Bible Commentaries

Genesis 2:10-14 — Genesis in this. The critical allegation that this part of Genesis was written by one who lived in an arid, desert region is denied by these abundant rivers in Eden. The reference to the fact that God had not yet caused it to rain upon the earth (Genesis 2:5), spoke of conditions in the creation on the third day of creation. "The Euphrates" This is the river, more than any other, which is almost synonymous with the garden of Eden, that being the use of it that appears in Revelation 16:12. Any exact location

Genesis 29:1-6 — same vicinity. "Laban the son of Nahor" Nahor was the father of Bethuel, the father of Laban, as repeatedly mentioned earlier. Therefore, "son" as used here actually means grandson.Ibid. A similar use of "son" was observed in our comments on Genesis 9:24. It should be noted that the conversation reported here is quite different from the way a similar conversation would run today. This was due to the fact that the Hebrews did not have a word that simply meant "yes." Note that, "The words from the middle

Genesis 30:43 — had promised, he was indeed "with Jacob," and blessed him abundantly. Several other interesting things appear in the chapter: (1)    Jacob's sons were now grown up sufficiently to enable Jacob's employment of them as shepherds. (2)    The ringstreaked, speckled, spotted and black sheep and cattle were separated from the main flock by a three days' journey, some fifty miles away. Jacob clearly did not trust Laban at all. (3)    The semi-pagan

Genesis 34:25-29 — were her real brothers distinguished from others who were half-brothers. There is some question as to whether any other of Jacob's sons took part in this episode, Simeon and Levi being the only ones mentioned. The indefinite "sons of Jacob" (Genesis 34:27) could mean that all of Jacob's sons participated in looting and plundering the city. It is one of the things that we can not know. At least it is a reasonable conjecture that Simeon and Levi had some kind of assistance, since two men would not have

Genesis 37:25 — were they? Ishmaelites or Midianites? Well, they were both! They were Ishmaelites by race, being descended from Ishmael, and they were Midianites by residence. It is said of Moses, that, "He fled from Pharaoh and dwelt in the land of Midian" (Exodus 2:15). And any dweller in the land of Midian would have been, as to residence, a Midianite, just as, today, the Dallas-ites live in Dallas. All of the scholarly squabbles about this passage are simply "much ado about nothing." That this is clearly the

Genesis 4:7 — upon Cain, and that God was warning him to rule over the "sin" and thus refrain from committing it, has nothing whatever to commend it. The word for "sin" in this passage means "sin offering, a common meaning of the word in Scripture, as in Hosea 4:8; 2 Corinthians 5:21; and Hebrews 9:28."Robert Jamieson, Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown's Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961), p. 21. This understanding of the passage is ancient. Clement of Rome, quoting the Septuagint (LXX) (which

Exodus 12:29-30 — the households. Had this not been the case, the dead would have been discovered, not that night, but the next morning. Several quibbles concerning these verses are: (1)    "The captive that was in the dungeon" is used in Exodus 12:29, whereas, "the maid-servant that is behind the mill" is used in the parallel place in Exodus 11:5; but those with knowledge of those times tell us that many of the maid-servants who ground the corn and performed other menial tasks in Egypt were also

Exodus 14:10-14 — automobiles issued by the State of New Hampshire carry the motto, "Live free or die." What the Israelites were saying to Moses was an ancient equivalent of "Better Red than Dead!" Moses' response to the situation actually had five elements: (1) Fear not; (2) Stand firm; (3) See God's salvation; (4) Jehovah will fight for you; and (5) Shut up! i.e., "Hold your peace!" It should be noted that "Stand still" had no reference whatever to an order to "Do nothing." We cannot believe that Moses meant anything

Exodus 17:13-15 — quantities of supplies and booty of all kinds. He also explained the relative peace enjoyed by Israel during the ensuing stay in the wilderness as having been due to this great victory which "terrified the neighboring nations."Josephus, op. cit., p. 92. Certainly, there was some excellent reason why the next attack of Israel by the Amalekites came nearly forty years afterward, and why as Rahab said, "The fear of you has fallen upon all of us" (Joshua 2:9). "Write this for a memorial in a book" The

Exodus 20:7 — words, "Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name!" (Matthew 6:9). Salvation itself is accomplished in the power of this glorious name. "Neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). "Thou shalt not" Notice the recurrence of these words. Evidently Almighty God was not operating on the same level of present-day psychologists who deplore "negative commandments." Some Christian teachers, even, have fallen into the error of supposing

Exodus 22:25-27 — effect, that the borrower could keep it! Many of the Jews of a later day sorely abused the rights of the poor. "Ye oppress the poor… ye crush the needy… they have sold the righteous for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes!" (Amos 2:6; Amos 4:1). The principle here applied to any absolutely necessary possession, such as the mill, or either of its stones (Deuteronomy 24:6).

