Bible Commentaries

Psalms 118:21-24 — words were fulfilled twice in the times subsequent to those of King David. (1)    They were fulfilled in the building of the temple, either that of Solomon, or the second temple, as Dummelow thought.J. R. Dummelow's Commentary, p. 372. It makes no difference, for David wrote before either was built. That is what is so wonderful about this prophecy. Dean Plumptre said, "The illustration seems to have been drawn from one of the stones, quarried, hewn, and marked, away from the site

Psalms 46:4-7 — dwelling place; but the actual meaning might be, "The river of God's presence and favor,"Ibid. The tabernacles of the Most High typically represent, "God's favor, like a river, is distributed to all the Church."Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary, p. 362. "It was the river of God's life-giving presence."The Layman's Bible Commentary, Vol. 9, p. 80. "This river is the perennial fountain of God's grace."The Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 8, p. 358. Yes indeed, these views are acceptable; but there seems also

Psalms 85:8-13 — of that which is "good" (Psalms 85:12), the earth yielding its increase, and all of the glorious conditions described here as having come to pass - all of this seems to speak of the New Heaven and the New Earth spoken of by the apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:13). Such an inspired vision as this must surely have come as a great encouragement to the little band of discouraged Israelites who were struggling with the problems of rebuilding the ravaged city of Jerusalem and constructing the Second Temple. It

Psalms 96:10-13 — therein; Then shall all the trees of the wood sing for joy Before Jehovah; for he cometh, For he cometh to judge the earth: He will judge the world with righteousness, And the peoples with his truth." "This passage expresses the Messianic hope (Psalms 96:13)… but here, as in Malachi 4:6, there is no thought of any personal Messiah. Yahweh himself is the deliverer."W. E. Addis, p. 389. Once more, we have an example of scholarly blindness apparently due to lack of a knowledge of the New Testament.

Ecclesiastes 7:1-4 — death is not better than the day of his birth. However, the death of Christ was better than the day of his birth; because his Church celebrates his death, not his birth. Paul declared that, "It is better to depart and be with Christ (Philippians 1:21-23), Also; "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints" (Psalms 116:15). In spite of these scriptures, we find it very hard to believe that Solomon had anything like that in mind. His viewpoint here seems to be like that of a tribe in

Jeremiah 18:5-10 — conditional, that the condition in every case must be assumed, whether stated or not; that condition being that the forgiven man continues in faith and obedience."Richard C. Trench, Notes on the Parables (Westwood, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1953), p. 164. Upon the authority of the apostle Paul, we find another analogy in the potter's house, namely, that if the potter cannot make the vessel he intended out of the clay, he has the power to make another vessel, a vessel unto dishonor, instead

Jeremiah 4:27-31 — been there! Ash complained that the optimistic note of Jeremiah 4:27 "seems out of place, and some scholars suggest omitting the not. This would seem more harmonious with Jeremiah 4:28!"Anthony L. Ash, Psalms (Abilene, Texas: A.C.U. Press, 1987), p. 73. All such scholar objections are founded upon the rationalistic prejudice that the same author could not prophecy both doom and deliverance at the same time. We reject that whole prejudice out of hand. It is just another one of the false rules followed

Ezekiel 10:9-14 — is a reference to the all-knowing, all-seeing God. Cooke tells us that the pagans also illustrated this characteristic of their gods by making idols covered with eyes.George A. Cooke in International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1936), p. 116 (footnote). Another example of this is found in Zechariah 3:9, where one reads of the Stone that had seven eyes, which stands for the Lord Jesus Christ. The actions of the great Vision in this second appearance of it to Ezekiel, "Enable us

Ezekiel 32:1-10 — THE CROCODILE CAPTURED, SLAIN, AND DEVOURED (Ezekiel 32:1-10) "And it came to pass in the twelfth year, in the twelfth month, in the first day of the month, that the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, Son of man, take up a lamentation over Pharaoh king of Egypt, and say unto him, Thou wast likened unto

Ezekiel 33:23-29 — of the Mosaic covenant. If they had ever read the Book of Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 28) Moses had told them categorically that, if they did not obey all the commandments of the Mosaic covenant, that God would pluck them off the land I (Deuteronomy 28:63). Moreover Ezekiel here cited a whole catalogue of their violations of the sacred covenant. How could they, for a moment, dare to believe that they were indeed the true heirs of God's promise to Abraham? God's verdict was no! The judgments of the Mosaic

