Bible Commentaries

Exodus 24:17-18 — (Matthew 17). This concludes the Scriptural record of the giving of the Old Covenant. We cannot leave this without noting the astounding declaration of Davies that, "Jeremiah corrected Moses by omitting any reference to blood in the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34), our Lord corrects Jeremiah by reintroducing the blood."G. Henton Davies, 20th Century Commentary (New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1955), p. 139. Such "mixed up" comments by critical scholars is common, and, for that reason, we shall

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

Leviticus 14:1-9 — be cleansed." This is to indicate that the leper must do his share to become pure. He himself must seek to attain purity by way of repentance and appropriate conduct.Meshekh Hahmah, Wellsprings of Torah, Vol. 1 (New York: The Judaic Press, 1969), p. 235. That the Jewish understanding of this is correct is corroborated by the N.T. appearance of exactly the same thought in the commandment of Ananias to Saul of Tarsus, "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins" (Acts 22:16).W. E. Vine, Expository

Amos 5:23 — either skipped the questions raised by this verse as did McKeating;Henry McKeating, op. cit., p. 46. (2) dismissed the verse on the grounds that the only thing God had against anything at Bethel was the worshipper's violation of the rights of the poor; (3) suggested that instruments of music were a part of the regularly established Hebrew worship; or (4) affirmed that, "There is no hint that the ritual was irregular."James Luther Mays, op. cit., p. 107. (5) Barnes thought that the thing God condemned

Matthew 27:66 — "his day"? The presumption that would make it so is offensive to the emotions and contrary to reason. THE SEVEN WORDS FROM THE CROSS These were: 1.    "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34). 2.    "Verily, I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). 3.    "Woman, behold thy son … Behold thy mother" (John 19:26-27). 4.    "My

Mark 1:23-24 — cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus thou Nazarene? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the holy one of God. THE HEALING OF THE DEMONIAC IN THE SYNAGOGUE With an unclean spirit … Luke's account of this (Luke 4:31-37) calls this "an unclean demon," the expressions being synonymous. What have we to do with thee … The plural indicates that the demon was speaking either upon behalf of himself and other demons, or for his victim and himself. Regarding

Mark 16:6 — the wisest and best of all ages since then having concurred in the conviction that our Lord did in fact rise from the dead. There could have been no Christianity if he did not. The great historical witnesses of: (1) the calendar, (2) the Lord's Day, (3) the Lord's Supper, (4) Christian baptism, and (5) the progression of Christianity throughout history are perpetual and undying monuments to the fact of Jesus' resurrection. Not one of them has any explanation at all apart from the truth that Jesus

Luke 17:1-2 — between the various pronouncements and that (although Luke does not say so) they were uttered on one and the same occasion."Norval Geldenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1951), p. 431. Hobbs thought the four sayings might be entitled "Four things of which the Christian should beware." These were enumerated by him as "the sin of tempting others (Luke 17:1-2), … the sin of an unforgiving spirit (Luke 17:3-4),

Luke 2:27-28 — They were his "parents" legally; Joseph was his "father" legally; and a student of the New Testament must be out of his senses to suppose that Jesus was reared any other way than as the "supposed" child of Joseph (Luke 3:23), a fact Luke stated. Could it be imagined, even for a moment, that Mary and Joseph would have shared the glorious truth of Jesus' virgin birth with the nosey neighbors of unbelieving Nazareth? or with the secular hypocrites who ran the temple? NO!

Luke 2:4 — does not appear to be certain that Mary was required to make this journey. Clarke stated that "It was not necessary for Mary to have gone to Bethlehem";Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1829), Vol. V, p. 369. that is, it was not necessarily a requirement of Caesar's decree that she should have gone. The priority of the decree as the reason for the journey is plain, for it was the only reason Luke mentioned; but there were doubtless other considerations

John 17:17 — Testament seem thus to limit the grace of God, or to measure it by the ordinary effect produced on the understanding by divine truth. H. R. Reynolds. The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), II, p. 349. Reynolds disagreed that such a "limitation" exists, but he was correct in his mention of "numerous assurances" of the New Testament which prove that it does exist. The proximity of this teaching of Jesus to his promise of the

John 3:20-21 — hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, lest his works should be reproved. But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God. These two verses are a further explanation of John 3:19, spelling out the universal law regarding the hatred of evil men for the truth of God, called here "the light." Also, there is the converse of it, namely, that good men seek and desire the truth. The whole spectrum of human behavior appears

John 5:10 — prophet might, for cause, set aside the sabbath; as the Prophet like unto Moses, Jesus had every right to do so; (2) as God incarnate, Christ had total authority, even referring to himself once as "Lord of the sabbath" (Matthew 12:8); and (3) the Lord's actions often referred to as breaking the sabbath, such as this man's carrying his bed, constituted no violation whatever of God's true law regarding sabbath observance, but only violated the hair-splitting interpretations of it so dear

Romans 1:29-32 — affection, unmerciful: who, knowing the ordinance of God, that they that practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also consent with them that practice them. There are several such lists of sins in Paul's writings, 2 Timothy 3:1-8 and Galatians 5:19-21 being two others. In one of these, Paul attributes such conduct to the "corrupted in mind," and in the other to those practicing the "works of the flesh"; therefore, the same type of sinner is in view in

Romans 3:21 — he would do it by preaching that gospel. Apart from the law … Whiteside and others are quick to point out that Paul here used a term which includes more than the law of Moses, R. L. Whiteside, op. cit., p. 75. but, as pointed out under Romans 3:20, the impossibility of procuring justification under God's divine law automatically argues the impossibility of such a thing's being possible under any other similar kind of law; and, therefore, the translators have wisely left it to read "the

Romans 5:1 — through our Lord Jesus Christ. Justified by faith … has invariably the meaning of "justified by an obedient faith," as in the case of Abraham. See the preceding chapter. Also, for further explanation of this synecdoche, see under Romans 3:22. Both at the beginning and ending of Romans, Paul defined "faith" in the sense of its being "the obedience of faith"; and although this has been cited before, the extravagant and vociferous claims to the effect that Paul really

1 Corinthians 12:10 — Sapphira, saying that "The miracles of mercy stand higher in God's esteem than those which execute his judgments and mete out punishment." J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 123. Prophecy … Gifts of prophecy, including the ability to foretell future events, were the endowment of certain Christians in the apostolic age; and there would appear to have been two orders of these, the higher including those mentioned under

Joshua 17:7-13 — with the modern El-Burj, north of Tanturah. In Roman times it was called Dora (Josephus); it is located on the Mediterranean coast near Mount Carmel."G. T. Manley, The New Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971), p. 322. "En-dor" (Joshua 17:11). "En-dor is the modern Endur 4 miles south of Mount Tabor. Assigned to Manasseh, it was never wrested from the Canaanites. The witch of En-dor, of whom Saul inquired before his last battle (1 Samuel 28:3-7) was probably of

Hebrews 2:14 — (Philadelphia and New York: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1969), p. 115. Partook of the same. Christ took a mortal body, partaking of blood and flesh; and this is an essential Christian doctrine. "He who was manifested in the flesh" (1 Timothy 3:16) was constantly extolled and adored from the earliest Christian times; and the man who would not receive the truth that "Christ came in the flesh" was held to be of the antichrist (1 John 4:3). The old creeds were altogether correct in

2 Samuel 23:1-7 — A MESSIANIC PROPHECY AND A LIST OF THE 37 MIGHTY MEN; A PROPHECY OF THE MESSIAH "Now these are the last words of David: The oracle of David the son of Jesse, the oracle of the man who was raised on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, the sweet psalmist of Israel: `The Spirit of the Lord