What is a good commentary for John, Romans and 1 Corinthians?

What commentaries will help most in studying these books?

Again, first consult the commentaries in "What the Bible Teaches" on each of these books. The above mentioned general commentaries also help with these books.

John: Any of the authors who wrote books on the gospels recommended by Tom Wilson (September, October, 2001) are worth consulting where they write on John. George Reith is not well known, but, of his 314 pages in two small volumes, W. Smith says, "Dr. Reith has packed more helpful, practical, biblical, interpretative material into the unusually rich paragraphs of this book than any other writer on the same gospel within the same space." Leon L. Morris has 936 pages on John, of which Barber writes, "a work of superlative scholarship that not only replaces the majestic work of Westcott but surpasses Barrett as well."

Romans: James Currie has just released his book on Romans, which is likely to be very helpful. H. C. G. Moules book, "The Epistle to the Romans" is highly rated. His "Studies in Romans" is good, but less valuable than the other.

I Corinthians: J. M. Davies "The Epistle to the Corinthians" and W. E. Vines "I Corinthians" are very helpful aids for study.

Ephesians: William MacDonald in his "Believers Bible Commentary" devotes more pages proportionately to Ephesians than any other epistle of Paul. It may well be the outstanding work in his commentary.

"In the Heavenlies" is one of Henry A. Ironsides best studies. John R. W. Stott, "Gods New Society: The Message of Ephesians" is also very helpful.

Hebrews: "Studies in the Epistle to the Hebrews" by E. Schuyler English and "An Unshakeable Kingdom" by David Gooding are a good basis for studying this book.

W. Gustafson
Other pages in this section

About this site

How can we deal with in-law problems?

It is important always to remember that you and your in-laws are all children of God and loved by Him so much that He gave His Son for each of you. We are commanded in 1 John 4:11," TARGET="_blank">1 John 4:11,12 to love one another, thus proving the reality of our salvation. If problems have developed between believers, the Lord Jesus taught in Matthew 18:15" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:15 that we should discuss and clear up the problems privately. If that doesn't work (verse 16), then one or two brethren with spiritual wisdom and experience should be invited to give unbiased advice. Every effort should be made to avoid involving others in the assembly.

Sometimes the problem is that parents have been so accustomed to the subjection of their children in the home that they forget that their married "child" is now a member of a new family with the husband as the head. The situation should never be left to fester and become worse, or it can develop into strife not only within the family but also in the assembly

A. Joyce

Other pages in this section

About this site

What is a Nazarene?

How are we to understand the words in Matthew 2:23" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 2:23 “He shall be called a Nazarene”?

Some connect them with the Nazarite vow, but how did that depend on living in Nazareth?

The exact words quoted are not to be found verbatim in any particular Old Testament Prophet, and the evangelist does not assert so much, but only, as it seems, that the sense of his quotation “was spoken by the prophets.” The phrase cannot refer to the Nazariteship of the Lord, because His consecration was not on the line of the Jewish vow of the Nazarite. He was not a Nazarite in the literal sense, and had He been, that would not have depended on His living in Nazareth. Indeed, this interpretation may be ruled out, for the words both in Hebrew and Greek are different—that for Nazarite being “Nazir” or “Nazeiraios,” whereas an inhabitant of Nazareth is generally “Nazöraios” or else (e.g., Mark 1" TARGET="_blank">Mark 1: 24 or Luke 4:34)" TARGET="_blank">Luke 4:34) “Nazarênos.” Some have thought the reference is to Nazareth, as a despised place, which would tally so well with our Lord’s name of Nazarene, which certainly conveyed the thought of reproach. However this may be, the more probable interpretation seems to be that which connects the words of Matthew with such a passage as Isa. ii. i, “There 8hall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Netzer (Branch) shall grow out of his roots.” The name “Nazareth” is probably derived from Netzer, from the bushes and shrubs which were a feature of the landscape, a fact that would thus recall the prophetic name.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Why does the church share a cup for the wine?

In this passage, what is the significance of partaking of the cup?