Ezekiel 38:1-6 — Tyre," despite the ruling monarch's identification as a human being. Certainly the whole campaign of Gog was instigated and motivated by the Evil One. "Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal" "There is no evidence that a country named Rosh ever existed."RHA, p. 930. This is no problem at all. We believe all of these place-names are symbolical representatives of the the terminal nations of the human race at a time just prior to the Eternal Judgment; and it would appear that the true names of those nations at that

Hosea 9:15 — the very first. At Gibeath, they had rejected God's government and set up their own king; at Baal-peor, that had rejected the stern morality of the Decalogue and "consecrated" themselves to Baal "And Israel joined himself unto Baal-peor" (Numbers 25:3). Gilgal was another place where their inherent apostasy had long been in evidence. "Hosea considered Israel's monarchy to be one of Israel's primary offences against Jehovah; and the only noteworthy incident at Gilgal preserved in...the Old Testament

Amos 5:4 — sections; but the divisions are not very clear, etc."Ibid. Of course, no "editors" or "redactors" had anything to do with Amos. The so-called "evidence" of any such thing is usually pointed out in this fashion: "(This chapter has): a funeral song (Amos 5:1-3); a call to repent (Amos 5:4-7); part of a song of praise (Amos 5:8-9); a warning about injustice (Amos 5:10-13); a further call to repent (Amos 5:14-15); and a further funeral song, or vision of death (Amos 5:16-17)."Ibid. With all due deference to

Amos 7:10-11 — worship of the Israelites. These two verses (Amos 7:10-11) are the first of a three-fold division of this last section of the chapter, and relates to Amaziah's report to the king. The other two are: Amaziah's taking matters into his own hands (Amos 7:12-13), and Amos' answer to Amaziah (Amos 7:14-17). The whole passage is one of remarkable strength and effectiveness. Smith's quotation from George Adam Smith is appropriate: "It `is one of the great scenes of history.' It reports the conflict between a

Amos 7:17 — partition of property among the victors, and exile of the leaders were all part of the ordinary treatment of a conquered people by the victorious invaders."Hughell E.W. Fosbroke, The Interpreter's Bible, Vol. VI (New York: Abingdon Press, 1957), p. 837. It is not necessary to assume that Amaziah's wife willingly became a harlot of the city, although some have assumed that she did. What seems more likely is that, violated by the soldiers of Assyria, and left behind with the residue of the people after

Amos 8:9 — tried to refer this to an eclipse, even attempting to discover which eclipse was meant; but, even as McKeating admitted, "It is pointless to decide that Amos 8:9 refers to an eclipse and then try to identify the eclipse!"Henry McKeating, op. cit., p. 63. No eclipse ever recorded could be an example of the sun's "going down"; and, besides that, no eclipse ever involved more than the tiniest fraction of "the earth." "The language as Amos used it referred to more than just an eclipse of the sun,"Ralph

Zechariah 12:1-2 — Graham), p. 478. Why then, has the current crop of versions eliminated this thought from the passage? Mitchell made it a gloss, and discarded it.Hinckley G. Mitchell, International Critical Commentary, Zechariah (Edinburgh: T and T Clark, 1912), p. 321. Dummelow said, "This does not make sense";J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York City: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 610. and Unger accepted the KJV rendition as "the only one that makes sense."Merrill F. Unger, Zechariah (Grand

Zechariah 4:6 — As Unger observed: "Zechariah's vision was THE WORD OF THE LORD, vitally real and effective for the pressing problems of the hour in which it was initially revealed."Merrill F. Unger, Zechariah (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1963), p. 74. Nor should the meaning of it be restricted to that immediate portion of the word of the Lord addressed to Zerubbabel. (See a full discussion of this candlestick as the word of God in my commentary on Hebrews, pp. 181-183.) Watts thought that

Matthew 12:40 — conviction that the expression is a Hebrew idiom referring to any part of three days and nights which included an entire day, the two nights on either side of it, and portions of the other two days. The present custom of accepting a month to be 28, 30, or 31 days is held to be similar to the Hebrew custom of so loosely determining "three days and three nights." The traditional view that Christ was crucified on Friday and raised on Sunday draws its principal support from Matthew's word

Matthew 21:37-38 — son. There is to be no other after Christ. The rejection of Christ by the human race is not to be followed by other offers of reconciliation. This is surely one of the big revelations from this parable. "Last of all, the Son!" If Matthew 21:37-38 above are understood to give a true and accurate picture of the inner thoughts and intentions of the Jewish religious hierarchy in Jerusalem (and so they are understood by this writer), it is crystal clear that they recognized him as the Messiah,