Bible Commentaries

Genesis 21:11-13 — commanded him. "He is thy seed" Willis and others frequently stress that "seed" in this passage is a collective noun in singular form, but with a plural meaning. "It is clear that the reference is to the Israelite people,"John T. Willis, op. cit., p. 281. or, as in the case of Ishmael, the whole people descended from him. However, such a simplistic view of this word is insufficient. There are no less than five definite meanings of this term in the Bible: (1)    "In Isaac shall

Genesis 48:12-14 — what were the obvious desires of Joseph. This is the first example in the Bible of the laying on of hands in the act of blessing or the conveyance of a gift.Ibid. Afterward, it was extensively employed: (1) in the dedication of priests (Deuteronomy 29:9); (2) in the ordination of Christian servants (Acts 6:6); (3) by the Saviour and his apostles in the performance of miracles (Matthew 19:13); (4) in the giving of the Holy Spirit (Acts 17 and Acts 18), etc. REGARDING THE BLESSING Willis gives the

Exodus 18:1-4 — can be little doubt of Jethro's being a priest of the Most High God, the one and only Jehovah, but if as Keil thought, Jethro was a representative of the pagan world, it would have been possible: (1) if Moses had converted Jethro out of paganism; or (2) if Jethro had received the truth handed down through his ancestors, thus having known the true God throughout his life, in which case he would as a "faithful remnant" still have come from the pagan world. It is amazing that critics are so anxious to

Leviticus 1:3-4 — some ways, this was the most important of all the sacrifices. First it could be offered by men of any race or nation,Robert Jamieson, Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1957), p. 432. being distinguished in this from all other Jewish sacrifices. Also, it was an essential element in the extremely important ritual of the Day of Atonement, which is indeed suggested by the terminology here. Thus, right here at the threshold of God's

Leviticus 16:20-22 — presented? To some wilderness demon, or to the Devil himself?. Who could believe it? The preposterous suggestion of Micklem that, "The goat for Azazel may therefore represent a concession to popular demands"Nathaniel Micklem, Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 2 (New York: Abingdon Press, 1953), p. 78. is simply incompatible, in our opinion, with a CHRISTIAN view of this passage. It would require us to believe that some of the most vital and typical representations of Jesus Christ in these Day of Atonement

Leviticus 17:1-7 — later time would have used such terminology! "A statute forever throughout their generations" (Leviticus 17:7). As a matter of fact, God Himself changed the regulation given here just before Israel entered into the possession of Canaan (Deuteronomy 12:15). The principal thing forbidden here was the slaughter of any animal (of the type suitable for sacrifice) anywhere except "before the tent of meeting." There are several discernible purposes in this restriction: (1)    It safeguarded

Leviticus 23:4-8 — appears the back-to-back sabbaths on the successive dates of Nisan 14 and 15 which also occurred while our Lord was in the tomb. That is why Matthew wrote, "And after the sabbaths (plural) were past… came Mary Magdalene… etc." (Matthew 28:1, see the Greek Text). The recognition of this truth has a significant bearing upon determining what day it was when our Lord was crucified. "Ye shall do no servile work" (Leviticus 23:7). We have already noted that this was a less strict command

Leviticus 24:17-21 — he that killeth a beast shall make it good: and he that killeth a man shall be put to death." The principles enunciated here were basic to Biblical and Near Eastern Law throughout history. This doctrine is given three times in the O.T. - here, Exodus 21:23-25, and in Deuteronomy 19:21. Inherent in this are some factors that appear to be forgotten in a large degree today. (1)    Violence against people deserves punishment. (2)    The punishment should be proportional

Leviticus 25:23-28 — power is sufficient to the task. Yet it is an enigma that Christ himself left a glimmer of possibility that the heel of the Gentile would be lifted from Palestine (Jerusalem) at a point in history when the "times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" (Luke 21:24). Mighty things are now under way in world history. The right of redemption, whether by kinsmen, or by one himself, was here made to be unalienable. That failing, the year of the Jubilee still restored every man to his possession. The spiritual

Leviticus 27:1-8 — shekels. But if he be poorer than thy estimation, then he shall be set before the priest, and the priest shall value him; according to the ability of him that vowed shall the priest value him." "And Jehovah spake unto Moses" This, along with Leviticus 27:34, has the effect of tying all of those instructions to the regulations of God already given, making all of them an integral part of the law of Moses, binding terms of the sacred covenant. Once a vow was made, the discharge of it was required. In

