Bible Commentaries

1 Kings 5:1-6 — Solomon became a center of pagan worship (Ezekiel 8); and that prophet recorded the departure of God's Spirit from it (Ezekiel 10-11). "I will give thee hire,… according to all that thou shalt say" "This amount was so enormous (according to 1 Kings 5:11, 220,000 bushels of wheat and 180,000 gallons of oil) that we are not surprised to find out later that Solomon apparently went bankrupt and had to cede part of his territory to settle the debt."The Layman's Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 30. This alliance

2 Kings 24:1-7 — beginning of the seventy years of captivity for the children of Israel, as Jeremiah had prophesied: "And this whole land (Palestine) shall be a desolation and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years." (Jeremiah 25:11). It should be noted that the `seventy years' of Jeremiah's prophecy should be applied to the sovereignty of the king of Babylon and not uniquely to the actual period that the people of God would be in captivity, although that too was approximately

2 Kings 4:8-17 — they sought out the opportunity to do such a thing and "constrained" Elisha to accept it. Elisha passed to Shunem (2 Kings 4:8). "This place was north of Jezreel, about 20 miles from Carmel where Elisha lived;"The New Layman's Bible Commentary, p. 455. and Elisha was continually passing through it on his way to visit the various schools of the prophets. The Shunammite woman, "According to Rabbi Eliezer, was a sister of Abishag, the beautiful Shunammite woman, well known in the history of David."Adam

Psalms 133:1-3 — Dummelow pointed out, "This exquisite gem of a song describing the blessings of unity was especially suitable as a Pilgrim Song, when rich and poor, priest and peasant, would fraternize on their pilgrimage to Jerusalem."J. R. Dummelow's Commentary, p. 375. Quoting Hengstenberg, Delitzsch stated that, "David here brings to the consciousness of the church the glory of the fellowship of the saints."F. Delitzsch, Vol. V-C. [. 317. "Like the precious oil on the head… of Aaron… that ran down

Psalms 19:4-6 — behavior of the heavenly host speaks eloquently of a Designer, who could not possibly be anyone other than God Himself. This writer once saw in the principal Library in New York City a tabulation of every single eclipse of the sun during the last 2,500 years, giving the exact duration in minutes and seconds of every one of them, and also disclosing the part of the earth in each case where the eclipse would have been visible. Such order and design cannot possibly be imagined apart from the thundering

Psalms 81:6-16 — wilderness. "I proved thee at the waters of Meribah" There were two instances in which God provided water for Israel at Meribah; and these are discussed fully in our Vol. II of the Pentateuch (Exodus), pp. 230-233, and in Vol. III, (Lev.-Num.), pp. 442-445. "O Israel, if thou wouldest hearken" There seems to be an emotional factor in such pleading words as these; and they remind us of the words of the Christ: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem… how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as

Ecclesiastes 7:15-18 — we discussed this thoroughly in the Book of Job; but the summary of them is: (1) the activity of Satan, (2) freedom of the human will, (3) the primeval curse upon the earth for Adam's sake, (4) the element of `time and chance' happening to all men. (5) the lack of wisdom, sometimes, on the part of the righteous (Luke 16:8). and (6) the impartiality of natural disasters such as floods, tornadoes, etc. (these are related to (3). Therefore, we reject the conclusion of Barton that, "Ecclesiastes here

Ecclesiastes 8:9-13 — alternate reading here from the margin (American Standard Version) reads the last two words here as his own hurt. Hendry, however, disagreed with this, "It means to the hurt of the ruled, not that of the ruler."The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 575. Loader also agreed that, "The people in power used their power to hurt others."J. A. Loader, Ecclesiastes, p. 98. We should ignore the marginal reading. "So I saw the wicked buried… etc." "The precise meaning of this verse cannot now be recovered."The

Isaiah 25:6-8 — (the sanctuary) and heaven (the Holy of Holies); (3) of equality among God's children, since it separated between the High Priest and the lesser priests; (4) of the veil of darkness that prevents unbelievers from understanding the Old Testament; and (5) of the law of Moses, being actually the pivotal instrument in that whole system. These are some of the symbolical connotations of the veil of the temple, the most significant fact about that veil being that it was "rent in twain." It is in that second

Isaiah 44:24-28 — any means, a unique thing. "Three centuries before Josiah was born, God prophesied his birth, the name he would bear, and the fact that Josiah would burn the bones of men upon the altar at Bethel (1 Kings 13:2)."The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 10b, p. 158. Not only so, did not the angel of God announce the name of Jesus before he was born; and to Almighty God is that anything different from announcing Cyrus a hundred fifty years before he was born? As Barnes said, "That this passage of Isaiah was seen

