Bible Commentaries

Isaiah 7:10-17 — refusal to cooperate with God in the matter of a miraculous sign, God went ahead and gave him the sign of The Virgin anyway; but we shall explore that possibility later in our special notes on The Virgin. Notice the dramatic shift from "thy" God (Isaiah 7:11) to "my" God (Isaiah 7:13). Notice also that the same Isaiah 7:13 is the place where the prophet ceased from addressing King Ahaz and addressed, instead, the whole House of David. Notice also that the pronoun "he" in Isaiah 7:13 is a reference to

Amos 5:10 — oppressed; but anyone performing such a function in that society was "hated" and "abhored." The indifference and corruption of the whole society were the result. Smith makes a big "to do" over the fact that "Amos 5:10 is in the third person, and Amos 5:7 is in the second person!"Ralph L. Smith, op. cit., p. 112. What do the critics expect? That this shepherd should have kept all of his persons in the proper focus? Some of the changes from one person to another are evidently due to Amos' reference to

Amos 6:7 — pass away." Motyer's summary of the balance of this chapter is thus: "The fact of pride (Amos 6:8), its moral indifference (Amos 6:12), and its self-centeredness (Amos 6:13) are brought before us; but now we see the divine reaction to them. Amos 6:1-7 tell us in so many words that pride goes before a fall; Amos 6:8-14 tell us why this is. The divine reactions are hatred (Amos 6:8), alienation (Amos 6:9-10), and enmity (Amos 6:11-14)."J. A. Motyer, op. cit., p. 736. "Go captive with the first that

Obadiah 1:21 — more immediate fulfillment's of this prophecy of the preeminence of Jerusalem which came to pass exactly as Obadiah promised. Perhaps, as Deane noted, "Zerubbabel and the valiant Maccabees, who severely punished the Edomites"W. J. Deane, op. cit., p. 7. were, in a sense, "saviours" that rose up to restore the true religion, the reading of God's law, etc.; but all such persons were, at best, only types and forerunners of the blessed Messiah, "the true saviour which is Christ the Lord."Ibid. "To judge

Obadiah 1:9 — fulfilment began in the Chaldean period, for Nebuchadnezzar unquestionably destroyed Edom upon the same occasion as that of his capturing Jerusalem, and five years later destroying the Moabites and Ammonites, "as unquestionably inferred from Jeremiah 49:7 ff; Ezekiel 35; Jeremiah 25:9; Jeremiah 25:21, and Malachi 1:3."C. F. Keil, op. cit., p. 376.. The Edomites were mentioned among the nations round about Judah whom God would deliver into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 25:9). It is certain that

Jonah 2:4 — inspired prophet already considered as a reality. "I will look again toward thy holy temple" "Thus, Jerusalem was not yet destroyed, for the temple was still standing."Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Whole Bible, Vol. V (New York: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1837), p. 704. Now the Babylonian army had completed the destruction of the temple in 586 B.C., after a siege of 18 months, consequent upon Zedekiah's rebellion."International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Chicago: Howard-Severance Company, 1915), p. 2934.

Jonah 4:9 — Abel? (Genesis 4:9).What doest thou here, Elijah? (1 Kings 19:13).Betrayest thou the Son of Man with a kiss? (Luke 22:48).Lovest thou me more than these? (John 21:24).Wilt thou be made whole? (John 5:6).Saul, Saul, Why persecutest thou me? (Acts 22:7). Before leaving this verse, it should be noted that a different word in the Hebrew is used for God, than is used in other verses of this chapter. In fact, the following pattern is evident: Jonah 4:4 "[~Yahweh]," meaning God the Creator is used. Jonah

Micah 4:13 — that secular, fleshly, worldly Israel will conquer all the nations of the world and ruthlessly destroy them. That Someone will do so is surely taught; but that One is Christ to whom the Father hath committed the judgment of this ungodly world (John 5:27). The metaphor of threshing the nations is a terrible one indeed. "The allusion is to the threshing machine studded underneath with iron spikes dragged over the threshing floor."W. J. Deane, op. cit., p. 35. Some of Israel's enemies had actually executed

Zephaniah 1:8 — written would not have had any children in the times of Zephaniah old enough to fall under the criticism given here. However, "The Septuagint translation used 'house of the king' here, and that may be more accurate."Frank A. Eakin, Jr., op cit., p. 279. If that should not be allowed, "the king's sons" might refer to the sons of preceding kings who would still have been living when Zephaniah wrote. Another possibility is that Zephaniah here spoke of Judah in a general sense, not focusing upon the

