Bible Commentaries

Matthew 27:57 — And when even was come, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple. Isaiah 53:9 was fulfilled by this. In the common version, the word "rich" in Isaiah's prophecy would appear as either singular or plural, but it is in reality singular, as evidenced by the more accurate translation in the English Revised Version (1885)

Luke 3:23 — years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Matthat … THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS THROUGH MARY Thirty years of age … On the bearing this has with reference to dating the birth of Jesus, see under Luke 3:2. We shall not undertake any exhaustive "harmonization" of the two separate genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and here. It is now and has been this student's conviction for many years that Luke's genealogy cannot possibly be for Joseph's line

John 1:37-38 — this place is very particular and graphic, making it probable that the writer was an eye-witness. (2) The writer of such a narrative would have been sure to mention the name of the other disciple, unless there had been some reason for withholding it. (3) The writer of this Gospel never refers to himself by name, and the same feeling which led him to withhold his name elsewhere accounts for his withholding it here.Alvah Hovey, op. cit., p. 78 . What seek ye? … was an appropriate response by

John 1:42 — Jesus. Jesus looked upon him and said, Thou art Simon the son of John: thou shalt be called Cephas (which is by interpretation, Peter). Thou art Simon the son of John … These are the exact words Jesus used in his confession of Peter (Matthew 16:13 f), and the Lord's use of them here appears to have been prompted by his divine foreknowledge of the great confession that Peter would make. Thou shalt be called Cephas … This new name assigned to Andrew's brother means "stone" or "pebble";

John 12:32-33 — these words might literally come true. It must have seemed to those who heard it the most presumptuous statement ever made.Batsell Barrett Baxter, If I Be Lifted Up (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1956), p. 1. Lifted up … See under John 3:14. The primary reference of this is to Jesus' death by being lifted up upon the cross; but the words suggest other truth also. Christ was lifted up from the grave; he was lifted up into heaven; he has been lifted up in the hearts of men by the preaching

John 5:19 — that he was a blasphemer), but rather, without denying either of these, to convince them, if possible, of his absolute unity with the Father in action.Alvah Hovey, Commentary on John (Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, 1885), p. 135. All the actions of Jesus were in complete harmony with God's will; neither is the Son of God capable of doing anything contrary to it. The Son can do nothing of himself … This stresses the obvious truth that no mere man could have healed the

Acts 11:15 — Pentecost as "the beginning," this being the prime authority for accepting that date as the beginning of the church of Christ. There were in fact many beginnings on that day in Jerusalem. See in my Commentary on Luke under Luke 24:46-47. (3)    Peter's linking the event in Cornelius' house with that of Pentecost also justifies the conclusion pointed out by Campbell: It is a logical inference from these words, that from the day of Pentecost to the calling of the Gentiles,

Acts 13:38-39 — or by his own achievement. It is not as Joe Bloke, or John Doe, that any man can be saved but "as Christ," "in Christ," and as fully identified with Christ. For full discussion of justification, see my Commentary on Romans, Romans 3:22.

Acts 16:9-10 — gospel unto them … By the use of "us," Luke showed that "He included himself with Paul, Silas and Timothy as preachers of the gospel." H. Leo Boles, A Commentary on Acts of Apostles (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1963), p. 255. Further comment on Luke is made in the introduction to his Gospel in my Commentary on Luke, pp. 3-6.

Acts 17:26 — nation … No matter how one reads it, whether "one race," "one blood," or "one family," the meaning is the same: all men are descended from a single ancestor. "Eve was the mother of all living" (Genesis 3:20); and the proof of this is evidenced by many things, one of these being the ability of a man of any race to provide a blood transfusion for a man of any other race. The oneness and brotherhood of the whole human race are affirmed here; and this was

Romans 11:5 — the Lord. Then as now, Paul was saying, God's true people are of a different order, after the election of grace. They are the people who have accepted the gospel, have been baptized into the body of Christ, thus being Abraham's true seed (Galatians 3:29). A remnant … means a part of fleshly Israel. And who were they? They were the 3,000 souls who obeyed the gospel on Pentecost. The original church of Christ was almost totally Jewish, including the Twelve, and many others of that first period.

Romans 7:22 — transgressions. Ibid., p. 89. The inward man … does not mean regenerated man, or the regenerated portion of a man, since it is of unregenerates that Paul here spoke. This usage of the expression was followed by Paul in 2 Corinthians 4:16 and Ephesians 3:16, according to Clarke. He further stated: "The inward man" as used here means the mind, without regard to the state, whether unregenerated or renewed. To say that the inward man means the regenerate part of the soul is supportable by no

1 Corinthians 11:21 — Supper. An analysis of such disorders shows that: 1.    The various groups did not eat at the same time. 2.    Each group ate its own provisions, instead of sharing in the "one bread" (1 Corinthians 10:17). 3.    Some ate too plentifully; some ate nothing at all, for there was nothing left. 4.    Some were "drunken"; and there is no need to soften the meaning of this. "Grotius gives `drunken' the milder,

1 Corinthians 16:13-14 — Company, 1916), p. 164. Watch ye … Although originally directed as an admonition to Corinth, this is a timeless duty of all Christians. The things they were to watch against were: (1) the danger of division, (2) the deception of false teachers, (3) the atheistic denials of the resurrection, (4) the failure of love of the brethren, etc. Stand fast in the faith … It is deplorable that the RSV renders this "Stand firm in your faith"; for what Paul plainly meant was that they should

1 Corinthians 3:9 — cooperate with each other in God's service." F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 82. Despite the fact of there being a sense in which Christians are God's partners at the present time, and that this partnership shall be expanded at the judgment (Matthew 25:23), it is hard to believe that Paul was stressing such a thought here. Marsh said that the Greek text favors the idea of partnership with God, and that the context indicates the other meaning, Paul W. Marsh, op. cit., p. 381. Since the oneness of Paul

1 Corinthians 6:1 — down the rules for any follower of the Lord having a matter against his brother; and this rule involved: (1) a personal confrontation between wronged and wrongdoer, (2) another attempt at reconciliation if the first failed, with witnesses present, and (3) a general examination before the whole church. See Matthew 18:15-17. Also for extended discussion of this subject, see my Commentary on Matthew, pp. 279-281. McGarvey stated that "By going to law before the pagan tribunals, they were not only

1 Corinthians 8:1 — puffeth up, but love edifieth. Now concerning … These words indicate that "the Corinthians had asked Paul questions in regard to these matters," David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 117. a fact also indicated by the use of quotation marks to set off portions of this verse and in 1 Corinthians 8:4 and 1 Corinthians 8:5 in the RSV. We all have knowledge … This was the conceited declaration of the questioners from Corinth

Galatians 4:30 — William Hendriksen, op. cit., p. 189. In Paul's times, and until now, there are still two classes of "sons of Abraham"; and the significant question is, "Who is a real son of Abraham?" Paul had already given the answer in Galatians 3:26-29. The reason why all natural religious systems are bound to come in conflict with Christianity is that Christianity is supernatural, and the natural systems cannot coexist as parallel paths to the same goal." R. Alan Cole, op. cit., p. 135.

Philippians 4:7 — described by Hendriksen as "The smile of God reflected in the soul of the believer, the heart's calm after Calvary's storm, the conviction that God who spared not his own Son will surely also, along with him, freely give us all things (Romans 8:32)." Ibid., p. 196. Passeth all understanding … Those who see it manifested in the lives of Christians cannot understand such peace exhibited despite the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune encountered by them; even those who possess

Colossians 2:2-3 — Colossians 1:24 and ends with these verses was written by Morgan thus: We find reference to a threefold mystery: (1) the church which is the body of Christ; (2) the secret of life in the individual believer, "Christ in you, the hope of glory"; and (3) the deepest mystery of all, "the mystery of God even Christ. G. Campbell Morgan, op. cit., p. 496. As frequently pointed out, the "mystery" of the New Testament is exceedingly large and extensive, no less than three facets of it appearing