Deuteronomy 13:12-18 — thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to. do that which is right in the eyes of Jehovah thy God." Alexander states that the words here rendered "hear tell" sometimes have the meaning of "overhearing," as in Genesis 27:5;W. L. Alexander, op. cit., p. 229. but nothing like that is meant here. It is merely a reference to the common gossip about a town that reaches to another town. In the event of such an evil report coming in about some sister city, the report was to

Deuteronomy 14:22-29 — strange thing it would be if the Israel of God which is the Church should have no obligation whatever along this line. Jesus Christ affirmed that the righteousness of his followers should "exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees" (Matthew 5:20), adding that unless it does so, one cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. Certainly the Pharisees paid tithes of all that they had, and can a Christian's "righteousness" exceed that of the Pharisee while he persists in the denial that he should pay

Deuteronomy 28:49-57 — sacred book of the Hebrew people?" Until the critics can come up with the answer to that, they should forget about their little fairy tale about the Jewish priests authoring any part of Deuteronomy. The gruesome scenes here predicted (Deuteronomy 28:52-57) were accomplished in the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:28).R. K. Harrison, The New Bible Commentary, Revised, Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 225. However, as many discerning writers have noted, "The description

Joshua 16:5-10 — 262. This is a popular assertion and is echoed by a number of scholars. Morton enhanced this declaration by adding that: "Here it says they have become slaves to do taskwork, a situation that arrived under Solomon in the tenth century B.C. (1 Kings 9:15-22)."William H. Morton, Beacon Bible Commentary, Joshua (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1970), p. 358. Are these allegations true? Let's take a look at the passage Morton cited as proof: "Pharaoh the king of Egypt had gone up, and taken Gezer, and burnt

Joshua 24:19-28 — think of God's turning to punish men, it is NOT God who changed but the sinners who deserve the punishment. Woudstra pointed out that these two ideas: (1) God's changelessness and (2) His `turning' "sometimes occur in one and the same chapter (1 Samuel 15:11; 1 Samuel 15:29)."Marten H. Woudstra, op. cit., p. 354. Here again in Joshua 24:23 we find evidence that the children of Israel still indulged a secret reverence and respect for heathen gods, actually having some of these idols in their possession

Judges 18:27-31 — there are indeed editorial additions to the sacred text here and there cannot be denied, as for example in those places where the sacred writer's death and burial are recorded. An example is found in Joshua 24:29-30, and another is in Deuteronomy 34:5-8). The phrase noted here is possibly an editorial addition at a later time than that of Samuel's narration. If these words mean "after the Assyrian captivity," then Samuel who died centuries earlier could not have written them. Baigent stated that,

Judges 9:1-6 — the oak of Moreh in the vicinity of Shechem that he erected his first altar (Genesis 12:6 f). (2)    It was probably by this oak that Jacob, upon his return from Paddan-aram, compelled his family to bury their false gods (Genesis 35:4). (3)    Jacob here bought a parcel of ground east of the city from the sons of Hamor upon which he pitched his tent and erected an altar which he called "El-Elohe-Israel," i.e., "God, the God of Israel." (Genesis 33:18-20). (4)    It

1 Samuel 6:4-9 — who has done all this great harm; but if not, then we shall know that it is not his hand that struck us; it happened to us by chance." "Five golden mice" "The abrupt mention of mice here constitutes a difficulty."The Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 2, p. 905. To us there appears no difficulty whatever. Allegations that there must have been two plagues, one of the tumors, and the other of the mice (or rats) that have been confused and mixed up by some editor or redactor are in fact ridiculous. There was

2 Samuel 7:4-7 — interpreted as God's approval of the temple. That command to rebuild the temple is in the same category as Christ's command to Judas Iscariot to "get on with the betrayal" (John 13:27) or the holy angel's command for Baalam to, "Go with the men" (Numbers 22:35). It was far too late in Israel's history to change their infatuation with an earthly temple. The prophet Amos, long after the glory of Solomon's Temple had so enamoured the children of Israel, prophesied that, "In that day will I raise up the tabernacle

2 Samuel 8:15-18 — Biblical genealogies, both Zadok and Abiathar (or Ahimelech) were descended from Ahitub, a son of Aaron, who was the father of Eleazar and Ithamar, Zadok being descended from Eleazar and Abiathar from Ithamar."The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 305. A slight variation in the spelling of the name of Ahitub (in some versions) is no excuse whatever for the false notion that "the same person is not necessarily meant in both references."Ibid. One other bizarre allegation sometimes leveled against Zadok