Bible Commentaries

John 20:1 — least two trips to the sepulchre, and probably three, as follows: (1) the first trip, as recorded here, while it was still dark, (2) the second when she followed Peter and John (whom she quickly notified) and who ran on ahead of her to the tomb, and (3) when she came with the other women bringing the spices after the sun was risen. John specifically stressed that the tomb was "nigh" to the cross (John 19:42); and the sudden onset of the high sabbath at sunset prevented any of the witnesses

Acts 1:8 — to be true. The apostles had already complied with the requirement to be baptized (see under Acts 1:5); and since Luke quoted Jesus as saying that those who refused John's baptism had "rejected the counsel of God against themselves" (Luke 7:30), it must be allowed that if any of the apostles had done such a thing, they never could have received the promised Spirit. This same teaching is even more clearly evident under Acts 2:38, which see. Since the apostles had already complied (through

Acts 15:19-20 — or of the Lord's own apostles, or of the unity of the whole Christian body. F. J. Hort, The Christian Ecclesia (London, 1914), p. 82. The four prohibitions here are that the Christians should refrain from: (1) pollutions of idols, (2) fornication, (3) things strangled, and (4) blood. The binding nature of these restrictions was pointed out by Root, thus: Not only the apostles and elders and brethren, but also the Holy Spirit concurred in the message (Acts 15:28), making this an inspired message,

Acts 8:15-17 — Spirit. That they might receive the Holy Spirit … has reference to receiving the Holy Spirit in miraculous measure, because, having been baptized, they had already received the gift ordinary of the Holy Spirit as Peter promised on Pentecost (Acts 2:38). Fallen upon none of them … means that none of them had received such miraculous powers as had been conferred upon the Twelve on Pentecost. As Don DeWelt noted, "Luke used the term `fallen upon' to describe the reception of the special

Romans 6:22 — the sacred text or in the experience of believers. But isn't baptism the new birth? Yes, of course, in the sense of its being necessary thereunto, and an integral part of it, being specifically that "water" of which people must be born (John 3:5); but the new birth is not of water only, but "of the Spirit" as well. These dual elements in the new birth relate justification and sanctification as follows: (1) The WATER of the new birth (baptism) is the condition upon which justification

1 Corinthians 14:27-28 — whenever tongues may be used. These are: 1.    No more than three may speak in a tongue on any given occasion. 2.    All tongue-speaking must be done "in turn," that is, by persons speaking one at a time. 3.    On no occasion may tongues be used unless an interpreter is standing by to tell the audience every word that was spoken. To these prohibitions, there must be added a number of others which are given in this chapter, including

Galatians 6:4-5 — the slander that would make Paul's rejection of the "works" of the Law of Moses as having any connection with salvation, to be in any sense inclusive of the "work of faith" which is required of every Christian (1 Thessalonians 1:3). Hendriksen revealed a shade of meaning accurately in his rendition thus: "Let each one test his own work; then his reason to boast will be in himself alone, and not in (comparing himself) with someone else." William Hendriksen, New Testament

Ephesians 1:1 — 2:6) and Barnabas (Acts 14:14), Paul's use of the title for himself was always in the highest sense of a plenary representative of Christ who in harmony with the will of God had personally commissioned him; and as in the instance of the Twelve (Luke 6:13) the "Lord named him" an apostle. The title was not one which "developed" in the early church but goes back to Christ himself. To the saints … This frequent designation of all Christians in apostolic times regarded what they

Philippians 4:21-23 — his own hand, as he sometimes did, thus making such an inscription a kind of signature. Knight wrote that "One would expect in a personal letter such as this to find in the closing salutations a number of names." John A. Knight, op. cit., p. 352. Despite the fact of many scholars accepting such a proposition, such an expectation as that mentioned by Knight is as fantastically unreasonable as any that could be contrived by the imagination. In no other scholarly assumption is there such a vacuum

Colossians 1:12 — ff). III.    Belief enters into qualification for salvation; and, as Jesus said, "This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent" (John 6:29). IV.    Repentance also figures in salvation (see Luke 13:3; Luke 13:5); but it is God who "grants" repentance. "To the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance unto life" (Acts 11:18). V.    Confession of Christ is one of the prior conditions of salvation (Matthew

Colossians 2:1 — they would be called today. It is inconceivable that Paul would have named two of them, omitting the other, without some good reason for the distinction. Very well. What was that distinction? There existed churches at all three places (Colossians 4:13); Paul addressed letters to Colossae and Laodicea (Colossians 4:16) but apparently did not address a letter to Hierapolis. This can be logically explained only on the premise that Paul was well acquainted in two of these cities and unacquainted in Hierapolis.

