Bible Commentaries

Genesis 28:18-22 — is of interest that all kinds of traditions about this stone have been alleged. It was supposed to have been taken to Jerusalem, to Spain, to Ireland, and to Scotland, upon which, "The Kings of Scotland sat to be crowned!"Adam Clarke, op. cit., p. 175. It is not at all likely that any truth lies behind the tradition. Dummelow pointed out that, Edward I of England removed it from Scotland to Westminster Abbey, but he observed that the "Stone under the coronation chair in the Abbey is common granite,

Exodus 12:15-20 — the unleavened bread, but the holy convocations would have to wait. "Leaven" This, by reason of God's instructions here, was made to be a symbol of corruption, sin, wickedness, and impurity. Paul gave the spiritual application of it in 1 Corinthians 5:7, and Jesus mentioned it in Matthew 16:6-12. The only instance in which leaven might not have been intended to convey this meaning is that in the parable of the leaven hidden in three measures of meal (Matthew 13:33), and even there, if the true meaning

Exodus 12:21-28 — it is a name for "the caper plant." "It is in view of this latter identification that the modern Arabic name for the caper plant is Asuf or Asaf, almost the same as the Hebrew [~'ezowb], the word here rendered hyssop."George Rawlinson, op. cit., p. 275. This plant, used as a sprinkler for blood is mentioned in connection with a number of O.T. rites. "Jehovah will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses… "The destroyer is the personified power of Yahweh Himself manifesting itself

Exodus 2:11-15 — thus renounced his adoptive state, but his concern was not immediately obvious to the chosen people … Moses was not yet ready for the task."Hywel R. Jones, The New Bible Commentary, Revised (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 122. It would require forty years of God's discipline to prepare him fully for the task. "And he sat down by a well" The actual meaning of this is, that, "He dwelt by a well,"George Rawlinson, op. cit., p. 36. i.e., he took up a temporary residence

Exodus 23:1-3 — initiation of a lying report, but to the taking up of it and repeating it. "Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil" Johnson applied this to mob violence, such as a lynching,Philip C. Johnson, Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), p. 72. but far more than that is included. Before Exodus was concluded, all Israel followed the majority report of the ten unfaithful spies, resulting in a 40-year probation for the whole nation. Majorities in all ages have been disastrously wrong. It was

Exodus 32:30-35 — when the day came, but one thing is certain, "God has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by that Man whom he has appointed, whereof he hath given assurance unto all men in that he hath raised him from the dead" (Acts 17:31). The final judgment, therefore, is the day when all people must stand before the judgment seat of Christ to give an account of the deeds done in the body. Whatever sins and excesses of people may be apparently "overlooked" by God throughout history,

Exodus 34:10-13 — Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. I (Chicago: The Howard-Severance Company, 1915), p. 168. The symbols of this goddess, made frequently of green trees, that being the type that Manasseh introduced into God's temple at Jerusalem (2 Kings 21:3; 2 Kings 21:7), and also of carved posts, "wooden poles made in the shape of the male sex organ,"Michael Esses, op. cit., p. 254. in time, came to be called "the Asherim." Thus, what is commanded here is that all such symbols of pagan gods and goddesses were to be

1 Kings 21:1-4 — Leviticus 25:23 forbade the selling of one's inheritance, "The land shall not be sold in perpetuity." "No inheritance of the children of Israel shall move from tribe to tribe… Everyone shall cleave to the inheritance of his fathers" (Numbers 36:7 ff). It should be observed that these prohibitions came not from the so-called Priestly Code (P) nor from some mythical Deuteronomist (D), but from the Books of Moses, being therefore a part of the Mosaic covenant. "Ahab's proposal to Naboth would have

1 Kings 21:5-10 — contempt on Jezebel's part in such words as these. She no doubt despised her weakling husband. "And she wrote… proclaim a fast" "The purpose of this was to cast a religious mantle over the whole diabolical procedure."Albert Barnes, Kings, p. 217. The evil leaders of Jezreel, following Jezebel's orders to the letter were pretending that their city was under some great cloud of guilt, due to some citizen's having committed some capital crime. Their procedure mimicked the behavior of Joshua following

Leviticus 5:7-13 — less than a bushel. Meyrick calculated the amount of the minimal sacrifice as "either three pints and a half or three quarts and a half, accordingly as whether we adopt the larger or smaller estimate of the amount of an ephah."F. Meyrick, op. cit, p. 73. The regulation forbidding any oil or frankincense upon the flour distinguishes it from the meal-offering, for reasons that are not fully discernible to us. It could have been a means of further reducing the cost for a poor man, or as Bamberger believed,