Numbers 14:39-45 — its occurrence and affords no excuse whatever for making the Scriptures contradictory! "Beat them down, even unto Hormah" It is useless to attempt a location of Hormah. "Its exact location cannot be ascertained."John Marsh, Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 2, Numbers (New York: Abingdon Press, 1955), p. 215. "The original name of the place was Zephath, a royal city of the Canaanites on the south border of the Holy Land."William Jones, op. cit., p. 344. The circumstances that led to the change of its name

Numbers 27:15-23 — a charge, as Jehovah spake by Moses." "And thou shalt put of thine honor upon him" Joshua was not to have the same place in Israel's history as Moses had. The word here rendered "honor" has the meaning of "authority,"Harry M. Orlinsky, op. cit., p. 239. and in some of the affairs of the Chosen People, Joshua was subordinate to the High Priest. In the whole conception of the Theocracy, this was an essential element. "In whom is the Spirit" The American Standard Version departs from precious versions

Numbers 32:1-5 — congregation of Israel, is a land for cattle; and thy servants have cattle. and they said, If we have found favor in thy sight, let this land be given unto thy servants for a possession; bring us not over the Jordan." "A great multitude of cattle" (Numbers 32:1). Owens seems to have had some question of this in his remark that, "It seems strange that they could have had such a great abundance of animals after such a long period of wanderings in the desert."John Joseph Owens, Broadman Bible Commentary, Vol.

Numbers 32:16-19 — fortified towns and villages where they lived. "Many of the men of war from these tribes were, of course, left behind. The total roster of the men of war for Reuben, Gad and half of the tribe of Manasseh was 110,580, according to the census in Numbers 26, but how many actually aided in the conquest? From Joshua 4:13, we learn that of those two and one half tribes, only forty thousand armed men passed over Jordan, meaning that 70,580 armed men remained at home for the defense of the women and children."Adam

Deuteronomy 4:9-14 — what Moses mentioned here. One may only smile at the critical slur that "we are surprised that Moses would speak to his hearers as if they were present to see the theophany!" Indeed, vast numbers of them were present. "Ye saw no form" (Deuteronomy 4:12). This is presented here as an argument against making any kind of an image. If one should attempt to form an image of God, what form could it possibly take? There is powerful theological support here for the specific in the Decalogue, that "Thou shalt

Joshua 22:30-34 — Phinehas dutifully reported to his superiors in Shiloh and that he thus properly fulfilled his mission as one sent on a task that was then accomplished. It was the plan of God outlined fully in the Pentateuch that three times in the year: (1) at Passover; (2) at Pentecost; and (3) at the feast of Tabernacles, all of Israel was to report at the one and only general sanctuary for the purpose of observing those special national feasts. This, of course, was designed to cultivate and preserve the unity of all

Joshua 6:22-27 — sets forth the overthrow of all that resists the kingdom of which Christ is the head; and particularly the day of judgment, in which the overthrow will be finally accomplished."F. C. Cook, op. cit., p. 365. "She dwelt… unto this day" (Joshua 6:25). The fact that Rahab was still living in Israel at the time this narrative was written is amazing proof regarding the date of Joshua. We like the way Adam Clarke noted it: "This is one proof that the book was written in the time to which it is commonly

Ruth 3:1-5 — thou shalt do. And she said unto her, All that thou sayest I will do." "Shall I not seek rest for thee?" Moffatt translated this, "I must see you settled in life." "`Rest' in this context is the equivalent of marriage."Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 270. Naomi is determined to do everything in her power to procure a husband for Ruth, and here she reveals a very clever plan for doing so. It is significant that Naomi had previously prayed for a husband for Ruth (Ruth 1:8-9), but here she is exerting

1 Samuel 1:21-28 — the Lord there." "Elkanah and all his house went up … to pay his vow" "This shows that Elkanah had ratified Hannah's vow, making it his vow also."The Pulpit Commentary, op. cit., p. 13. "As soon as the child is weaned, I will bring him" From 2 Maccabees 7:27, we learn that the weaning time for children in Palestine and the Mideast was a period of two years, or often, three years. "She took him up with her, along with a three-year old bull" This does not mean that Hannah, alone, made the trip

1 Samuel 12:1-5 — has a defense of Samuel's administrative leadership, which he is now relinquishing to Saul; but he is not laying down his priestly functions nor his office as the first of the great prophets of God after Moses."The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 293. The placement of this chapter is exactly correct, the events reported happening very probably, as admitted by many scholars, upon the occasion at Gilgal when Saul was finally actually acclaimed King of Israel. The fact of this address by Samuel coming