Zechariah 13:4 — merely an example of one false interpretation being used to bolster another false interpretation. Amos did not refuse to call himself a prophet, affirming in the most uncertain words that God indeed gave him the message to Israel. He did say in Amos 7:14: "I was not a prophet; neither was I a prophet's son"; but what he was saying is not that, "I am not a prophet," but that I WAS not a prophet at the time I was called to the prophetic office. (See full comment on this in our series, Commentary on

Zechariah 8:18-19 — popular fasts, later mentioning another, Zechariah named all four of them and, in effect, cancelled them, all of them being illegal, human-initiated religious observances without any value whatever. For a little more detail on these, see under Zechariah 7:3, above. Wellhausen made a deduction from this passage that the Day of Atonement (a fast) had not been instituted in Zechariah's day, because there was no mention of it here by Zechariah. Leupold properly discerned the reason for Zechariah's omitting

Matthew 16:2-3 — the lawgiver from beneath his feet (Genesis 49:10). (4) Even a "sign from heaven" had already been given at the baptism of Christ when God spoke out of heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Matthew 3:17). (5) It had been revealed to Simeon that he should not die until he had seen the Lord's Christ; and it must be presumed that Simeon, by that time, was long since dead and buried. (6) All the world was expecting the coming of some Great One. (7) The

Matthew 21:31 — indicating that no sin is greater than being conscious of none. (2) The publicans and sinners heard him (Luke 15:1), but the Pharisaical class refused to hear. (3) They believed him (Matthew 21:32). (4) They repented. (5) They were baptized (Luke 3:12; Luke 7:29-30). If the Pharisees had been willing to do this, they too might have entered into the kingdom. In the very next words, Christ shows how they failed.

Matthew 3:16 — being offered upon the presentation of our Lord in the temple (Luke 2:24); (3) it is a monogamous creature! (4) it is a symbol of peace; (5) it is a marvel of gentleness, love, and affection; (6) it is a messenger (the homing pigeon is a dove); and (7) the dove has no gall, suggesting that there is no bitterness in the service of God. Brownville wrote, "It has been suggested that one reason for the gentleness of the dove is that the bird has no gall, the gall having been considered by naturalists

Matthew 8:5 — And when he was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him. This wonder is mentioned at greater length by Luke (Luke 7:1-10); and, of the so-called discrepancies, it may be said that there are none when proper allowance is made for the common practice of ascribing to one person the deeds he actually did through an agent, or the omission of details, or addition of details,

Mark 10:52 — condition is a figure of sin; (2) the blind man believed in Jesus as the Messiah; (3) he cried out to the Lord for mercy; (4) he persisted in spite of the rebukes of many; (5) he answered Jesus' call; (6) he cast aside all hindrances (the garment); (7) he pleaded for mercy; (8) he was saved; (8) he followed Jesus. This is the last healing reported in Mark; and this tenth chapter which is viewed as a condensed narrative of the entire Judean and Perean ministry of the Son of God is thus concluded. Significantly,

Mark 13:32 — angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Commenting on this verse, John Wesley said that as a man, "Christ was no more omniscient than omnipresent."John Wesley, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), en loco. Such is an oversimplification, however, because there are many examples of Jesus' omniscience. From this, we conclude that when Christ "emptied himself" (Philippians 2:7); he emptied himself of some phases of omniscience and not

Mark 7:17-19 — made between Jews and Gentiles. This thesis is further supported by Jesus' extending his mercy to the daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman immediately after his teaching on meats, and which Mark recorded in close connection with it. See under Mark 7:24 ff.

Luke 1:32 — He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the Lord God shall give him the throne of his father David. The Son of the Most High … Strangely, this is the title given by the demoniac (Mark 5:7) to our Lord, suggesting that this is one of the titles given to the Son of God throughout the unseen world of angels and demons. Ash noted that "Most High" is used seven times in Luke (Luke 1:32; Luke 1:35; Luke 1:76; Luke 2:14; Luke 6:35;

Revelation 7 overview — to conditions with God's church during the entire period of the seals and leading up to the final judgment depicted at the end of Revelation 6. They are introduced here retrospectively for the encouragement of the saints. The first vision (Revelation 7:1-8) shows their protection and safety during the calamities and misfortunes of their earthly pilgrimage, and during the divine visitations of God's wrathful judgments upon the wicked. The second (Revelation 7:9-17) shows their state of bliss in the