Bible Commentaries

Genesis 12:10-20 — intervened to deliver Abram and Sarai from Egypt. "The account of Abraham’s ’sojourn’ in Egypt bears the stamp of having been intentionally shaped to parallel the later account of God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Genesis 41 -Exodus 12). Both passages have a similar message as well. Thus, here, at the beginning of the narratives dealing with Abraham and his seed, we find an anticipation of the events that will occur at the end. . . . Behind the pattern stands

Genesis 21:22-34 — 13. Abimelech’s treaty with Abraham 21:22-34 "This scene occurs at the same time as the events of Scene 6 [Genesis 21:1-21] but focuses on different characters and tensions. This second conflict with Abimelech creates a bracket around the Isaac birth narrative. Whereas the first conflict,

Genesis 3:14-15 — Effects on the serpent 3:14-15 God’s judgment on each trespasser (the snake, the woman, and the man) involved both a life function and a relationship. [Note: J. T. Walsh, "Genesis 2:4b-3:24: A Synchronic Approach," Journal of Biblical Literature 96 (1977):168.]

Genesis 36:1 — the area later known as Edom whom Esau brought under his control. [Note: The NET Bible note on 36:1.] We can divide this chapter as follows. Esau’s three wives and five sons, Genesis 36:1-8 Esau’s five sons and 10 grandsons, Genesis 36:9-14 Chiefs (political or military leaders) descended from Esau, Genesis 36:15-19 Chiefs of the Horites (with whom the Edomites intermarried and whom they dispossessed), Genesis 36:20-30 Kings of Edom, Genesis 36:31-39 A final list of chiefs, Genesis 36:40-43 Different

Genesis 39:7-23 — mid-calf-length shorts and a tunic that resembled a long T-shirt (cf. Genesis 3:21; Genesis 37:3). [Note: Wenham, Genesis 16-50, p. 376.] Joseph regarded obedience to God as his primary responsibility (Genesis 39:9) and therefore chose as he did (cf. Psalms 51:4). Note that Potiphar’s wife’s invitation was for Joseph to lie "beside" (Heb. ’esel) her (Genesis 39:10; cf. Genesis 39:15-16; Genesis 39:18; Genesis 41:3), not to lie "with" her, the more common phrase that describes

Genesis 7:11-24 — The Flood proper 7:11-24 There are two views among evangelicals as to the extent of the Flood. 1.    The flood was universal in that it covered the entire earth. Here is a summary of the evidence that supports this view. a.    The purpose

Exodus 21:15-17 — another person would subject the minor to a lesser penalty. In Mesopotamian law a minor striking someone other than his parent would not have his hand cut off; depending on his status he would be fined or flogged. [Note: Code of Hammurabi, sections 202-4.] Likewise, in ancient Israel he would be fined and not subject to the death penalty (Exodus 21:18-19). Thus we have a situation where striking a non-parent makes one subject to regular criminal law, but striking a parent makes one subject to a ’juvenile

Exodus 3:13-22 — Moses’ fear that the Israelite elders would not accept him is understandable (Exodus 3:13). God had not revealed Himself to His people for over 400 years. When Moses asked how he should answer the Israelites’ question, "What is His name?" he was asking how he could demonstrate to them that their God had sent him. "According to the conception prevailing in the ancient East,

1 Chronicles 23:1-32 — to the new temple ritual. This form of worship was a combination of tabernacle and divinely approved revised worship (1 Chronicles 23:3-32; Numbers 3). The Chronicler gave the names of the family heads in Levi’s tribe first (1 Chronicles 23:3-24). Then he explained the duties that David prescribed for them (1 Chronicles 23:25-32). In all this, David was careful to abide within the guidelines of the Mosaic Law and other instructions he had received from the Lord (cf. 1 Chronicles 28:19). Previously

Matthew 24:3 — it its name: the Olivet Discourse. It was an appropriate place for Jesus to give a discourse dealing with His return. The Mount of Olives is where Zechariah predicted that Messiah would stand to judge the nations and establish His kingdom (Zechariah 14:4). This prophecy is foundational to the discourse that follows. The word "privately" as Matthew and Mark used it set the disciples apart from the crowds. Mark wrote that Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Jesus the question (Mark 13:3).

