Bible Commentaries

Genesis 11:10-32 — NAHOR, TERAH, and ABRAM (ABRAHAM). A check with the genealogy given by Luke (Luke 3:34-36) conforms exactly to this with the exception that Cainan is introduced between Shelah and Arpachshad, suggesting that the whole list may be abbreviated. Genesis 11:27 provides the additional information that Terah had two other sons besides Abraham, i.e., Nahor (named after his uncle) and Haran, the father of Lot. This was probably given to explain the association of Lot with Abraham in subsequent chapters of Genesis.

Genesis 38:8-10 — social custom of brothers raising up children to a deceased brother's name through marriage to his widow is much older than the Mosaic Law, which elevated this custom to the status of a divine command about four hundred years afterwards (Deuteronomy 25:5). This does not indicate a late date for Genesis; for, "The existence of the practice has been traced in different forms in Indians, Persians, and other nations of Asia and Africa."Thomas Whitelaw, op. cit., p. 442. As a matter of fact, "The custom

Genesis 44:32-34 — paragraph recording Judah's plea into four paragraphs instead of only one as in the ASV. Skinner entitled these successive paragraphs thus: (1)    The recital of the interview in which Joseph had insisted on Benjamin being brought down. (2)    A pathetic description of his father's reluctance to part with him, overcome only by the harsh necessity of hunger. (3)    A suggestion of the death stroke which their return without Benjamin would inflict

Exodus 10:21-24 — statement that it was a darkness that could be "felt." This may have a double meaning: (1)    it would be taken to heart by the Egyptians, as God indicated when he promised to send his plagues "upon the heart" of Pharaoh (Exodus 9:12); (2)    and it may mean that the darkness would be caused by something discernible in the sense of touch. We think the latter is most likely. This, and the fact of the land of Goshen being spared, almost force the conclusion that

Exodus 30:1-10 — shall make atonement upon the horns of it once in the year; with the blood of the sin-offering of atonement once in the year shall he make atonement for it throughout your generations: it is most holy unto Jehovah." "The horns" mentioned in Exodus 30:2 were said by Clements to be "superfluous on an altar for burning incense, but have been introduced in imitation of the much larger altar,"Ronald E. Clements, Exodus (Cambridge: University Press, 1972), p. 192. but his comment is contradicted by the

Exodus 32:15-20 — that, "It is not within the compass of language to declare more explicitly that the engraving was miraculously accomplished."Robert Jamieson, Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary, Vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprint 1982), p. 408. "And Moses' anger waxed hot" We do not really know whether or not Moses' conduct here was sinful. Adam Clarke and many of the old commentators considered it so. "But we must not excuse this act; it was rash and irreverent: God's writing should

1 Kings 21:17-26 — Israel)." "In the place where the dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine" How ridiculous is the comment of critics that, "These words were not exactly fulfilled in history."The International Critical Commentary, Kings, p. 332. While true enough that the fulfillment of this dreadful prophecy varied in some degree from what is said here, the variation was due to the repentance of Ahab which fully justified the slight changes (Jeremiah 18:7-10), because all of God's promises

Nehemiah 4:1-6 — ability and skill of Nehemiah, this initial opposition of laughter, ridicule and insults might have proved successful. "Nothing makes the enemies of the Lord's work any more indignant than the success of God's people."George DeHoff's Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 491. The nature of the insults heaped upon the Jews here was calculated to discourage them. They were called, "feeble Jews"; "will they fortify themselves"? was asked in a tone of unbelief. "The very idea that these people would contemplate such

Nehemiah 4:7-14 — appear and kill the workers; the Jews from the surrounding area appealed to their neighbors at work on the wall to return home, abandoning the work. Nehemiah's presence of mind and firmness alone saved the situation." Arthur S. Peake's Commentary, p. 332. Note the manner in which Nehemiah moved to meet this crisis: (1) He prayed to God (Nehemiah 4:9). (2) He set a watch day and night (Nehemiah 4:9). (3) He set armed men at "the lowest parts," i.e., places were the walls might be most easily attacked

Job 30:10-15 — and we find strong reasons for agreement with Driver who strongly questioned this rendition. "The text here is so uncertain and ambiguous that it is impossible to determine with confidence whether these verses refer to: (1) God's treatment of Job, or (2) to the treatment of Job by evil men."International Critical Commentary, Job, p. 254. Judging from the context, it appears to this writer that the word "he" here should be rendered "they" instead; because the following clause, according to the rules