Since God required the blood to satisfy His claims (Exodus 12:13;" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 12:13; Leviticus 17:11)," TARGET="_blank">Leviticus 17:11), the cup of blessing expresses fellowship with God. Those partaking of the cup share a fellowship with God on the basis of shed blood. This corporate act expresses a corporate fellowship, "the fellowship" (Acts 2:42)" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:42) existing when believers obey the Spirit’s teaching, thus forming an assembly (1 Corinthians 1:9)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 1:9).

This is central to Paul’s teaching about idolatry. By partaking of what was given for idols ("the cup of devils"), they expressed a fellowship with demons ("the table of devils"). By symbolically partaking of what was for God ("the cup of the Lord"), they expressed a fellowship with the Lord ("the table of the Lord"). It is morally impossible to have fellowship with devils (demons) and with the Lord, to participate with the heathen temple and with the church of God. Participating in the assembly requires separation from evil.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What does it mean to "wait upon the Lord"?

Please explain what is meant by “waiting upon the Lord,” as in Isaiah 40:31" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 40:31?

Several Hebrew words are translated, “wait,” in the Old Testament. The root used here for “wait upon” is different from that, say in Psalm 62:5," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 62:5, and elsewhere, where the R.V. Margin has “to be silent” (“dämam”—properly “to be dumb”). Here the word is “qãvãh, of which the primary meaning is “to be strong,” and then “to await” (the idea being perhaps that waiting God’s answer does need a certain strength of purpose or endurance). The two roots are found together in Psalm 62:5," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 62:5, “My soul wait (dãmam—be dumb) thou only upon God, for my expectation (qãvãh root) is from Him.” Isa. xl. 31 then means that they that come to the Lord and tell Him their needs, and are willing to wait His time for an answer, “shall renew their strength.” Waiting upon God gets the answer some day, and strengthens the soul to-day. Therefore “wait (qavah) on thy God continually” (Hosea 12:6)." TARGET="_blank">Hosea 12:6).

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Why does 2 Kings 8:26 say Ahaziah began to reign at 22 but 2 Chronicles 22:2 says he was 42?

Why does 2 Kings 8:26" TARGET="_blank">2 Kings 8:26 say Ahaziah began to reign at 22 but 2 Chronicles 22:2" TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 22:2 says he was 42?

Commentators attempt to explain this in at least half a dozen ways (see John Gill’s "Expositor"). Here are two of the better suggestions.

1. The 42 years are an ironic connection with the house of Ahab. Omri, Ahab’s father, began his dynasty in Israel about 42 years before Ahaziah was 22 (1 Kings 16:23; 15:10; 22:42;" TARGET="_blank">1 Kings 16:23; 15:10; 22:42; 2 Kings 8:17)." TARGET="_blank">2 Kings 8:17). The four sentences that follow the statement that Ahaziah was 42 (literally, "a son of 42 years") all link Judah’s King Ahaziah with Israel’s wicked house of Ahab. "Also," used twice, shows Ahaziah’s similarity to Ahab’s wickedness (2 Chronicles 22:2-5)." TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 22:2-5). The 42 years then make a powerful statement that the character of Ahaziah embodied the wickedness of those 42 years in Israel. However, the expression, "a son of 42 years," is nowhere else used in this way.

2. 42 is a copyist’s error and should be 22. Commentators, while upholding the inerrancy of Scripture, generally support this view. The difference between the two numbers is a difference between two similar Hebrew characters. 22 appears in some very old manuscripts of the Septuagint, Arabic, and Syraic Scriptures. In fairness, these postdate the Hebrew manuscripts and the absence of 22 in predated Hebrew manuscripts provides no evidence of an error by the scribes renowned for accuracy in copying the Scriptures. This explanation relies on an unsupported supposition.

If forced to choose, I prefer the first.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Will the resurrection bodies of the saints be the same as those in which they lived and died?

THE RESURRECTION BODY
Will the resurrection bodies of the saints be the same as those in which they lived and died?

