Bible Commentaries

Genesis 28:10 — Mesopotamian ziggurats were equipped with a flight of stairs leading to the summit … Only a stairway can account for Jacob's later description of it as a `gateway to heaven.'"E. A. Speiser, The Anchor Bible (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday and Company, 1964), p. 218. So, there is no textual basis whatever for changing "ladder" to "staircase." The reason lies in the purpose of making this dream purely a human dream without God anywhere visible in it. Note the prejudice here that a "steady stream of angels"

Exodus 30 overview — This chapter is of unusual importance, detailing the instructions for the golden altar of incense (Exodus 30:1-10); the institution of the poll-tax for the ransom of souls (Exodus 30:11-16); the command for making a bronze laver (Exodus 30:17-21) the formula for making the holy oil for anointing (Exodus 30:22-33); and the recipe for making the holy incense (Exodus 30:34-38). Efforts of critics to downgrade this chapter by making it a

Exodus 33:18-23 — just why Moses made such a request of God, and there does not appear to be a fully satisfactory answer. Calvin thought that Moses, "Desired to cross the chasm which had been made by the apostasy of the nation."Calvin, as quoted by Keil, op. cit., p. 236. It also seems to this writer that Moses was conscious of some inferiority in his mission as a mediator between God and man and that he sought to remove it by seeing God's face. This was not to be, however, because Moses, human as he was, could NOT

Psalms 44:17-22 — slaughter." The marginal reading gives us `though' instead of the word `that' at the beginning of Psalms 44:19. These five verses state the problem of the psalmist. "Israel had not been unfaithful to God, and yet afflictions had come upon her."H. C. Leupold, p. 346. Furthermore, the problem was greatly aggravated by the evident fact that their faithfulness to God actually appeared to be "the reason why" they suffered. That is the meaning of the thundering words, "For thy sake" in Psalms 44:22. Of course, this

Ecclesiastes 2 overview — certain Biblical books to be the pseudepigrapha, a device that was thoroughly exploded in 1977 by John A. T. Robinson in his famous book, "Redating the New Testament."Redating the New Testament by A. T. Robinson (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1976.) It seems absolutely incredible that any writer, centuries after Solomon's reprobate life had ended, could possibly have put into Solomon's mouth the conceit that all of his debauchery was committed while he still retained his great wisdom, a notion

Ezekiel 40:6-49 — whereby they went up to it: and there were pillars by the posts, one on this side, and another on that side." The date. "This was fourteen years after the fall of Jerusalem."Henry H. Halley's Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), p. 306. "This was April 28, 523 B.C."F. F. Bruce in the New Layman's Bible Commentary, p. 894. There was the vision of the man measuring the east gate (Ezekiel 40:6-19). Measuring the north gate (Ezekiel 40:20-23). Measuring the south gate (Ezekiel 40:24-31).

Hosea 2:2 — domestic situation; but this impression fades quickly "into the picture of a nation under the figure of a marriage which has gone wrong."J. B. Hindley, The New Bible Commentary, Revised (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 706. The mother here is then the nation of Israel, and the children are individual members of the whole nation, of whom a small remnant were faithful to God; and, it is to that remnant of the faithful that the admonition to "Contend with your mother" was

Numbers 13:30-33 — in that strength to overcome. "They brought up an evil report of the land" The Hebrew from which this is translated is, "They made go at a defamation of the land."Elmer Smick, Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Old Testament, Numbers (Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), p. 131. This has the effect as making their charges to be falsehoods, and certainly this nonsense about the land eating up the people must rank as the yarn of a champion liar! "The Nephilim" is translated "giants" in the Septuagint (LXX), and that

Numbers 31:1-12 — rendered "thousand" here is actually [~'eleph]; "This word is here and elsewhere translated `a thousand,' but more likely means contingent or unit."W. Gunther Plaut, Torah, A Modern Commentary (New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1979), p. 296. If this recent light (1979) on the meaning of the ancient word [~'eleph] is received, there is envisioned here not the triumph of a mere 12,000 men, but of twelve divisions, a far different thing. Also, the fact that the soldiers actually participating

Jonah 4:1 — reputation as a prophet was irreparably damaged. He would be called a false prophet, a liar, a deceiver, and would be ridiculed and denounced for prophesying something which did not occur.William L. Banks, Jonah the Reluctant Prophet (Chicago: Moody Press, 1966), p. 106. (2)    It may very well be that Jonah was also aware of the prophetic implications of Nineveh's conversion, forecasting the ultimate rejection of Israel as God's people, and the coming of the Gentiles into that sphere