Job 40:15-24 — swords"!Van Selms, p. 151. We have included this interpretation because it is supported by two things: (1) It is supported by the KJV rendition of the word `stones' (Job 40:17), which is translated "testicles" in the Douay Version of the Bible and (2) the fact the comparison to a cedar-tree does not fit a hippopotamus' tail at all. "For he is the chief of the ways of God" "This suggests that God's masterpiece was the hippopotamus. However, the passage bears the translation that, `He is the beginning

Leviticus 1:1-2 — inner Shrine."Ibid. "An oblation" This word means "any grateful or solemn offering." It comes from a technical Hebrew word that is "identical with Korban,"W. F. Lofthouse, Peake's Commentary on the Bible, Leviticus (London: T. C. and E. C. Jack, Ltd., 1924), p. 197. and has the meaning of something brought near to the altar. This is the same word that Jesus spoke of in Mark 7:11. "Ye shall offer… of the cattle… of the herd and of the flock" The last phrases here are restrictive with regard

Numbers 6:22-27 — the Three Persons of the Godhead. "Psalms 67 is evidently modeled on this benediction,"J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 105. as is also the case with the famous benediction recorded by Paul in 2 Corinthians 13:14. The Hebrew words that compose this blessing consist of only three lines, with three words in the first, five words in the second, and seven words in the third.W. Gunther Plaut, op. cit., p. 65. When one compares this benediction with

Deuteronomy 18:1-5 — him out of all thy tribes, to stand to minister in the name of Jehovah, him and his sons forever." "All priests were Levites, but only the sons of Aaron were priests."Meredith G. Kline, Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Deuteronomy (Chicago: Moody Press, 1862), p. 180. Despite this simple truth extensively revealed throughout the O.T., "The RSV renders Deuteronomy 18:1, thus: `Priests, that is, all the tribe of Levi,' foisting off on Deuteronomy the false view that all Levites were priests."Ibid. This, of

Deuteronomy 26:16-19 — people unto Jehovah! Several things here are exceedingly interesting. Here is the ratification, on the part of both parties, God and Israel, of the covenant, a ratification equivalent in every way with the solemn acceptance of God's covenant in Exodus 24:7. This additional ratification was necessary for several reasons: (1)    a new generation was at hand; (2)    Moses would die within a few days of this speech, and a new leader in the person of Joshua would

Joshua 1:1 — distinct from the Pentateuch. There is no ancient Jewish tradition or manuscript evidence that the book ever formed a unit with the five books of the Law,"Merrill F. Unger, Unger's Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. 1 (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), p. 279. as the critics have alleged regarding their speculative "Hexateuch." Unger's comment on the hypothetical Hexateuch is as follows: "Unbelieving critical scholarship of necessity must explain away the large number of miracles in the book as legends

Judges 6:1-6 — The oppression had been going on for seven years when the events of this chapter unfolded. "The genealogy of the Midianites reached all the way back to Abraham and his son Midian by his second wife Keturah,"Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Old Testament, p. 245. making them kinsmen of the Israelites. "Israel made them dens… and caves…" The severity of Israel's oppression under Midian is indicated by the fact that many Israelites resorted to hiding in dens and caves, a phenomenon of the limestone

1 Samuel 24:8-15 — comes forth wickedness'; but my hand shall not be against you" Some able scholars have interpreted these words to mean that David said, "Your wickedness will bring divine destruction, but I will not take vengeance into my own hand."John T. Willis, op. 239. It appears to this writer that The Interpreter's Bible has a better explanation: "The proverb means simply that `wicked deeds come from wicked men,' and if David had been the inveterate enemy Saul took him for, he would have killed Saul without compassion."The

2 Samuel 15:7-12 — Absalom kept increasing." "At the end of four years" The KJV and other ancient versions have "forty years" here instead of "four"; but the RSV is doubtless correct here in following the Syriac and certain texts of the LXX.Arthur S. Peake's Commentary, p.290 This indicates that it took Absalom four years from the time he was reconciled with David to launch his attempted coup de etat. "In Hebron" The reason for Absalom's choice of Hebron as the place to launch his rebellion might have been complex. He

2 Samuel 2:18-23 — three sons, David's nephews, all held important positions of trust in David's army."Everyone in the Bible, p. 366. Joab commanded his army; Abishai was with David when they found Saul asleep and pleaded with David to allow him to kill Saul (1 Samuel 26:6-12); both he and Asahel were reckoned among David's thirty mighty men (2 Samuel 23:8-38; 1 Chronicles 11:26 ff). Strangely enough, the father of these mighty men was never mentioned. This was probably due, as Barker thought, "Either to the widowhood