Matthew 25:46 — The goats (unbelievers) will go into eternal punishment in hell eventually instead of entering the messianic kingdom (cf. Matthew 7:21-23; Matthew 13:40-43). This is the only place in Scripture where the term "eternal punishment" appears. Some interpreters believe that "eternal" here does not mean "everlasting" but pertaining to the age to come, which is eternal. [Note:

Matthew 5:17 — not an external, perspective." [Note: Bock, Jesus according . . ., p. 131.] The terms "the Law" and "the Prophets" refer to two of the three major divisions of the Hebrew Bible, the third being "the Psalms" (Luke 24:44). "The Law and the Prophets" was evidently the most common way Jews referred to the Old Testament in Jesus’ day (cf. Matthew 7:12; Matthew 11:13; Matthew 22:40; Luke 16:16; John 1:45; Acts 13:15; Acts 28:23; Romans 3:21). Jesus’

Matthew 8:20 — move. Jesus called Himself "the Son of Man." This expression occurs 81 times in the Gospels, 69 times in the Synoptics, and 30 times in Matthew. [Note: For a good introduction to the meaning of this term, see Hagner’s excursus, pp. 214-15, or Carson’s excursus in "Matthew," pp. 209-13.] In every instance except two it was a term Jesus used of Himself. In those two instances it is a term others who were quoting Jesus used (Luke 24:7; John 12:34). Though it occurs in

John 20:17 — explain any reason for Jesus’ prohibition. Advocates of a second view understand Jesus as telling Mary to release Him because she must go to the disciples with a message. [Note: M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples, pp. 159-60, §476.] However it is very unusual for the preposition "for" (Gr. gar) to link a prohibition and an imperative. [Note: Carson, The Gospel . . ., p. 642.] Furthermore this reading makes "for I have not yet ascended to the Father" a rather

1 Corinthians 11:10 — prophesying along with men. Her covering would serve as a sign of her new liberty in Christ. [Note: Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians, p. 106; M. D. Hooker, "Authority on Her Head: An Examination of I Cor. XI. 10," New Testament Studies 10 (1963-64):410-16.] There does not seem to be adequate basis of support for this view in the passage. The fourth major view takes having "authority" in its usual meaning of having the freedom or right to choose. The meaning in this case would be that

2 Peter 1:21 — Spirit did this. However in view of what we find elsewhere in Scripture, we know He did it without overriding the vocabulary and style of the prophet. In some cases the writers of Scripture used other resource materials (e.g., Joshua 10:13; 1 Kings 14:19; Luke 1:3; et al.). Even though 2 Peter 1:20-21 do not describe the method of inspiration in detail, they clearly affirm the basic method and the fact of inspiration. God is the Author of Scripture (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16). He guided the writers of Scripture

Ruth 3:1-5 — Ruth had proved to be such a blessing to her. Bush argued repeatedly that there is no indication in the text that part of the hope of Naomi and Ruth was that Ruth would bear a child who would perpetuate the line of her first husband. [Note: Bush, p. 147, et al.] But it seems likely that children played a part in the hope that these women entertained in view of how ancient Near Easterners regarded children, even though the writer made no mention of this hope. It was common for Hebrew parents to arrange

2 Samuel 11:1-5 — cf. 2 Samuel 10:7), David was residing in Jerusalem (2 Samuel 11:1). By mentioning the fact that normally kings led their armies into battle in the spring, the writer implied that David was not acting responsibly by staying in Jerusalem (cf. 1 Samuel 14:1-2). ". . . leading his troops into battle was expected to be the major external activity of an ancient Near Eastern ruler . . ." [Note: Youngblood, p. 928. Cf. 1 Samuel 8:5-6, 20.] "Our most difficult times are not when things

2 Samuel 15:13-37 — responsible for worship in Jerusalem where David built a new structure to house the ark. Abiathar seems to have functioned for many years as David’s personal chaplain. Earlier Zadok had been in charge of the Gibeon sanctuary (1 Chronicles 16:39-42). God’s "habitation" (2 Samuel 15:25) most likely refers to the new tent David had recently completed in Jerusalem (cf. 1 Chronicles 15:1). These facts suggest another reason for Absalom’s rebellion and the support he enjoyed.

2 Samuel 7:4-17 — God’s purpose to honor David 7:4-17 The promises Yahweh made to David here are an important key to understanding God’s program for the future. God rejected David’s suggestion that he build a temple for the Lord and gave three reasons. First, there was no pressing need to