Isaiah 9 overview — 15:55). But now watch the critical enemies start to work on the passage. Henry McKeating stated that, "Modern scholarship is virtually unanimous in taking this verse as a threat."Henry McKeating, Amos, Hosea, and Micah (Cambridge: University Press, 1971), p. 148. And how do the all-wise "modern scholars" render the place? Here it is: "I will not save this people from the world of the dead or rescue them from the power of death. Bring on your plagues, Death! Bring on your destruction, world of the

Jeremiah 38 overview — the second is recorded in the preceding chapter, and the third imprisonment is the one recounted in this chapter. TWO IMPRISONMENTS, NOT ONE The great Jewish historian Josephus preserved a record of both of these imprisonments, (the two in Jeremiah 37 and Jeremiah 38) adding significant details to each, noting, for example, that, in the imprisonment given in this chapter, "Jeremiah stood in the mire up to his neck," and that, "The intention of the rulers was that he might be suffocated."Flavius Josephus'

Deuteronomy 33:1-5 — 33:6 through Deuteronomy 33:25. "Some of the outstanding manifestations of God's power and glory and his goodness toward Israel are reviewed here as a proper introduction to the blessings,"Bruce Oberst, Deuteronomy (Joplin: College Press, 1968), p. 387. That Moses is called "the man of God" here, contrary to the general usage in Deuteronomy, sends the critics after their favorite adjuster, the editor, or the "redactor," but no such person would have deviated from the usual address. Joshua might have

Joshua 1:12-18 — land" (Joshua 1:13), and in the same breath (Joshua 1:14) called it "the land … beyond the Jordan!" `Beyond the Jordan' is a technical expression referring to the geographical section EAST of the Jordan river."William H. Morton, op. cit., p. 307. This is true enough as Joshua used it Joshua 1:14, but sometimes it means west of Jordan. It is definitely used both ways. However, it has no reference whatever to the perspective of the writer and cannot be used for the purpose of identifying the

Joshua 9:22-27 — place which he (God) should choose" was a customary reference to Jerusalem is erroneous. We encountered many such critical assertions in our studies of Deuteronomy, but, as we pointed out, Jerusalem is nowhere mentioned in Deuteronomy, nor is Joshua 9:27 here a reference to it. Note the future tense in "God should choose," meaning that the permanent site of the tabernacle at this point in time had not been chosen. On this account, we reject absolutely the etiological explanation quite arbitrarily assigned

Joshua 9:3-8 — 1929), p. 350. This city was the leader of a group of four cities, and, "The Four Cities Alliance led by the Gibeonites lay within a ten-mile radius of Jerusalem."Ben. F. Philbeck, The Teachers' Bible Commentary, Joshua (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1972), p. 142. The importance of this union of the Gibeonites and their allies with the Israelites was pointed out by Boling: "Israel then controlled the entire northwest quadrant of the approaches to Jerusalem."Robert G. Boling, op. cit., p. 266. "They

Judges 10:6-9 — Israel served the Baalim and the Ashtaroth…" In addition to these, they also served: (2) the gods of Syria (which are never mentioned by name); (3) of Sidon (Astarte); (4) of the Moabites (Chemosh); (5) the Ammonites (Milcom); (6) or Molech; and (7) the god of the Philistines (Dagon). As Keil noted, "Seven of these heathen deities are mentioned as being served by the Israelites."C. F. Keil in the Keil-Delitzsch Commentaries, Old Testament, Vol. 2-A, p. 373. Some writers express amazement at the

Judges 7:9-14 — allies. Gideon admitted that fear, when he took Purah with him on that journey. This mention of the great hero's fear was cited by Cundall as denying any probability of "Any fabrication of this narrative."The Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 111. True to the Biblical character observable in both the O.T. and the N.T., the sins, weaknesses and shortcomings of its heroes are mentioned along with their successes and achievements. "Cake of barley bread tumbled into the camp of Midian…

Revelation 6 overview — elements, Babylonian mythology, the writings of Virgil, Semitic and Hellenic mythology, the Apocrypha, and the Book of Enoch." James Moffatt, Expositor's Greek New Testament, Vol. V (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), pp. 388-390. Scholars who pursue such an assumption can never know what Revelation means, simply because they are seeking its meaning in the wrong place. Thirdly, there is a deep sense of conviction that no "brand new doctrine," such as

1 Samuel 20:4-11 — interview occurred. He had not yet recovered his clothes and returned from Ramah! As Willis noted, "These events (of 1 Samuel 19-20) transpired over a relatively brief period, following the ostensible reconciliation between Saul and David in 1 Samuel 19:7."John T. Willis, p. 212. This explains why Jonathan was slow to believe that David was in any danger. There was also another factor in Jonathan's incredulity regarding his father. "Filial attachment naturally blinded the prince to defects in the parental