Deuteronomy 7:1-5 — 7:2). "Some people take offense at this, as though it represented sub-Christian ethics. Actually, they are taking offense at the theology and religion of the whole Bible."Meredith G. Kline, Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Deuteronomy (Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), p. 165. What the physician does when he removes a cancerous member of a human body is exactly what God is represented as doing here, i.e., removing a terribly-infected portion of the human race to prevent the destruction of all people! God has already

Luke 3:23 — scholarly evidence tends to the view accepted here. "Among the many modern scholars who accept it are Professor Godet and Dean Plumptre."H. D. M. Spence, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), Vol. 16, Luke, p. 71. Robertson affirmed that the theory of this being Mary's line "seems the most plausible," citing the following as concurring in that view: Luther, Bengel, Olshausen, Lightfoot, Wieseler, Robinson, Alexander, Godet,

John 3:16 — view are unconsciously advocating an evolutionary hypothesis of Christianity, rather than the view that Christ brought it all at one time. They forget that the function of the Spirit in the apostles was to help them remember what Jesus said (John 14:26). (3)    The technical reasons alleged against this position are weak. For example, some words in the paragraph beginning here do not appear elsewhere in words attributed to Jesus but do appear in other writings of John, "only

Romans 2:17-20 — distinction at the end of this chapter where he denied them any right to be so called. It is as though Paul had said, "I do not associate myself with you in your usurpation of this honored name." The name "Jew" first occurs in 2 Kings 16:6; but after the Babylonian exile, it was used frequently. It is thought to be derived from "Judah," the name of the principal tribe of Israel, especially of the southern kingdom, after the division. It was an honored and sacred name. Murray

1 Corinthians 14 overview — written by Luke at a time after Paul wrote the Corinthians, "It would seem logical that Luke would have noted the distinction between the two phenomena, if any existed." S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 634. However, Paul taught that there was a genuine gift of "interpretation of tongues" (1 Corinthians 12:10): and this has the effect of denying the gift at Corinth any identity with the miracle of Pentecost, where no interpreter was needed.

Joshua 17:7-13 — utterly drive them out." "From Asher to Michmethath" Philbeck tells us that these cities marked "the northern and southern extremities of Manasseh's territory,"Ben F. Philbeck, The Teachers' Bible Commentary, Joshua (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1972), p. 146. but the trouble with that is that, "This place has not been identified. All that we know is that it is opposite Shechem!"Alfred Plummer, The Pulpit Commentary, Joshua (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), p. 260. Due to textual

Joshua 18:21-28 — same is Jerusalem), Gibeath, and Kiriath; fourteen cities with their villages. This is the inheritance of the children of Benjamin according to their families." As Cook said, "nothing is known of a number of these places."F. C. Cook, op. cit., p. 396. Yet there are included in this list a number of the best known and most important places in all of Palestine: Jericho, Jerusalem, Bethel, Gibeon, Ramah, Beth-horon, Mizpeh, and Gibeah. Boling's assertion that these boundaries of Benjamin set up "contradictory

1 Peter 3:21 — with the water of Christian baptism. (5)    It was the water of the flood which washed away the filth of that evil generation; and it is the water of Christian baptism that, in a figure, washes away the sins of Christians (Acts 22:16). There is a variation in the figure here, which Peter pointed out; namely, that, whereas it was actual filth that was washed away by the flood, it is moral and spiritual filth which are washed away in baptism. The former affected the flesh and not

1 Peter 4:7 — that every one of such expressions noted above was for the purpose of inspiring watchfulness and preparedness on their part. Christ plainly said that not even he himself knew the "day or the hour" of the events of final judgment (Matthew 24:36); and it is irresponsible for anyone to affirm that the apostles decided, in spite of this, that they knew when the Second Advent would be. It is fundamentalist modernist scholars who insist on taking these words of the apostles literally. The church

Judges 12:1-6 — too late. Jephthah is already at home, and at least two months have passed (Judges 11:39), and besides, the claim that the help of Ephraim had been sought and refused, does not accord with Judges 11."The International Critical Commentary, Judges, p. 306. Such criticism takes no account whatever of the device of retrogression in telling a narrative. There are thirty examples of this same phenomenon in Sir Walter Scott's "Ivanhoe." Here, the narrator, whom we believe to have been Samuel, merely went