alabaster cruse …

Mark 6:14 — spanned the life and public ministry of Jesus: From a family characterized by intrigue and violence, "he appears as a sensual, cunning, capricious, cruel, weak, unscrupulous, superstitious, despotic prince (Matthew 14:9; Luke 3:19; Luke 13:31-32)."A. Elwood Sanner, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1964), p. 320. It may well be doubted that this Herod believed in the resurrection of the dead; but a guilty conscience is a strong persuader, and his fearfully guilty

Mark 6:29 — jurisdiction. Matthew clearly indicated that the murder of John entered into Jesus' decision to withdraw east of Galilee (Matthew 14:13); and we cannot agree with Cranfield who thought "Matthew misunderstood Mark,"C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit., p. 213. as if there had to be only one reason why Jesus withdrew. The reasons for Christ's withdrawal were complex: (1) He and his disciples needed rest. (2) Jesus needed an opportunity to instruct the Twelve privately. (3) Herod was showing interest in