Colossians 2:13 — grace," if encountered once, has been encountered a hundred times; but it is not, in any sense, true. In the New Testament, baptism is said to be the reality of which even the salvation of Noah and his family was only "the figure" (1 Peter 3:21). Furthermore, it is a gross error to suppose that baptism in any true sense whatever is accomplished without the existence of the prior conditions of faith, repentance and confession. One is surprised that even Lipscomb would declare that "Baptism

1 Thessalonians 4:13 — concerning them that fall asleep; that ye sorrow not as the rest, who have no hope. SECOND ADVENT OF CHRIST We would not have you ignorant … This was one of Paul's favorite ways of introducing a new and important subject. It is also found in Romans 1:13; Romans 11:25; 1 Corinthians 10:1; 1 Corinthians 12:1, and 2 Corinthians 1:8, in all of which, as here, the term "brethren" is used with it for the sake of conveying the idea of tenderness and affection in what he was about to say. Concerning

1 Timothy 2:8 — up holy hands … This is not a prescription demanding any posture in prayer, but: It is merely an allusion to the ancient practice of presenting the uplifted hands in respectful petition to God, as in Nehemiah 8:6; Psalms 141:2 and Lamentations 3:41. E. M. Zerr, Bible Commentary Vol. VI (Marion, Indiana: Cogdill Foundation, 1954), p. 168. Without wrath and disputing … Hervey speaks of a number of instances cited by Chrysostom in which angry and vindictive prayers were offered to God against

Hebrews 11:12 — children, they must have belonged to his concubines. Some commentators, notably Hallet, think Keturah was among the souls "they had gotten in Haran" (Genesis 12:5); and it has been suggested that Keturah was the mother of Eliezar (Genesis 15:2-3), the apparent heir of Abraham for many years, suggesting that Eliezar was the oldest of the sons of the concubines. The number of concubines, though not given, was certainly plural (Genesis 25:6). The events relative to Hagar do not contradict the

Hebrews 11:5 — seems to have been written to cover that very point. There is no evidence that Enoch, any more than Elijah, was a sinless person; but he was doubtless of those mentioned by Paul, whose sins God "passed over," for sufficient reason (Romans 3:25 ff). That he was evidently blameless should be understood relatively, that is, in his relationship to his contemporaries.

Hebrews 12:27 — — when (in Dryden's words) the last and dreadful hour This crumbling pageant shall devour — the whole material universe will be shaken to pieces, and the only things to survive will be those that are unshakable. F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 383. The doctrine of the world's end and the cataclysmic developments associated with it are so forcibly brought to view here, that a little further study of such a theme is due. THE END OF THE WORLD The end of the world and its replacement with new heavens

Hebrews 3:1 — calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, even Jesus. Holy brethren is the third term of endearment already used in this epistle to describe God's people, the other two being "sanctified" and "sons" (Hebrews 2:11-13). That mortal man should be considered holy is due to the imputation of Christ's righteousness and to their having received the gift of the Holy Spirit subsequent to their being baptized into Christ (Acts 2:38). Thus their holiness was not in any sense

James 2:13 — misunderstood passage in the New Testament; but the interpretation presented here flows out of deep convictions: (1) that here indeed we have the inspired word of God; (2) that this portion of the New Testament is as easily understood as any other; (3) that the simple answers are the true ones; (4) that there is not the slightest contradiction between Paul and James; (5) that Paul's affirmation that we are justified "by faith" and James' declaration that we are justified "by works"

James 4:8 — expression, "Let us draw near," as used in Hebrews 10:22 ff, has a marked application to conversion, faith, repentance and baptism, all three being specifically referred to. See full comment on that passage in my Commentary on Hebrews, pp. 229-232. It is of special importance that Hebrews was also written to Christians and yet contains this very pronounced paragraph on the conversion of alien sinners; and there is no good reason for supposing that James did not do the same thing here. DRAWING