Exodus 32:7-14 — Israel, Moses indeed shines as a type of the Lord Jesus Christ. Moses' intercessory prayer presented three arguments against what God contemplated doing: (1)    He appealed for God to remember all that he had already done for Israel. (2)    He pointed out that the Egyptians would accuse God of leading the people out in order to destroy them. (3)    He pleaded with God to remember the promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Israel regarding their posterity

Exodus 8:16-19 — appears in a word meaning "fleas" in the Septuagint (LXX).Wilbur Fields, op. cit., p. 188. "Adam Clarke was certain that it means the tick, basing his conclusion on (1) their being said to be in man and beast (the tick buries its head in the victim), and (2) the meaning of the root word here, which is to make firm, fix or establish (which ticks most assuredly do).Adam Clarke, op cit., p. 325. It is interesting that some very recent scholars also favor this view. Ellison also understood the term to mean

Exodus 8:8-11 — him the "glory" or advantage of naming the time when the pests should be removed, that the Divine control of the visitation might be the more conspicuous."Canon George Harford, Peake's Commentary on the Old Testament (London: T. C. and E. C. Jack, 1924), p. 175. "Thy houses" The plural is used in Exodus 8:9; Exodus 8:11, and, despite this being usually interpreted as reference to the houses of both Pharaoh and his servants, there remains the possibility that the houses (plural) of Pharaoh himself

Leviticus 19:5-10 — accepted" (Leviticus 19:5). Orlinsky stated that the true rendition of this place is: "Offer it so that it may be accepted."Harry M. Orlinsky, Notes on the New Translation of the Torah (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1969), p. 216. This makes the whole passage clear. It means that when one offered a peace-offering to God, then he should not try to eat all of it himself! If one did that, he was offering it so that it would not be accepted. In view of the basic benevolence and

Leviticus 5:14-16 — made by the priests; and the mention of "shekels" in the plural indicated that it had to be of more than ordinary value. Two conditions were imposed in connection with this type of sacrifice, these being: (1) that a confession of sin was required, and (2) that restitution including a twenty percent penalty was demanded. Regarding the name of the sacrifice here called trespass-offering, it is called guilt-offering in some versions; and Wenham cited examples of its being called "reparation-offering" and

Numbers 10:11-16 — over the host of the tribe of the children of Issachar was Nethanel the son of Zuar. And over the host of the tribe of the children of Zebulun was Eliab the son of Helon." This is the beginning of the second major division of Numbers, ending in Numbers 20. It was a significant moment indeed in the history of Israel. The deliverance from Egypt has been accomplished, the Decalogue Covenant has been ratified, the rebellion in the matter of the golden calf was behind them, the tabernacle had been constructed,

Numbers 11:1-3 — suffering, diligent work and faithfulness. The spirit that came out in this chapter finally resulted in God's rejection of that whole generation and His condemnation of them to death in the wilderness. "And the fire of Jehovah burned among them" (Numbers 11:2). Speculations as to the possibility that this fire was the result of lightning or some other natural cause are futile. The event was of sufficient dimensions to warrant the naming of the place as Taberah in commemoration of it, and, without any doubt,

Numbers 9:9-14 — prime requirements are enumerated again. "Four of the chief regulations governing the ordinance are here specified as governing also this supplementary Passover: (1)    observe it on the fourteenth day of the month (Numbers 9:11) (2)    eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs (Numbers 9:12) (3)    leave none of it until morning (Numbers 9:12) and (4)    nor break a bone thereof."George Buchanan Gray, op. cit., p.

Romans 5 overview — doctrine of justification by putting this truth in its eschatological context. William M. Greathouse, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press, 1969), p. 106. Greathouse cited "the hope of the glory of God" (Romans 5:2), and "final salvation" (Romans 5:9-10) as supporting his analysis. Lenski favored the view that writings in this chapter Undoubtedly describe the blessed effects of God's righteousness through faith. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of