In our Lord’s resurrection we have the pattern of our own. Was the Lord’s resurrection body the same as that in which He lived and died? Yes, it was the same body; there was nothing left in the tomb but the grave-clothes, and our Lord took pains to show that His body was truly the very one that had died, by calling attention to His hands and feet which bore the marks of His cruel death on Calvary.

But though the same, it was not under the same conditions.* It was a spiritual body, not subject to the same laws as before. It could disappear at will; it could pass through closed doors; it could be seen and not be recognised, and then suddenly become recognisable; but also it could be touched and felt; it could eat, it had flesh and bones, it was a real body. When the Lord ascended “God gave Him glory,” and His body was also glorified, as Paul saw Him on the way to Damascus. It was the same body, but under new conditions (see Luke 24:36-43;" TARGET="_blank">Luke 24:36-43; John 20:5, 7, 13, 19, 25, 27;" TARGET="_blank">John 20:5, 7, 13, 19, 25, 27; Philippians 3:20-21)." TARGET="_blank">Philippians 3:20-21). Really the buried body is the sown grain, and the glorified body the flower, the same, yet not the same. God gives to the grain a body as He pleases. But what goes to form the flower, was once in the grain. A gardener can recognise the flower from the seed, and vice-versa. And so every saint will have a glorified body that will be recognisable, as coming from its particular seed sown in the graveyard. There will be no confusion: “to every seed his own body,” and all “like Him” (1 Corinthians 15:37, 38, 44, 49)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15:37, 38, 44, 49).
W.H.

* certain elementary substances such as sulphur, phosphorus, oxygen, carbon have the quality of existing in distinct forms, known as allotropic modifications. Thus carbon exists as diamond, graphite or soot. There may be a distant analogy between this and the existence of the body under different conditions.

Other pages in this section

About this site

kjv sunday school lessons on samson

The Bible character Sampson is one of the great heros of the sunday school lesson colleciton. Here are some resources that you can use to teach Samson's life, Samson's faith and his mistakes.

See the lessons section for a kick start on what you should include in your sunday school lesson.

See the sunday school activities section for ideas on printable projects, power points and classroom activities to go along with the sunday school lesson.

If you wish to search the KJV Bible for any scripture passage click here .

Other pages in this section

About this site

When should I confront a person who has offended me?

When should I ignore offenses against me and when I confront the offender?

Three passages answer the first part of the question. "The discretion of a man deferreth his anger; and it is his glory to pass over a transgression." (Proverbs 19:11)." TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 19:11). In Matthew 18:22," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:22, when the Lord taught Peter to forgive "until seventy times seven," He discouraged keeping count of others' wrongs. It is not right to remember with resentment or with a view to paying back. "Taketh not account of evil" (1 Corinthians 13:5," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 13:5, RV) is in keeping with this teaching.

Luke 17:3," TARGET="_blank">Luke 17:3,4 touches the second part of the question: "If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him." Here are the alternatives: rebuke him or forget it. If I must rebuke him, the Lord Jesus teaches, "tell him his fault between thee and him alone" (Matthew 18:15)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:15). If there is a good possibility of restoring him from wrongdoing, Galatians 6:1" TARGET="_blank">Galatians 6:1 teaches me to confront him "in the spirit of meekness." When there is professed repentance, the Lord instructs me to forgive, since only God can measure its genuineness.

W. Gustafson

Other pages in this section

About this site

What qualifications should a preacher meet?

If a man in the fellowship of an assembly has previously been put away on several occasions for fornication, should he be permitted to preach the Gospel or minister the Word in assembly meetings?

1 Timothy 3:8-12" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 3:8-12 gives us the qualifications for deacons, men who serve the Lord in an assembly. The primary service of deacons (servants) is spiritual, that is, ministering the Word of God to believers and preaching the Gospel to sinners. Verse 10 clearly states that they must first be proved; "then let them minister being found blameless" (Newberry margin). The Scripture therefore clearly disqualifies a Christian man in an assembly from preaching the Gospel to sinners or ministering the Word to believers, if he has been guilty of repeated moral sins.

A. Joyce

Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu