NISB or NIOVC?

[Brian W. Davidson]

For quick reference concerning historical and literary matters would the New Interpreter's Study Bible or the New Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary be better? Something else?

 

I know this is subjective, but I would like to hear your thoughts.

Edited October 31, 2015 by Brian W. Davidson

[Daniel Francis]

Over all I think the Study Bible  is a bit better because it is more even,  as occasionally the OVC can be extremely brief, other times it is solid gold. Here are a couple comparisons.

 

1 Samuel 2:

 

New Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary

 

2:1–11. The Song of Hannah. Originally a hymn of national thanksgiving, this poem was adopted for the story of Hannah because of its reference to God reversing the fate of the disadvantaged (esp. vv. 4–8). The line in v. 5 about the barren woman who bears children seems particularly appropriate for Hannah. The references to Yahweh’s “king” and “anointed” (v. 10) indicate that the poem was written during the period of the monarchy and thus significantly later than the time of Hannah. The poem features in Mary’s Magnificat (Luke 1:46–55).

 

 

Steve McKenzie, 1 Samuel, The New Interpreter’s Bible One Volume Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010), 189.

 

New Interpreter's Study Bible

 

Chapter 2

 

2:1–11 This poem is a national thanksgiving and does not specifically relate to Hannah’s situation (cf. v. 5b). It probably dates from a later period (cf. v. 10b) than the book of Samuel. Nonetheless, it is appropriate here because its theme of God’s delivering the people from oppression, seen first in Hannah, runs through all of Samuel. (This song is the model for Mary’s thanksgiving Magnificat in Luke 1:46–55.)

 

2:2 Rock indicates a dependably sure foundation (2 Sam 22:2–3, 32, 47; 23:3; cf. Matt 7:24–27).

 

2:3–8 Israel’s enemies are warned that their actions will be judged by the one who established the world; they are also given examples of God’s liberating the forgotten and poor from desperate situations. For Sheol, see Excursus: “Life After Death in the OT,” 434.

 

2:9–10 Verse 9 is essentially the theology of the Deuteronomistic History: God rewards the righteous and punishes the wicked.

 

Special Note

Although this statement of absolute justice is supported widely in Prov 1:29–33; 12:21 and 13:21; other biblical writers raise the issue of theodicy: How can divine justice allow tragedy to strike the innocent? This opposing view appears, e.g., in Eccl (as in 4:1–3; 7:15) and Job (esp. chaps. 1–2). Similarly, Isa 53:4, a passage many Christians take as referring to Christ, points out the error in assuming that all those who suffer are being punished.

 

2:10 Since the move to the monarchy is a generation in the future, King is anachronistic, perhaps indicating that this poem comes from a later time. Here it alerts the reader to the coming change and to God’s involvement in it. The poem establishes Hannah as the first prophetic voice in the book.

 

2:11 The LXX says “they” left him there; if the MT’s reading of Elkanah alone is preferred, it may mean that Hannah stayed to serve at the shrine (cf. 2:22, although 2:18–20 shows her coming and going on annual visits) or it may simply refer to the household by the name of its head (cf. Gen 13:1–3).

 

2:12–7:17 This section explores both the relationship between Eli and Samuel and the different effects of their leadership on Israel. The first of several prophecies in the book occurs here; they connect the somewhat episodic action into a coherent entity.

 

2:12–4:1a The offspring of the woman who prayed for a child and the priest who misunderstood her are compared: her son is faithful to God, while his sons are corrupt.

 

2:12–26 Scoundrels is used to describe Hophni and Phineas; the same Hebrew word is used in 10:27; 2 Sam 20:1 to describe others who rebel against authority. The problematic father/son relationship that runs through 1–2 Sam is raised here for the first time (see notes on 1:1–2:11). Eli’s competence as a priest was questioned in 1:12–14 and is questioned again here, along with his skills as a father; his priestly sons are taking proscribed portions of the offerings for their own use (Lev 3:14–17; 7:30–36; Num 18:17–18).

 

2:18 The word ephod has several uses in 1–2 Sam. Here it refers to a simple ceremonial garment (as in 22:18; 2 Sam 6:14), not the elaborate ephod of the high priest (Exod 28:6–35; 39:1–26), which was associated with “inquiring of the Lord” using the Urim and Thummim (Exod 28:30; 1 Sam 14:3, 18–19; 23:6–12; 30:7–8).

 

2:20 For the gift that she made to in Hebrew reads literally “for the gift that she asked of,” using the root shʾal; see note on 1:20.

 

2:21 See notes on 2:1–11, esp. v. 5. For children as God’s reward for faithfulness, see Exod 1:21.

 

2:22–26 In his ineffectual attempt to guide his sons, Eli does not remind them of their duty to God, to people, or to their father; he speaks only of the danger they are putting themselves in.

 

Special Note

The following verses show that the ending of v. 25 in no way absolves the sons or Eli of responsibility for their own actions. Although the ending has been understood to support predestination in the sense that Eli’s sons were doomed from birth, it is better seen in the light of the sure punishment for wrongdoing found in 2:9. Cf. the repeated statements that “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart” (Exod 7:3; 9:12; 10:1) and that “Pharaoh hardened his heart” (Exod 8:15, 32; 9:34–35) in the exodus story, referred to in v. 27. See also 1 Sam 6:6. In no sense is Pharaoh seen as a victim of God, but rather one whose intractability toward God is almost beyond belief. This theology offers no concept of an independent evil force; instead, all things come from God (cf. Exod 4:24–26; 2 Sam 24:1). Like Pharaoh, Hophni and Phineas are responsible for their own destruction.

 

2:26 While Eli’s sons are earning rebuke, Hannah’s son is growing physically and spiritually.

 

2:27–36 Verse 25 spoke of the deaths of Eli’s sons; in this section we find that his whole house will be destroyed. This news comes by an unknown man of God rather than being directly given by God to Eli. Its fulfillment extends throughout the books of Samuel and into 1 Kgs. Verse 34 is fulfilled in 4:11, but the rest of the oracle deals with events during the time of Saul, David, and Solomon.

 

2:27–28 Your ancestor Probably a reference to Aaron’s consecration in Lev 8–9; note that Aaron also has two sons who misuse their priestly privileges (Num 3:3; see also notes on 1:12–18. For ephod, see note on 2:18.

 

2:30 I promised...but now See Exod 29:4–9; 40:12–15; Num 25:10–13. The promise still applies to the rest of the Aaronides (descendants of Aaron) but not to Eli’s branch; he and his sons have not lived up to it.

 

2:31–33 This passage concerns Saul’s slaughter of the priests of Nob (22:16–23; Abiathar alone survives).

 

2:34–35 V. 34 is fulfilled in 4:11, and v. 35 refers not to Samuel (whose sons do not inherit his power; see 8:1–5), but to Zadok (2 Sam 8:17; 1 Kgs 1:8; 2:26–35); it explains why Abiathar’s line is not chosen.

 

2:36 Descendants of the family who were rejected for eating meat that was not their due will need to beg for bread.

 

Walter J. Harrelson, eds. The New Interpreter’s Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), n.p.

 

Psalm 1

 

New Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary

 

Psalm 1

 

Psalm 1 contrasts the “way of the righteous” (v. 6) and the “way of sinners/the wicked” (vv. 1, 6). The first stanza (vv. 1–3) portrays the way of the righteous; the second stanza (vv. 4–6) portrays the way of the wicked.

 

In the first stanza, the one who is “happy” is described first negatively and then positively. Negatively, this one does not follow the advice of the wicked, take the “way” of sinners, or sit in the seat of scoffers. Positively, this one delights in God’s instruction, which is a better translation of torah than law—the term here could almost be translated scripture. The happy one will flourish, like a tree that bears fruit even in a brutal environment. The connection between the tree that drinks of the water and the happy one who drinks of the Lord’s instruction/scripture is obvious.

 

The second stanza also begins negatively, by describing the “way of the wicked.” They do not bear fruit and flourish. Quite the opposite from one who is deeply rooted in God’s instruction, the wicked lacks roots and thus is like dried up leaves in autumn, lacking substance and subject to the wind. The poem ends with the promise that God watches over the chosen people. The wicked choose their own way and thus lead themselves to destruction. The righteous surrender self-mastery and give themselves to the Lord’s way, becoming objects of the Lord’s care.

 

Rolf A. Jacobson, Psalms, The New Interpreter’s Bible One Volume Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010), 310.

 

New Interpreter's Study Bible

 

Chapter 1

 

1:1–6 Blessed assurance The first two psalms are a programmatic introduction to the psalter and to the way of Torah piety. In contrast to all other psalms in Book I (Pss 1–41), except Ps 10 and 33, Pss 1–2 have no superscription. Repetitions of the word “happy” (Heb. ʾashre; Pss 1:1; 2:12) frame statements that distinguish the righteous individual from wicked people (Ps 1) and Israel’s king from other rulers (Ps 2). Both psalms teach that a blessed life involves deliberate avoidance of the way of the wicked and conscious choice of God’s way (Pss 1:6; 2:12; see Excursus on “ ʾAshre,” 754). The LORD’s law (1:2) and decree (2:7) prioritize lives oriented to God. Ps 1 is a didactic wisdom poem that confidently differentiates the stability and productivity of the righteous person from the ephemeral nature of the wicked (vv. 4–6). The text may be divided thusly: vv. 1–3, the way of the righteous; vv. 4–6, the way of the wicked.

 

1:1–3

 

1:2 The law of the LORD Torah is at the heart of success and righteousness. Constancy, joy, and fruitfulness characterize the individual who delights in and continually meditates (the same Heb root, hgh, is translated as “plot” in 2:1) upon God’s law (cf. Pss 19; 119). In vv. 1–3, the Hebrew uses masc. sing. pronouns where the NRSV translates the plural those and they.

 

1:4–6

 

1:4 Chaff The wicked are like debris from threshing that the wind blows away.

 

1:5–6 Arranged as a chiasm, these terms complete the separation: (A) The wicked will not stand in the congregation of the righteous ( , for the LORD watches over the way of the righteous (B´), while the way of the wicked (A´) will perish.

 

Walter J. Harrelson, eds. The New Interpreter’s Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), n.p.

 

Isaiah 6:

 

New Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary

 

6:1–13 Isaiah’s Vision of the Holy One, and the Message Isaiah Is to Give

 

 

6:1–8. This account of Isaiah’s ministry starts by describing how he came to be a prophet. Initially it describes a vision of Yahweh, specifically of Yahweh as the great king (in the context of the earthly king’s death) and as the holy one: not just holy but utterly holy. This vision explains why Yahweh’s being “the Holy One” is so important in Isaiah. The seraphs come only here in the OT; because saraf means “burn,” and on the basis of OT references to fiery serpents, they are usually reckoned to be serpent-like.

 

6:9–13. This is not really a story about Isaiah’s call, because actually Isaiah volunteers, and he is then commissioned to declare a frightening message. Understandably, then, readings in church commonly stop at v. 8, but vv. 1–8 lead inexorably into vv. 9–13. Isaiah’s ministry is to stop people from understanding anything, so that terrible punishment falls on them; Jesus says the same applies to his ministry (Mark 4:11–12). The people are already willfully resistant to Yahweh’s message; this persistent lack of understanding is one form that punishment will take. At the same time, the point of telling people that this is Isaiah’s commission (as with other prophetic declarations of judgment) is presumably in part to shake them into a response that will mean the declaration does not need to be implemented.

 

 

John Goldingay, Isaiah, The New Interpreter’s Bible One Volume Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010), 393.

 

New Interpreter's Study Bible

 

Chapter 6

 

6:1–13 First Isaiah’s inaugural oracle, describing his call to be a prophet (for other inaugural oracles, see 1 Sam 3:1–4:1a; Isa 40:1–11; Jer 1:4–10; Ezek 1:1–3:11; and Amos 7:14–15). The account is probably placed here rather than at the book’s beginning because of its close association with the oracles that immediately follow in 7:1–8:18 concerning the Syro-Ephraimite war.

 

6:1 Like the prophets Ezekiel and Micaiah (Ezek 1:1–3:11; 1 Kgs 22:19), First Isaiah sees God majestically enthroned. Yet while his counterparts envisioned the enthroned deity in the heavens, First Isaiah sees God in the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem Temple, an image consistent with the prophet’s conviction that Jerusalem was the seat of God’s universal dominion (see the note at 1:2–20 and the Excursus: “Zion in Prophetic Literature and in the Psalms,” 960). First Isaiah’s presence in the Temple’s inner sanctum may suggest that he was a priest as well as a prophet or, at least, a member of the Temple’s religious establishment (see also Jer 1:1; Ezek 1:3). Uzziah died in c. 742 BCE.

 

6:2 Seraphs are supernatural beings, probably serpentine in form and associated with fire (see 14:29 and 30:6). They cover their faces to protect themselves from seeing God (see Exod 33:20; Judg 13:22). Feet is a euphemism for genitals.

 

6:3 The chant holy, holy, holy emphasizes the utterly sacred nature of God, a being wholly set apart and separated from all defilement and impurity (see the note at 1:4). It is repeated in Rev 4:8. The early church found in it, evidence for its doctrine of the Trinity and incorporated it into the eucharistic prayer. It is also frequently used in Jewish liturgy. On LORD of hosts, see 1:9.

 

6:5 Having seen God, the prophet fears for his life (see v. 2).

 

6:6–7 First Isaiah’s lips are cleansed by a coal taken from one of the Temple’s altars (see similar imagery in Jer 1:9–10 and Ezek 2:8–3:3, where God puts divine words into the prophets’ mouths; see also the note at 50:4–5).

 

6:8 The actual commission of the prophet. God asks, “Who will go for us?” a reference to God’s divine assembly (see 40:1–11). First Isaiah responds, “Here am I” (Moses in Exod 3:4, and Samuel in 1 Sam 3:4, respond to God’s call similarly; see also Isa 40:6).

 

6:9–10 First Isaiah’s task is to make the people stubborn or hardheaded, for God has already decided to punish them for some unspecified sin.

 

Special Note

This passage is quoted in all four Gospels (Matt 13:14–15; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; John 12:40) to describe those who fail to follow Jesus. In Acts 28:26–27, these reprobates are specifically identified as the Jews, who are contrasted with the Gentiles, “who will listen” (see Rom 9), a sentiment echoed by many of the church fathers in their anti-Judaic manifestos (e.g., Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Ambrose, John Chrysostom, Jerome, and Augustine). See further the Excursus: “Anti-Semitic Interpretations of Isaiah,” 959–60.

 

6:11–13 A description of the judgment to come.

 

Walter J. Harrelson, eds. The New Interpreter’s Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), n.p.

 

 

Matthew 5:

 

New Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary

 

B. Messiah, Mighty in Word (5:1–7:29)

 

In the first of five discourses of Jesus in the Gospel (the “Sermon on the Mount,” 5:1–7:27), Matthew shows him to be “mighty in . . . word” (Luke 24:19; cf. Matt 7:28–29). The focus of the sermon is on the character and behavior of those who participate in God’s rule. Spoken originally on a mountain (5:1, recalling the mountain from which Israel received God’s law [Exod 19:16–20:21]) by Jesus to his disciples, Jesus’ words come to later disciples from their risen Lord, in possession of “all authority in heaven and on earth”: it is at the behest of the risen Lord that they are taught to obey his commands (28:18–20). The identity of the speaker is crucial: the (counterintuitive) declaration that “the meek . . . will inherit the earth” (5:5), the command (counter to human instinct) not to “resist an evildoer” (5:39), the assurance (counter, at times, to all appearances) that the heavenly Father will provide for the needs of those who seek God’s kingdom (6:33); these are not the quixotic ideals of a deluded prophet, but reality as disclosed by the Lord of all, a reality now hidden within the kingdoms of this world, but destined one day to supplant them.

 

5:1–16. The People of God in the Midst of the World. The sermon begins (5:3–12) with a series of beatitudes, a familiar form (cf. Ps 1:1–3; 128:1–4) that identifies first who it is who enjoys God’s favor (“the poor in spirit,” “those who mourn,” etc.), then the manner in which that favor is revealed (“theirs is the kingdom of heaven,” “they will be comforted,” etc.). The pronouncements, which overturn worldly values and expectations, remain hopeless ideals at odds with reality unless they come from One whose word creates and shapes reality.

 

The “poor in spirit” are those who, in their desperate need, cry to God for help (cf. Ps 34:18). “Those who mourn” are those grieved by all that is evil in the world and by their own part in its waywardness. The “meek” are those who want no part in the world’s pursuit of power, but become like children and serve others. “Those who hunger and thirst for righteousness” are those who long to see all that is good and right prevail in the world—and in their own lives. The “merciful” are those eager to aid all in need, ready to forgive all who wrong them, and charitable in assessing the deeds and motives of others. The “pure in heart” are those who singlemindedly pursue the will of God. The “peacemakers” are those who subordinate their own rights and interests to maintain peace, overcoming evil with good (cf. Rom 12:21). Misfits and persecuted on earth, the poor in spirit, mourners, and meek who follow Jesus will be rewarded with a part in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[p. 636]

 

Yet followers of Jesus must be faithful to their calling, to the way of life prescribed for them by Jesus, if they are to be a good, not useless, presence in the world (v. 13). The good they do can no more be hidden than can a city built on a hill; but it elicits praise for the divine Source of all good rather than for the conduits of God’s goodness (vv. 14–16).

 

5:17–48. The Greater Righteousness of God’s Rule. The grace of the gospel and Jesus’ compassion for sinners have at times been mistaken for an acceptance of all kinds of human behavior, erasing distinctions between good and evil (in effect, abolishing God’s law [5:17]). In this section of the Sermon on the Mount, the same Jesus who befriends tax collectors and prostitutes declares insults and lustful looks to be sins that deserve damnation. In both cases, God’s incarnate goodness is at work: a love that reaches out to the wounded and broken while inexorably opposing every trace of the evil responsible for their brokenness.

 

Jesus does away with none of God’s demands—indeed, as guides to a life in harmony with the wisdom of God’s creation, they cannot be done away as long as creation lasts (5:18); rather, he brings them to their intended “fulfillment” (v. 17). While extending forgiveness to every repentant sinner who falls short, he makes no compromise in spelling out the righteousness of God’s kingdom, a righteousness far surpassing mere compliance with any legal code, including that comprised by the legal enactments of “scribes and Pharisees” (5:20). He “fulfills” the law, then, not by simply restating its provisions, but rather by vividly portraying the righteousness of God’s rule that underlies the Mosaic code, but which that code, as the law of an earthly society of imperfect human beings, can only approximate.

 

Thus a legal code can prohibit murder and adultery but not outbursts of anger, expressions of contempt, or lustful looks. Jesus does (5:21–30), since these too express human willfulness, not God’s rule. Regulated divorce, oaths that guarantee truth-telling when invoked (but presuppose more laxity on other occasions), and retributive justice may be necessary evils in a society of sinners (cf. 19:8), but they can have no place in lives governed by God’s goodness (5:31–42). And inasmuch as God’s goodness and compassion extend to “all that he has made” (Ps 145:9; cf. Matt 5:45), the love and benevolence of God’s children cannot be exclusive, but must be shown even toward those who mistreat them (vv. 43–47). In short, the moral vision of Jesus’ followers finds its inspiration, its goal, and its delight in the perfection of divine goodness (5:48).

 

The language Jesus uses is typically dramatic, even hyperbolic, rather than legal, conveying a vision without attempting to spell out how God’s children are to behave in every situation. Reflecting on the pictures Jesus uses, they must understand that they cannot serve God acceptably when they are at odds with other human beings; every attempt must be made to be reconciled at once with any whom they have wronged (vv. 23–26). They must be vigilant in shunning all avoidable temptations to sin and rigorous in resisting the unavoidable (vv. 29–30). When ill-treated, they are to respond with a love that seeks the wrongdoer’s good, “overcom[ing] evil with good” (v. 39; Rom 12:21). As children of the Lord of heaven and earth, they need hardly fend for themselves and their rights; they can afford to be magnanimous toward all as God their Father is magnanimous (vv. 40–42, 44–48).

 

The intensification of punishments listed in v. 22 appears rhetorical; the wrongs condemned are equally sinful. The point of v. 32 is that the God who ordained marriage does not recognize divorce (cf. 19:4–6); hence second marriages, in the eyes of One for whom the first marriage is still in force, entail an adulterous relationship. The husband who (in Jewish practice of Jesus’ day) initiates the divorce bears responsibility for his (remarried) wife’s adultery unless it was her unfaithfulness that precipitated the divorce (“except on the ground of unchastity”). The logic of vv. 34–36 is that true reverence for God means avoiding all oaths, not simply those that explicitly mention the divine name; after all, any circumlocution inevitably remains within the sphere of God’s domain.

 

Stephen Westerholm, Matthew, The New Interpreter’s Bible One Volume Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010), 635-636.

 

New Interpreter's Study Bible

 

Chapter 5

 

5:1–7:28 These chapters comprise the Sermon on the Mount, the first of five collections (chaps. 10; 13; 18; 24–25) of Jesus’ teaching or revelation of God’s will. These thematic discourses instruct disciples, shaping their identity and lifestyle. The Sermon begins with blessings and sayings (5:3–16). Its middle section comprises six interpretations of scripture (5:17–48), instruction on three distinctive discipleship practices (6:1–18), and teaching on social and economic practices (6:19–7:12). The sermon closes with scenes of eschatological destiny (7:13–27). More than providing information about God’s will and motivating disciples to do it, the sermon offers visions of God’s empire. It sketches life in an alternative community marked by justice, transformed social relationships, practices of piety, and shared and accessible resources. Life under Rome’s imperial rule with vast discrepancies of wealth and much injustice is not God’s will.

 

5:1–2 Jesus addresses his disciples. So far there are only four (4:18–22; 10:1–4), but they represent all disciples. The mountain recalls Mt. Sinai and Moses’ revelation there (Exod 19–24) as well as Mt. Zion, where God’s empire will be established (Isa 35:4–10).

 

5:3–12 Nine blessings (beatitudes) divide into two groups (vv. 3–6 and vv. 7–12). Blessings declare God’s favor, not on attitudes, but on certain conditions and behaviors. The declarations encourage appropriate actions.

 

5:3–6 Surprisingly, in an imperial world that prizes power, wealth, and status, God’s favor is found among the powerless and poor (the meek, Ps 37) without resources and options who yearn for God’s empire and faithful intervention (5:3–6). The second half of each blessing promises God’s future reversal of these imperial situations. That reversal is already under way in Jesus’ ministry. These blessings name the distressing consequences of Roman rule and promise God’s victory over it.

 

5:7–12 These five beatitudes bless the social actions of the alternative community of disciples that manifests God’s empire. Persecution (name-calling, rumors, and social antagonism, 5:10–12) is inevitable when the powerful elite are challenged. God rewards faithfulness.

 

5:13–16 Transforming mission is the disciples’ task.

 

5:17–48 The focus changes to the interpretation of scripture. After some initial principles (5:17–20), six examples follow (5:21–48). These are often called “antitheses” on the mistaken view that Jesus rejects aspects of “dead Judaism.” But far from rejecting it, Jesus builds on the very vibrant Judaism of the 1st century. He enters into debated questions and offers the “right” interpretation of God’s will to guide how disciples live.

 

5:17–20 Jesus does not abolish the law and the prophets, the biblical tradition, but seeks to implement God’s revealed, saving will (5:17). Scripture has lasting authority, its smallest elements will not disappear, until the end of the world when in God’s new creation (19:28) God’s empire is established. But scripture always needs interpreting, and in Matthew Jesus interprets it as the examples of 5:21–48 demonstrate (so 1:22–23; 4:15–16, etc.).

 

5:19–20 Those who teach otherwise, who loosen a commandment, will be punished. Disciples must actively live the Scriptures interpreted by Jesus. The scribes and Pharisees live inadequately. To exceed their lived obedience (righteousness) means doing more—in 5:21–26 not only not murdering but not hating. It also means doing differently. As allies, the leaders preserve Rome’s hierarchical and unjust society (cf. 23:23). Disciples must challenge it by creating an alternative, just society.

 

5:21–48 Jesus offers six examples for this alternative community that embodies God’s empire.

 

5:21–26 Jesus interprets the prohibition of murder in the Ten Commandments (the Decalogue, Exod 20:13) to apply to the destruction of people with violent and publicly abusive anger, and dismissing them to hell.

 

5:27–30 Jesus interprets the Decalogue’s prohibition of adultery (Exod 20:14) to condemn the predatory behaviors and structures of a patriarchal society, to curb male power, and to establish different male-female interaction.

 

5:31–32 Deuteronomy regulates but it neither justifies nor forbids divorce (Deut 24:1–4). Against other permissive views, Jesus interprets it strictly to limit male power and declare that a man does not have unlimited power to dismiss/divorce a wife at his whim. See 19:3–9.

 

5:33–37 Jesus extends the prohibition against false oaths (Exod 20:7) to all oaths. A community of integrity and “right” relationships does not need oaths that can be used evasively.

 

5:38–42 Jesus interprets teaching about restricted revenge (Exod 21:24). The translation of 5:39 should read, “Do not use violence to resist an evildoer.” Instead of revenge (fight) or flight into passivity or indifference, disciples oppose evil with non-violent resistance. Jesus offers examples of such resistance that aim to confound the more powerful, restore dignity and initiative to the oppressed, and publicly shame or disarm the aggressor.

 

5:41 Imperial officials could commandeer labor, equipment, supplies, transportation, and shelter.

 

5:43–48 The Bible does not command hatred toward one’s enemies. Jesus extends the command to love neighbors (Lev 19:18) to everyone, in imitation of God’s indiscriminate love and life-giving mercy to all, both good and bad.

 

Walter J. Harrelson, eds. The New Interpreter’s Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), n.p.

 

Revelation 1:

 

New Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary

 

I. Introduction (1:1–20)

 

1:1–3. Prologue. The first word of the book, “revelation” or “apocalypse” (Gk.: apokalypsis), indicates the origin and authority of what follows. This is the only time “apocalypse” is used in the book. The original meaning of the word is not, as in common English usage, the cataclysmic end of the world, but an “unveiling”; a means to insight into the past, present, and future; an alternative vision to the normal perception of reality. John’s book has provided the name for a literary genre represented by Jewish apocalypses written in the [p. 920] last centuries BCE and in first century CE, including Dan 7–12, the Apocalypse of Abraham, the Apocalypse of Moses, 1 Enoch, and 2 Esd (= 4. Ezra), as well other Jewish and early Christian works. Characteristics of this genre include: a two-level view of reality in which heavenly and earthly events are closely linked, a narrative framework within which the secrets of heaven and God’s eschatological purposes are revealed, cosmic dualism, description of ascents to heaven and the final battle between the armies of God and Satan, elaborate images and symbols, and the mediation of revelation through angels. John also calls his book a prophecy (1:3; cf. 10:11; 22:19). Although he does not quote directly from prophetic books, the influence of earlier prophetic traditions is evident throughout the book (see Overview, Biblical Context).

 

1:4–8. Salutation. John’s opening greeting to the seven churches contains a three-fold description of Jesus Christ as “the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth,” celebrating his sacrificial death, his resurrection from the dead, and his kingly power. The first two titles recall Paul’s summary of the gospel as proclamation of the saving events of Jesus’ death on the cross and his resurrection (1 Cor 15:3–7). The word translated “witness,” martys, later took on technical meaning of “martyr,” one who dies for a cause. Testify and testimony in 1:2 are from the same Greek root, and witnessing is an important theme throughout Revelation. The third title, “ruler of the kings of the earth,” indicates Christ’s future role as universal ruler and judge. Revelation is much concerned with kingship and kingdom. It celebrates the kingship of God and Christ the Lamb, presently acknowledged by the hosts of heaven (4:1–5) and soon to be clearly established over all the earth (19:11–22:5). In 1:6 the addresses of the book are described as God’s “kingdom.”

 

The reference in 1:1 to “what must soon take place” is given more specific content in 1:7, which speaks of Christ’s “coming with the clouds,” the first of several allusions to Dan 7. The salutation concludes with a direct address from God the Father: “ ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega’, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty” (1:8). The first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, used to designate God’s all-encompassing power, are repeated in another word of God at the end of the book (21:6), and in 22:13 Christ uses them of himself. From early on Alpha and Omega appear frequently in Christian art. Although Revelation does not call Jesus “God,” as does John 1:1, its use of the same epithets for God the Father and Christ expresses a high Christology. The phrase “who is and who was and who is to come” (cf. 4:8; 11:17; 16:5), recalls the revelation of God’s name to Moses at the burning bush as “I am who I am,” alternately translated as “I will be what I will be” (Exod 3:14). God is in control of the world from beginning to end.

 

1:9–11. Author and Setting. The divine revelation is doubly mediated, through an angel (1:1) and the prophet John. John tells us little about himself, saying only that he was on the island of Patmos “because of the word of God” and that he shares “the persecution and the kingdom and the patient endurance” (1:9). The author is an otherwise unknown early Christian prophet (1:3), perhaps an itinerant prophet who traveled among the seven churches mentioned in Rev 2–3 (see Overview, Historical Context).

 

Artists such as the Limbourg Brothers and Hieronmyous Bosch present John in exile on a tiny island, attended by an eagle. Ever since Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons in the late second century, interpreted the four living creatures in 4:7 as symbols of the four Evangelists, the eagle has been associated with the apostle John in Christian art (with the lion standing for Mark, the ox for Luke, and a man or angel for Matthew). John says that he was on Patmos for the sake of the “testimony of Jesus” (1.9); this is often interpreted to mean that he was exiled because of his preaching. John says he has experienced suffering for his Christian activity, using two terms that will be repeated in subsequent chapters, “persecution” (cf. 2.9, 10, 22; see on 7:14) and “patient endurance” (cf. 2.2, 3, 19; 3:10; 13:10; 14:12), but he gives no details of his situation. His vision takes place on the Lord’s Day (1:10), probably a reference to Sunday (see 1 Cor 16:2).

 

1:12–16. Vision of the Son of Man. Martin Luther initially relegated Revelation to a subordinate place within the NT canon, saying “Christ is not taught or known in it.” This judgment is hard to square with the wealth of christological description in this opening vision and the prominence of [p. 921] Christ the Lamb in the rest of the book (and in fact Luther modified his view in later editions of his NT, after he recognized the book’s usefulness for anti-Catholic polemic). Both the vision of 1:12–20 and the christological epithets in the preceding verses present Christ as a powerful, awe-inspiring figure, who deserves honor equal to that of God the creator.

 

Christ is portrayed as a “one like a Son of Man,” a title for the expected eschatological judge and sovereign based on Dan 7:13–14 and used in all four gospels to refer to Christ’s role at the end time (Mark 14:62 par.; John 5:27; cf. Rev 14:14). Between seven lampstands (explained in 1:20 as the heavenly counterparts of the seven churches) Christ appears in majestic form, with brilliant face, eyes like fire, and a deafening voice. In his hair like white wool he resembles God the “Ancient of days” in Dan 7:9. The two-edged sword issuing from his mouth (cf. 2:12, 16; 19:15, 21) is a warning of divine judgment.

 

The seven lampstands of 1:12 recall the menorahs that burn before God in the Jerusalem Temple (Exod 27:20–21)—the first of many examples of temple imagery in Revelation. Worship is seen as communion with heaven, in which the earthly saints join with the heavenly hosts in lauding God. The book’s frequent mixing of past and present may reflect a liturgical sense of time, in which different times are inextricably linked.

 

1:17–20. Christ Commissions John. John’s response of fright, a common motif in prophetic call visions (Isa 6:5; Ezek 1:28), prompts a word of reassurance. Christ proclaims that he is alive forever; he is the “first and the last” who holds the keys of Death and Hades. He commissions John to write “what you have seen, what is, and what is to take place after this.” In addition to giving a glimpse of eschatological events, John’s book is to unveil the true nature of present reality.

 

Judith L. Kovacs, The Revelation to John, The New Interpreter’s Bible One Volume Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010), 919-921.

 

New Interpreter's Study Bible

 

1:1–3:22 God speaks to the church in the city. After the title, blessing, and letter opening (1:1–8), the first scene portrays the appearance of the risen and exalted Christ, who commands John to write messages to the churches in seven cities in the province of Asia (1:9–20). The churches are evaluated, warned, and encouraged by the address of the risen Lord (2:1–3:22).

 

1:1–8 The title found in English Bibles, “The Revelation to (or “of”) John,” was added to the text by the church in the process of canonization. John’s own titular summary of the document is found in vv. 1–2. The revelatory “chain of command” represents God as the ultimate source of the disclosure mediated through the risen Christ, to the angel, to the prophet, to the church, which is to bear witness to the world. These links in the chain tend to fuse into one revelatory word, so that all that he [John] saw, the contents of the book, is identified as the word of God. The blessing of v. 3 is pronounced on the lector who reads the letter aloud and on the assembled congregation who hears and responds to its message. The opening words indicate that the book is to be read aloud, all at once, in the setting of worship. The epistolary opening (vv. 4–5) is an elaboration of the letter form that had become standard in the Pauline tradition. By including the revelatory content of the document in the brackets of a real letter, the writer expects it to be read as a real letter—that is, as a particular address to a specific situation. The opening doxology (vv. 5–8) appears in the slot of the conventional letter form, usually occupied by the “thanksgiving.” Here it has the form of similar pronouncements made by Christian prophets in congregational worship.

 

Excursus: Interpreting the “Near End” in Revelation

 

The book of Revelation begins (1:1, 3) and ends (22:20) with the announcement that the risen Christ will return soon to bring history to an end and establish the universal rule of God. The letter throughout is permeated with similar declarations that directly or indirectly declare that the remaining time is short (e.g., 2:16, 25; 3:11, 20; 6:11; 10:6; 12:12; 17:10; 22:6–7, 10, 12). The longest period before the end mentioned in Revelation is this span of time described variously as 42 months, 1,260 days, or “a time, times, and half a time” (11:2–3; 12:6, 14; 13:5), derived from the period of three and a half years prophesied in Dan 7:25; 8:14; 9:27; 12:7, 11–12. This period became a traditional apocalyptic time frame (cf. Luke 4:26 and Jas 5:17 with 1 Kgs 17:1; 18:1). The period is not meant literally, but still represents only a short time. Present-day readers should not force John’s apocalyptic understanding into a modern chronological framework, as though he actually foresaw a long period of history. This is sometimes attempted either by reinterpreting “soon” as symbolic language for a centuries-long historical epoch (2 Pet 3:1–10) or by understanding the return of Christ, the defeat of Satan, the resurrection, and the judgment in purely “spiritual” terms, as events that will happen in the present life of the church (see John 11:21–26; 12:31, 48; chaps. 14–16). Other NT authors began the reinterpretation of the earliest church’s near-expectation of the end in these (and other) ways, but John sees the events of his own time as the occasion to reassert the earliest Christian expectation that the end was, indeed, near. John expressed his faith in the thought forms of his day, one of which was the apocalyptic hope of the near parousia (return of Christ). History has shown that this form of the Christian hope was mistaken and should not continue to be repeated. Just as modern Christians can reinterpret John’s mistaken understanding of the shape of the world (cf. 7:1) without thereby rejecting his message, so also modern Christians can take seriously John’s message of hope expressed in the apocalyptic form, which included the near expectation of the end, without continuing to repeat it in his terms.

 

1:9–20 John recounts the appearance of the risen Christ, who commissions him to write to the seven churches.

 

1:9 While John writes with authority, his egalitarianism of the Spirit means that he claims no titles but identifies himself as brother, the term used (along with “sister”) for all Christians as members of the family of God. He likewise shares the common experience of all Christians: persecution (i.e., harassment, threats, occasional violence that could lead to death; see Introduction), kingdom (i.e., already sharing in Christ’s rule and “conquest”; see notes on 5:5–10), and patient endurance, the life to which Christians are called as they resist cultural pressures and orient their lives by the new reality revealed in the Christ-event.

 

1:10 John’s existence in the Spirit does not refer to his mood but to his being filled with the Spirit of God, which empowers him to prophesy (see 19:10; Num 11:25–29; Luke 1:67; Acts 2:18; 19:6; 2 Cor 12:1–10; Eph 3:5; 2 Pet 1:21; 1 John 4:1). The Lord’s day was Sunday, the first day of the week, adopted by Christians as their day of worship in distinction from the Jewish Sabbath. John receives his revelation at the same time Christians on the mainland are gathering for worship.

 

1:12–13a The lampstands (not anachronistic “candlesticks” as in some earlier translations) are the light-bearers that represent the churches (see 1:20; Matt 5:14–16). The risen Christ is in their midst and walks among them (2:1), pictured as both present on the earth now and coming from heaven in the future. The exalted Christ is portrayed as like the Son of Man—that is, as a human-like transcendent being of cosmic proportions (cf. Dan 7:13; Matt 25:31–46; Mark 13:26).

 

1:13b–16 John’s imagery is not merely a journalistic account of what he saw, but is expressed in the language of his Bible, combining features from the heavenly beings of Ezek 1:24, 26; 9:2, 11; Dan 7:9; 10:6 and the description of the Ancient One (God) in Dan 7:9. The sharp double-edged sword coming from his mouth reflects Isa 49:2, and his face, like the sun shining in all its brilliance, reflects the language of Judg 5:31.

 

1:17–20 John’s word picture shatters all attempts to imagine it; the same hand that holds the stars also touches John. The symbolism is powerful but cannot be reduced to graphic art or conventional language. The transcendent figure declares that he has died in faithfulness to God (as John’s readers may be called upon to do) and that he is now alive forever—not merely resuscitated, but raised to the life of God’s eternal world. Since the risen Christ has the keys to death and Hades (the world of the dead), Christians need not fear to die for their faith.

 

1:19 The vision is composed of two elements: what is (the true state of the world and church in John’s time, as revealed in chaps. 2–3) and what is to take place after this (the ultimate fulfillment of God’s purpose for the world, the final coming of God’s kingdom, which John sees as happening in the near future, as revealed in chaps. 4–22).

 

1:20 Since angel means “messenger” and can be used for human beings (such as John the Baptist in Matt 11:10 or the messengers sent by Jesus in Luke 9:52), it is occasionally thought that the “angels” are the bishops or prophetic leaders of each church. However, John operates out of the apocalyptic tradition, within which earthly realities have their counterparts in the heavenly world. Just as each nation has its representative “angel” in the heavenly world (see, e.g., Dan 10:2–14, 20–21), so also each congregation has its representative “guardian” angel in the heavenly world. The church participates in the reality of the eternal world. John writes to the churches but not merely as one concerned Christian to others; the communication of the divine message takes place on another level. The “angels” are the heavenly counterparts of the churches, their “alter egos.” To address the “angel” is clearly to address the church as a whole, but in a transcendent context. This is not without precedent: In Isa 40:1, the prophet’s message is addressed to the beings of the heavenly court and is only “overheard” by the earthly reader.

 

Walter J. Harrelson, eds. The New Interpreter’s Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), n.p.

Edited October 31, 2015 by Dan Francis

[Daniel Francis]

Carol Gizzard is the NISB author for 1 Samuel

Toni Craven and Walter Harrelson are the NISB authors for Psalms

Susan Ackerman is the NISB author for Isaiah

Warren Carter is the NISB author for Matthew

M. Eugene Boring is the NISB author for Revelation

 

-Dan

[Daniel Francis]

I have been thinking of your request and while I prefer the NISB, the ESV Study Bible may fulfill your request too. So I have decided to share the same passages from it for your comparison. I do not personally feel it as useful over all as the NISB, but I thought I should include all possible choices that might fit your request (there may well be others smaller works available in Accordance fitting your request but not that I know of).

 

1 Samuel 2

 

2:1–10 Hannah’s Song. Hannah’s song fits well in the narrative and marks the end of the story of Samuel’s birth. Many of Hannah’s themes are found in the Magnificat of Mary (Luke 1:46–56). The reference to the “king” in 1 Sam. 2:10 also looks forward to the rest of the book. At the other end of the grand narrative of 1–2 Samuel are the songs of David in 2 Samuel 22–23. These three songs are a frame around the entire narrative of 1–2 Samuel. Hannah’s song is really a song of praise, or a hymn, to the God who reverses human fortunes by his mighty power, the Creator beyond all human understanding who protects the faithful. There are many similarities to psalms and other passages of the OT, as the numerous ESV cross-references show. It is especially close to Psalm 113. It starts with Hannah’s personal emotions, but it is not about gloating over Peninnah, who was presumably still living with her children in Elkanah’s household. Rather, Hannah’s emotions are a step toward glorifying the Lord for his guidance in human affairs. Hannah alternates between the themes of the Lord’s holy sovereignty (1 Sam. 2:1b–3, 6–7, 8b–10a) and the reversal of human fortunes (4–5, 8a) and ends with the theme of kingship (v. 10b).

 

2:1 my strength is exalted in the LORD. The song both starts and ends with the declaration that the Lord exalts. The verb translated as “exalt” or “raise up” appears also in 7, 8, and 10 and expresses the theme of the song. The Hebrew for “horn,” translated as “strength” (here) and “power” (in v. 10), is often used as a symbol of strength (cf. Deut. 33:17; 2 Sam. 22:3; Ps. 89:17; etc.). With the expression my enemies, Hannah is not making a personal attack on Peninnah (one person) but is speaking against God’s enemies. His enemies are also Hannah’s enemies, because his enemies attack her trust in God and his dealings with her (see Ps. 139:21–22). The climax of this verse is because I rejoice in your salvation.

 

2:2 The first and third lines of this verse are parallel: holy is parallel to rock, and the LORD is parallel to God, with different structure but similar meaning. The formula “there is no … like …” denotes incomparability. Thus, there is none besides you states that there is no absolutely holy being besides the Lord; moreover, only the Lord is God, i.e., “monotheism” is true (see Deut. 4:35; 32:39; 2 Sam. 22:32). “Rock,” a common OT epithet for God (e.g., Deut. 32:4, 15; 2 Sam. 22:2; 23:3), indicates God’s protection and strength. In Ps. 118:22 and Isa. 8:14; 28:16; as well as in 1 Pet. 2:6–8, “rock” has a messianic significance (see note on 1 Sam. 2:10). With “our God,” Hannah speaks as a member of the covenant community, whom she addresses in the next verse.

 

2:3 by him actions are weighed. The ESV follows the “spoken” (Qere) Hebrew tradition, and means that God’s knowledge extends even to the motives behind human actions. The “written” (Ketib) tradition, “actions are not weighed,” would not make sense unless one added “his actions are not weighed,” i.e., God is not subject to human judgment.

 

2:5 seven. Hannah herself actually bore only six children, including Samuel (v. 21), but this is a general statement, and seven is a poetic number for perfection. is forlorn. The Hebrew usually means “becomes a widow,” but here it means “becomes childless.”

 

2:6–7 The Lord has total authority over life and death, including material and social life. Verses 4–5 give examples of how the Lord reverses human fortunes; vv. 6–7 state it more generally. kills … brings to life, brings down … raises up, makes poor … makes rich, brings low … exalts. These are merisms, expressions in which two words on the extreme ends of a scale are used to express everything on the whole scale. The Lord controls not only birth and death, but also the whole of life in between.

 

2:6 Sheol here refers to the place of the dead. In the Bible, it is usually found in idiomatic expressions such as “go down to Sheol” or “come up from Sheol.” God is also the One who raises up a soul from Sheol (e.g., Ps. 30:3), so he has authority over the dead as well as the living. He is the One who holds the key to Job’s question: “If a man dies, shall he live again?” (Job 14:14). Job remains confident: “For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth” (Job 19:25). Hannah affirms that same confidence.

 

2:8 The Lord is sovereign over life, for he created and owns the world. The exact meaning of the word pillars (Hb. metsuqe) is not known, but there are similar expressions using the ordinary word for “pillars” (Hb. ʿammudim; Job 9:6; Ps. 75:3) or “foundations” (2 Sam. 22:16). The reference to the foundation or support (“pillars”) of the earth is meaningful here, for the Lord upholds both the place where his people live as well as the moral order of this world; he protects his faithful, while he destroys the wicked (1 Sam. 2:9).

 

2:9 Darkness functions here as a metaphor for the silence brought upon the wicked in death (Ps. 35:6–8).

 

2:10 For the kingship of the Lord and his role as judge, see Ps. 96:10. The ends of the earth almost always appears in the context of describing the Lord’s uniqueness, majesty, and dominion (e.g., Ps. 67:7; 98:3; Prov. 30:4; Isa. 52:10; Mic. 5:4; Zech. 9:10). Since there was as yet no king in Israel, it is possible that the last two lines are a comment by the narrator rather than part of Hannah’s prayer. The law made provision for a king, however, and the institution was well known in Israel even before it was practiced (Judg. 8:22; 9:6; 1 Samuel 8), so there is no reason to think that these are not Hannah’s words. His anointed, or “his messiah,” appears here for the first time in the Bible (though Hb. mashiakh, “anointed,” is used of priests, e.g., Lev. 4:3). In the OT, priests and prophets are also referred to as “anointed,” but in Samuel most references are royal. Though the anointing of kings is known from various places in the ancient Near East, “messiah” as a royal title is attested only in the Bible. The song concludes with a twofold plea for the Lord to raise the king of Israel to a position of power and prominence worthy of the great God who appointed him.

 

2:11–36 Samuel, and Eli’s Two Sons. At the same time that the boy Samuel is ministering to the Lord at Shiloh (11, 18; 3:1), Eli’s own two sons are hindering the worship there.

 

The Rise of Samuel, Israel’s Last Judge

 

Decline of Eli’s Sons Rise of Samuel

Wickedness of Eli’s sons (1 Sam. 2:12–17) Samuel approved by Eli (1 Sam. 2:18–21)

Eli reproves his sons (1 Sam. 2:22–25) Samuel grows in favor (1 Sam. 2:26)

Prophecy against Eli and sons (1 Sam. 2:27–36; cf. 4:11–18) Samuel called and given prophetic word (1 Sam. 3:1–4:1a)

The Philistines; the ark and Eli’s house [defeat/capture/covenant defiled] (1 Sam. 4:1b–22) The Philistines; the ark and Samuel [return/victory/covenant renewed] (1 Sam. 7:2–17)

 

 

2:12–17 The priest’s servant (13, 15) was probably one of the worthless … sons of Eli (v. 12; cf. “young man” [Hb. naʿar; 13, 15, ESV footnote] with “young men” [Hb. neʿarim, plural of naʿar, v. 17]), rather than merely a servant. Some interpret vv. 13–14 as being the accepted, though degenerate, custom, and vv. 15–16 as representing the perversion of this custom. Another interpretation is that the author condemns both practices. This latter view is supported by the use of the word moreover (Hb. gam) at the beginning of v. 15. Thus in this passage there are two general statements about the sons (12, 17) framing descriptions of two of their wicked practices.

 

2:12–13 Custom (Hb. mishpat) usually means an expected standard (e.g., Deut. 18:3, “this shall be the priest’s due [mishpat] from the people, from those offering a sacrifice”); it can also mean “justice” (cf. 1 Sam. 8:3). Although it is hardly likely that the young men were ignorant of the regulations, their lack of real knowledge of the Lord or even concern for his honor (They did not know the LORD) meant that they completely ignored his commands.

 

2:13–14 The priests were to be supported by portions of the sacrifices of the people. In various parts of the Mosaic law the portion to be given to the priests is specified for various sacrifices, e.g., Deut. 18:3 (shoulder, cheeks, and stomach) and Lev. 7:31–32 (breast and right thigh). But the practice in 1 Sam. 2:13–14 has little in common with the regulations on priestly rights.

 

2:15–16 This is an extraordinary situation: the priest, who was supposed to know the rules of sacrifice, was engaging in behavior that shocked even the ordinary worshiper. The fat was normally removed from certain internal organs and offered as a burnt offering to God (see Ex. 29:13; Lev. 3:3–5). also, the priest would normally take his share right after killing the animal, before giving it to the worshiper.

 

2:17 It was because the sons of Eli did not know the Lord (v. 12) that they could treat with contempt his holy sacrifices that he had commanded for worship.

 

2:18–21 The story returns to another naʿar (“young man, boy”), Samuel (cf. note on vv. 12–17, “young man”). Before, Samuel was ministering “in the presence of Eli the priest” (v. 11), but now he is ministering simply before the LORD, in the garment of a priest. The linen ephod was probably a simple tunic or apron worn by priests (22:18) or sometimes by others, as by David as he brought the ark to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:14).

 

2:22–23 The women were not Canaanite cult prostitutes, as is sometimes speculated. Lying with them was considered among the sons’ evil dealings.

 

2:25 if someone sins against the LORD, who can intercede for him? This shows the need for a mediator between man and God. Because of Eli’s sons’ willful rejection of him, it was the will of the LORD to put them to death. When God is determined to destroy, no human intercession is effective. For the writers of the Bible, the fact that divine providence and human character mingle means that destinies are regarded as ultimately the result of the divine will. The most obvious example is Pharaoh in Ex. 7:13, 22, etc. But this does not mean that people are not accountable; Hophni and Phinehas had rejected God, even ignoring their father’s warning.

 

2:26 Similar language is used in Luke 2:52 to describe the physical and spiritual growth of the boy Jesus.

 

2:27–28 Did I indeed reveal … ? Did I choose him … ? These are rhetorical questions, expecting “Yes, indeed!” as an answer. The house of your father in 27, 28, 30 is a technical term referring to Eli’s extended family. “Your father” probably refers specifically to Ithamar, son of Aaron, who was made a priest of the Lord at Mount Sinai along with his father and brothers (Ex. 28:1; cf. 1 Chron. 24:3). Eli was a descendant of this house, according to 1 Chron. 24:3, where it is stated that his great-great-great-grandson Ahimelech was “of the sons of Ithamar.” The descent from Eli to this Ahimelech is as follows: Eli—Phinehas—Ahitub (1 Sam. 14:3)—Ahimelech—Abiathar (22:20)—Ahimelech (2 Sam. 8:17; 1 Chron. 24:6). The duties of the priest were to go up to the Lord’s altar, i.e., (1) to burn offerings on the altar (e.g., Lev. 1:9), which was connected with the privilege of being sustained from portions of the sacrifices, a privilege that Eli’s sons were abusing (1 Sam. 2:12–17); (2) to burn incense on the altar of incense (Ex. 30:1; see Luke 1:9); and (3) to wear an ephod before God. This ephod was probably not the linen garment of 1 Sam. 2:18, but the jeweled breastplate described in Exodus 28 that symbolized the people of Israel, with pockets for the sacred lots (for priests casting lots, see Lev. 16:8, etc.). According to 1 Sam. 21:9, that ephod was later kept in the sanctuary of Nob, and Abiathar took it with him when he escaped to David (23:6). I gave to the house of your father all my offerings by fire. Except for the case of burnt offerings, which were wholly burned, when an offering was made, part was burned as a “memorial portion,” but the rest of the grain offerings, sin offerings, and guilt offerings and a part of the peace offerings were normally eaten by the priests (Lev. 6:14–18; 7:1–38).

 

2:27 A man of God is a synonym for “prophet” (e.g., 9:6; 2 Kings 1:9). Thus the LORD has said is the regular prophetic “messenger formula.” In Samuel this formula appears also in 1 Sam. 10:18; 15:2; 2 Sam. 7:5, 8; 12:7, 11; 24:12. In the ancient world, messengers were supposed to recite their messages verbatim, so the messenger would begin with “[The sender] has spoken thus” and use the first person in the body of the message (e.g., Gen. 45:9).

 

2:29 You is plural here. The form of the verb scorn indicates a habitual action. By scorning the offerings, Eli is scorning the Lord and honoring his sons, while the Lord honors those who honor him and lightly esteems those who despise him (v. 30).

 

2:30 Though the Lord promised, he can revoke his promise for willful disregard of the terms of the promise. Far be it from me is a statement of strong denial of the previous statement (e.g., Gen. 44:7; 1 Sam. 12:23; 2 Sam. 20:20; cf. also 1 Sam. 20:9).

 

2:31–34 This is a curse for breaking the Lord’s covenant, with punishment given in words of curses similar to the curses in the covenant. Behold, the days are coming is an eschatological formula often found in the Prophets. The only one who shall be spared is Abiathar, who escaped when the priests of Nob were killed (22:20). Solomon later banished him to Anathoth; see 1 Kings 2:26–27, where it is stated that the banishment was a fulfillment of the prophecy against Eli. Jeremiah was probably descended from this house (Jer. 1:1). All the descendants is a general statement, because there are references to those who were left (see the previous clause in 1 Sam. 2:33, as well as v. 36). Eli will not live to experience the punishment, but the death of his two sons on the same day will be a sign to him that the prophecy is true.

 

2:35 The faithful priest with a sure house is probably Zadok, priest under David and a descendant of Ithamar’s brother Eleazar, son of Aaron (2 Sam. 8:17; 1 Chron. 24:3; see also Judg. 20:28). The Hebrew word “faithful” is the same as “sure” later in the sentence: the neʾeman priest will have a neʾeman house. The anointed is the king. The wording here is similar to that in 2 Samuel 7, where David is promised a “sure” house (2 Sam. 7:16).

 

Lane T. Dennis and Wayne Grudem, eds. The ESV Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008), n.p.

 

Psalm 1

 

Psalm 1. The first psalm serves as the gateway into the entire book of Psalms, stressing that those who would worship God genuinely must embrace his Law (or Torah), i.e., his covenant instruction. This psalm takes topics found in wisdom literature such as Proverbs and makes them the subject of song; the purpose is that those who sing the psalm will own its values—namely, they will want more and more to be people who love the Torah, who believe it, who see themselves as the heirs and stewards of its story of redemption and hope, and who seek to carry out its moral requirements. They can delight in the idea of being among the “righteous,” feeling that nothing can compare with such blessedness. By its sustained contrast, the psalm reminds readers that in the end there are really only two ways to live.

 

1:1–2 Contrasting Sources of Values. The truly happy person guides his life by God’s instruction rather than by the advice of those who reject that instruction.

 

1:1 Blessed. The truly happy person is happy because God showers him with favor. Jesus uses the Greek equivalent in Matt. 5:3–11; cf. also James 1:12. The Latin translation, beatus, is the source of the word beatitude. the man. A specific, godly individual (Hb. haʾish, “the man”) is held up as an example for others to imitate. Such teaching by use of a concrete example is common in OT wisdom literature. wicked … sinners … scoffers. These are people, even within Israel, who refuse to live by the covenant; the godly person refuses to follow the moral orientation of such people’s lifestyle. Some have seen an increasing level of sinfulness in the terms “wicked-sinners-scoffers,” together with an increasing loyalty in the metaphors “walk-stand-sit”; however, it is likely that the terms “wicked” and “sinner” here are equivalent, while a “scoffer” is certainly more committed to evil (see note on Prov. 19:25–20:1).

 

1:2 the law of the LORD. As the ESV footnote indicates, this could be taken as God’s instruction (Hb. Torah, which often designates the Law of Moses), particularly as he speaks in his covenant. For this reason no one should ever think that such a person receives his blessedness by deserving it, since the covenant is founded on God’s grace. Meditates describes an active pondering, perhaps even muttering to oneself in pursuit of insight. Some suppose day and night speaks of the work of professional scholars who spend all their time pondering the words of the law, but in view of the similar instruction in Josh. 1:8, readers should see this as setting the ideal of facing every situation, be it ever so mundane, with a view to pleasing the Lord by knowing and following his Word.

 

1:3–4 Contrasting Fruitfulness. Here are two similes, based on agriculture in ancient Palestine, describing the effects of the two kinds of people.

 

1:3 The first image is that of a tree in a dry climate, which nevertheless thrives because of its constant supply of water. A tree bears fruit, not for itself, but for others; thus, when the faithful prospers, it is not for himself, nor is the prospering even necessarily material, but he succeeds in bringing benefit to others. See Jer. 17:8 for the same image.

 

1:4 wicked. See v. 1. chaff. This is the husks and straw removed by threshing, and it is lighter than the edible kernels; when a farmer tosses threshed wheat into the air, the wind drives away the chaff. Those who reject God’s covenant are like chaff in that they bring no benefit to anyone (cf. 35:5).

 

1:5–6 Contrasting Outcomes of Their Lives. These two verses lead readers to reflect on where these two kinds of life are headed, showing that God will make the contrast last forever.

 

1:5 Therefore indicates that these verses are the conclusion of the psalm. judgment. This could be any particular judgment that falls on the wicked in this life, but it is more likely the final judgment, which allows some to enter the congregation of the righteous, while excluding others (Eccles. 12:14).

 

1:6 Knows must be something stronger than simply “knows about,” since God knows about the wicked and their deepest secrets (cf. 94:8–11). Some have argued that the word means “cares for,” but it is better to take this as “knows with affection and approval, i.e., prefers” (cf. Gen. 18:19; Amos 3:2). will perish. That is, end in destruction.

 

Lane T. Dennis and Wayne Grudem, eds. The ESV Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008), n.p.

 

Isaiah 6

 

6:1–12:6 God Redefines the Future of His People: “Your Guilt Is Taken Away.” God’s grace will preserve a remnant of his people to enjoy forever his messianic kingdom and to fulfill the purpose for which he called them. That grace spreads from Isaiah (6:1–13) to the southern kingdom of Judah (7:1–9:7) to the northern kingdom of Israel (9:8–11:16), bringing God’s people to the “wells of salvation” (12:1–6).

 

Datable Events in the Book of Isaiah

Uzziah’s death; Isaiah’s call ch. 6 740 B.C.

Days of Ahaz ch. 7 c. 735

Assyrian invasion chs. 36–38 701

Sennacherib’s death 37:38 681

Babylonians will destroy Jerusalem 39:6–8 586

Israel will return from Babylonian exile chs. 40–48 538

 

 

6:1–13 Grace—through Judgment—for Isaiah. God’s grace leads Isaiah from “Woe is me!” (v. 5) to “Here am I!” (v. 8). This vision seems to recount Isaiah’s commission as a prophet. His book conveys the lasting impression of this vision of God in his infinite holiness.

 

6:1 In the year. Around 740 B.C. King Uzziah died, marking the end of a lengthy era of national prosperity (see 2 Chronicles 26). Uzziah had contracted leprosy for flouting God’s holiness, and his son Jotham had been his co-regent for about 10 years (2 Chron. 26:16–21). I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne. The undying King holds court above. The words high and lifted up appear elsewhere in Isaiah (Isa. 52:13; 57:15) and seem to be part of his distinctive style (see Introduction: Date). John 12:38–41 brings two of these together, implying that John saw the servant of Isa. 52:13–53:12 as not only messianic, but divine. The temple in Jerusalem modeled the temple in heaven (cf. Heb. 9:24; Rev. 4:1–4).

 

6:2 the seraphim. Fiery angelic beings (the Hb. word serapim means “flames”). Six wings suggest remarkable powers. The references to face and feet, with their capacity for speech in 3 and 7, and “his hand” in v. 6, imply composite creatures, such as are represented in ancient Near Eastern art. he covered. Even a perfect, superhuman creature humbles himself before the all-holy God.

 

6:3 Holy, holy, holy. The threefold repetition intensifies the superlative (cf. Rev. 4:8). Holiness implies absolute moral purity and separateness above the creation (see note on Isa. 1:4). his glory. This is a technical term for God’s manifest presence with his covenant people. It was seen in the cloud in the wilderness (Ex. 16:7, 10); it moved in to “fill” the tabernacle (Ex. 40:34–35) and then the temple (1 Kings 8:11), where the worshipers could “see” it (Ex. 29:43; Ps. 26:8; 63:2). Several passages look forward to the day when the Lord’s glory would fill the earth, i.e., the whole world will become a sanctuary (Num. 14:21; Ps. 72:19; Hab. 2:14; cf. Isa. 11:9); and the ESV footnote suggests that the seraphic cry shares this anticipation. Other texts in Isaiah also look forward to the revealing of the Lord’s glory to the world (11:10; 35:2; 40:5; 58:8; 59:19; 60:1–2; 66:18). John 1:14 asserts that this glory was present in Jesus.

 

6:4–5 The revelation of the Holy One is disturbing (see Ex. 19:16–18). Woe is me! For the first time in the book, Isaiah speaks, and his word is a prophetic woe against himself. He confesses his unclean (i.e., not permitted in God’s presence) lips, unlike the seraphic choir, whose worship is pure. I dwell in the midst. Isaiah’s generation is unfit for God, and Isaiah himself is no better. my eyes have seen the King. The holiness of the King is such that the very sight of him seems as though it would be fatal to a sinner (cf. Gen. 32:30; Ex. 33:20; Isa. 33:14).

 

6:6–7 this has touched your lips. The remedy of grace is personally applied. God’s holiness and glory now redemptively enter Isaiah’s experience. atoned for. Through the sacrifice on the altar, according to the Levitical ordinances (e.g., Lev. 1:4). Through his seraph (the singular form of seraphim, plural; see note on Isa. 6:2), God declares the remedy for Isaiah’s sin to be sufficient and instantly effective. Now Isaiah is qualified to proclaim the only hope of the world—the overruling grace of God.

 

6:8 Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? See 1 Kings 22:19–20; Jer. 23:18, 22. Here am I! Send me. Isaiah’s experience of grace has dealt with his problem, confessed in Isa. 6:5. “Us” is like “us” in Gen. 1:26 (“let us make man”): God could be addressing himself (in a way compatible with the Christian doctrine of the Trinity), or he could be addressing his heavenly court (less likely, since only God is doing the sending here). See notes on Gen. 1:26; 1:27.

 

6:9–10 God decrees that the prophet’s ministry will have a hardening effect on his own generation, whose character was laid bare in chs. 1–5. The NT quotes this text to explain why some reject the good news of the gospel (cf. Matt. 13:14–15 par.; John 12:39–40; Acts 28:25–27). The openness of faith is a gift of grace, but the unresponsive hearer finds that the message only hardens him to God’s gracious purposes (cf. Isa. 29:9–10; 42:18–25; 65:1–7; Luke 2:34; John 9:39; Acts 7:54; Rom. 11:7–10, 25; 2 Cor. 2:15–16; 1 Pet. 2:8).

 

6:11–13 God’s discipline will leave only a remnant of his people—the holy seed—like a single stump left after a forest has been burned over. The remaining believers are set apart for God by the same grace that saved Isaiah. They are the heirs of God’s promises to Abraham, and thus the only hope for the whole world (see 10:20–23; 11:1–10).

 

 

Lane T. Dennis and Wayne Grudem, eds. The ESV Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008), n.p.

 

Matthew 5

 

 

5:1–7:29 The Authoritative Message of the Messiah: Kingdom Life for His Disciples. This is the first of five major discourses in Matthew (chs. 5–7; 10; 13; 18–20; 24–25). Speaking to his disciples (5:1), Jesus expounds the reality of discipleship lived in the presence and power of the kingdom of God but within the everyday world. Some interpreters have thought the purpose of this sermon was to describe a moral standard so impossibly high that it is relevant only for a future millennial kingdom. Others have thought its primary purpose was to portray the absoluteness of God’s moral perfection and thereby to drive people to despair of their own righteousness, so they will trust in the imputed righteousness of Christ. Both views fail to recognize that these teachings, rightly understood, form a challenging but practical ethic that Jesus expects his followers to live by in this present age. The sermon, commonly called the “Sermon on the Mount,” is probably a summary of a longer message, but the structure is a unified whole. It has similarities to the “Sermon on the Plain” in Luke 6:17–49, but there are also significant differences. The three main theories about their relationship are: (1) they record the same sermon but Matthew and Luke give summaries that report different sections and emphases; (2) they record two different sermons, given on different occasions but repeating much of the same content, as itinerant preachers often do; and (3) either Matthew or Luke, or both, have collected sayings that Jesus gave on different occasions and put them together in a sermon format. View (3) seems to make Matthew’s presentation of this as a single historical event untruthful (cf. Matt. 5:1–2 with 7:28–29; 8:1; and Luke 6:17, 20 with Luke 7:1), and evangelical commentators have not generally adopted it. Views (1) and (2) are both possible, and it is difficult to decide between them.

 

Jesus’ Five Discourses

 

The authoritative message of the Messiah (Sermon on the Mount) chs. 5–7

The authoritative mission of the Messiah’s messengers ch. 10

The mysteries of the messianic kingdom revealed in parables ch. 13

The community of the Messiah revealed chs. 18–20

The delay, return, and judgment of the Messiah (Olivet Discourse) chs. 24–25

 

 

5:1–16 Setting, Beatitudes, and Witness of the Kingdom of Heaven. In his Beatitudes, Jesus makes pronouncements to the crowds and religious leaders and gives instructions to his disciples concerning the nature of life in the kingdom (vv. 3–12). He follows this with two piercing metaphors on salt and light to illustrate the impact that the disciples will have on the world around them (vv. 13–16).

 

5:1 mountain. The traditional site of this sermon (though Matthew does not pinpoint the location) is above Tabgha, near Capernaum, on a ridge of hills northwest of the town, with a magnificent view of the Sea of Galilee. A twentieth-century church marks this site today, although down the hill in Tabgha there are remains of a small Byzantine chapel (probably from the 4th century) commemorating the sermon. This ridge is likely also where Jesus went “to a desolate place” (14:13; cf. Mark 1:35) and where he went “up on the mountain” (Matt. 14:23; 28:16). he sat down. Teachers in Judaism typically taught while sitting (cf. 23:2), a position Jesus takes regularly (cf. 13:1–2; 15:29; 24:3–4; 26:55).

 

5:2 While Jesus was seated, he opened his mouth (a Jewish idiom) and taught them, i.e., his disciples who had come to him (v. 1). “Disciples” (Gk. “learners”) were those who had made a commitment to Jesus as the Messiah; the “crowds” (v. 1) were those who were curious and often astounded by his teaching and ministry (7:28–29) yet for the most part remained neutral and uncommitted.

 

5:3–12 The Beatitudes all begin with “Blessed are …” They are called “beatitudes” from Latin beatus, “blessed, happy” (but see note on v. 3). These short statements summarize the essence of the Sermon on the Mount.

 

5:3 Blessed. More than a temporary or circumstantial feeling of happiness, this is a state of well-being in relationship to God that belongs to those who respond to Jesus’ ministry. The poor in spirit are those who recognize they are in need of God’s help. theirs is the kingdom of heaven. It belongs to those who confess their spiritual bankruptcy. On a contrast with the first seven beatitudes, see note on 23:13–36.

 

5:4 those who mourn. The spiritual, emotional, or financial loss resulting from sin should lead to mourning and a longing for God’s forgiveness and healing (cf. 2 Cor. 7:10).

 

5:5 The meek are the “gentle” (cf. 11:29), those who do not assert themselves over others in order to further their own agendas in their own strength, but who will nonetheless inherit the earth because they trust in God to direct the outcome of events. Cf. Ps. 37:11.

 

5:6 Those who hunger and thirst for righteousness recognize that God is the ultimate source of real righteousness, so they long for his righteous character to be evident in people’s lives on earth. They shall be satisfied by responding to his invitation to be in relationship with him.

 

5:7 The kindness and forgiveness that the merciful show to others will also be shown to them.

 

5:8 The pure in heart are those whose pursuit of purity and uprightness affects every area of life. they shall see God. Note the ultimate fulfillment in Rev. 22:4; cf. note on John 1:18. In contrast to Jewish traditions that overemphasized external ritual purity, Jesus taught that purity of heart was most important (cf. note on Matt. 5:28).

 

5:9 peacemakers. Those who promote God’s messianic peace (Hb. shalom, total well-being both personally and communally) will receive the ultimate reward of being called sons of God (see note on Gal. 3:26) as they reflect the character of their heavenly Father.

 

5:10 Those who are persecuted are those who have been wrongly treated because of their faith. God is pleased when his people show that they value him above everything in the world, and this happens when they courageously remain faithful amid opposition for righteousness’ sake.

 

5:11–12 Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you … on my account. Just as Jesus experienced opposition and persecution, his disciples can expect the same. Their reward may not come on earth, but it surely will be theirs in heaven. so they persecuted the prophets. Throughout history, beginning with Cain’s murder of Abel (Gen. 4:8; cf. 1 John 3:12), there have been those who oppose God’s people.

 

5:13 As salt is beneficial in a number of ways (as a preservative, seasoning, etc.), so are disciples of Jesus who influence the world for good.

 

5:14 light of the world. Jesus’ disciples have the kingdom life within them as a living testimony to those in the world who do not yet have the light.

 

5:15 The typical lamp in a Jewish home was fairly small and was placed on a stand to give maximum illumination.

 

5:16 The world will see the light of the kingdom through the good works done by Jesus’ disciples (and believers today), with the result that the Father who is in heaven will be glorified.

 

5:17–48 The Messianic Kingdom in Relation to the Law. Verses 17–20 explain how Jesus and the kingdom fulfill the law of Moses; this is the key to interpreting the Sermon on the Mount and indeed the whole of Jesus’ ministry. Jesus then offers six antitheses (vv. 21–48) that contrast proper and false interpretation and application of the OT.

 

5:17 abolish the Law or the Prophets. The “Law” or “Torah” refers to the first five books of the OT, while the “Prophets” includes the rest of the OT, all of which was held to have been written by prophets (cf. Matt. 13:35, which cites Ps. 78:2; on “Law [and the] Prophets,” cf. Matt. 7:12; 11:13; 22:40; Rom. 3:21). but to fulfill them. Jesus “fulfills” all of the OT in that it all points to him, not only in its specific predictions of a Messiah but also in its sacrificial system, which looked forward to his great sacrifice of himself, in many events in the history of Israel which foreshadowed his life as God’s true Son, in the laws which only he perfectly obeyed, and in the Wisdom Literature, which sets forth a behavioral pattern that his life exemplified (cf. Matt. 2:15; 11:13; 12:3–6, 39–41, 42; also Luke 24:27). Jesus’ gospel of the kingdom does not replace the OT but rather fulfills it as Jesus’ life and ministry, coupled with his interpretation, complete and clarify God’s intent and meaning in the entire OT.

 

5:18 until heaven and earth pass away. Jesus confirms the full authority of the OT as Scripture for all time (cf. 2 Tim. 3:15–16), even down to the smallest components of the written text: the iota is the smallest letter of the Greek alphabet (or the yod of the Hb. alphabet) and the dot likely refers to a tiny stroke or a part of a letter used to differentiate between Hebrew letters. pass from the Law. The OT remains an authoritative compendium of divine testimony and teaching, within which some elements (such as sacrifices and other ceremonial laws) predicted or foreshadowed events that would be accomplished in Jesus’ ministry (see notes on Gal. 4:10; 5:1) and so are not now models for Christian behavior. Until all is accomplished points to Jesus’ fulfillment of specific OT hopes, partly through his earthly life, death, and resurrection, and then more fully after his second coming.

 

5:19 These commandments refers to all the commands in the OT (although many will be applied differently once their purpose has been “fulfilled” in Christ; v. 17). The rabbis recognized a distinction between “light” commandments (such as tithing garden produce) and “weighty” commandments (such as those concerning idolatry, murder, etc.). relaxes one of the least. Jesus demands a commitment to both the least and the greatest commandments yet condemns those who confuse the two (cf. 23:23–24). The entire OT is the expression of God’s will but is now to be taught according to Jesus’ interpretation of its intent and meaning.

 

5:20 Jesus calls his disciples to a different kind and quality of righteousness than that of the scribes and Pharisees. They took pride in outward conformity to many extrabiblical regulations but still had impure hearts (see 23:5, 23, 27–28). But kingdom righteousness works from the inside out because it first produces changed hearts and new motivations (Rom. 6:17; 2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 5:22–23; Phil. 2:12; Heb. 8:10), so that the actual conduct of Jesus’ followers does in fact “[exceed] the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.”

 

5:21–48 These verses demonstrate that Jesus’ interpretation of the OT is the antithesis of faulty interpretations and applications by the religious leaders. Repeatedly introducing his comments with “You have heard that it was said” (21, 27, 33, 38, 43), Jesus corrects not the OT (see note on v. 43) but the misunderstandings of the OT that were prevalent at the time.

 

5:21 Premeditated murder is prohibited by the sixth commandment (Ex. 20:13) and under OT law carried the death penalty (Num. 35:31). The prohibition is grounded in the fact that humans are created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26–27; 9:6). Concerning unpremeditated murder (manslaughter), see notes on Deut. 19:4–6 and 19:8–10.

 

5:22 angry. The dangerous and destructive effect of human anger is likewise stressed throughout Scripture (e.g., Prov. 20:2; 22:3; 29:22; 2 Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31; Col. 3:8; James 1:20). Anger typically entails a desire to damage or destroy the other person, either in some personal way or literally in the form of murder (cf. Matt. 5:21 and James 4:1–2). Calling someone a fool is closely related to anger, in that it represents a destructive attack on one’s character and identity. Thus Jesus warns that the person who violates another person in this grievous way is liable to the hell of fire.

 

5:23–24 First be reconciled. Reconciliation with the person who has something against you must take precedence even over offering one’s gift in worship. The one who initiates the reconciliation here is the one who has wronged the other person.

 

5:25–26 Come to terms quickly. The importance of reconciliation is illustrated by the example of the person who is about to be judged in court. Not to be reconciled will have disastrous consequences on a human level but much more so if one is not reconciled to God. (Regarding the question of Christians and lawsuits, see note on 1 Cor. 6:1.)

 

5:27 Adultery was considered an extremely serious offense (cf. Ex. 20:14) because, in addition to violating another person, it broke the marriage covenant (Mal. 2:14) that was a reflection of the relationship between God and his people.

 

5:28 with lustful intent (Gk. pros to epithymēsai autēn, lit., “for the purpose of lusting for her”). Lust begins in the heart, the center of a person’s identity and will. It is not enough to maintain physical purity alone; one must also guard against engaging mentally in an act of unfaithfulness. Jesus is not adding to OT law but correctly interpreting it, for even in the Ten Commandments God had required purity of heart (Ex. 20:17; cf. 1 Sam. 16:7; Ps. 19:14; 24:4).

 

5:29–30 right eye … right hand. The right side often stood for the more powerful or important. The eye is the medium through which one is tempted to lust, and the hand represents the physical actions that result from lusting. cut it off. Jesus uses deliberate overstatement to emphasize the importance of maintaining exclusive devotion to one’s spouse. Even things of great value should be given up if they are leading a person to sin. See note on Mark 9:43–48.

 

5:31–32 A certificate of divorce in the ancient world gave a woman the right to remarry (e.g., Mishnah, Gittin 9.3: “The essential formula in the bill of divorce is ‘Lo, thou art free to marry any man’”) and reflects the fact that divorce and remarriage were widely accepted and practiced in the first century world. But I say to you indicates that Jesus does not accept the practice of easy divorce represented in v. 31. Because divorce was widespread in ancient times, God had instituted a regulation through Moses that was intended to uphold the sanctity of marriage and to protect women from being divorced for no reason. (See notes on Deut. 24:1–4; Matt. 19:8.) Here and in 19:3–9, Jesus bases his teaching on God’s original intention that marriage should be a permanent union of a man and woman as “one flesh” (Mark 10:8). Divorce breaks that union. Sexual immorality (Gk. porneia) can refer to adultery (Jer. 3:9; see also the use of the term in Sir. 23:23), prostitution (Nah. 3:4; 1 Cor. 6:13, 18), incest (1 Cor. 5:1), or fornication (Gen. 38:24; John 8:41). Scripture prohibits any kind of sexual intercourse outside of marriage (thus forbidding the practice of homosexuality and bestiality as well). Except on the ground of sexual immorality. This implies that when a divorce is obtained (by the injured party) because of the sexual immorality of one’s spouse, then such a divorce is not morally wrong. But when a man divorces his wife wrongly (i.e., when his wife has not been sexually immoral), the husband thus makes her commit adultery. Even though some female Jewish divorcees would have gone back to live with their parents in shame, many would have sought to remarry (which seems to be the typical situation that Jesus is addressing here). Jesus is thus indicating that such second marriages begin with committing adultery, since the divorce would not have been valid in God’s eyes. (On whether the adultery is onetime or continual, see note on Matt. 19:9.) But Jesus places primary blame on the husband who has wrongly divorced his wife, by stating that he (the husband) “makes her commit adultery.” Whoever marries a divorced woman is not an isolated statement that applies to all divorced women, or it would contradict the “except” clause that Jesus had just given (as well as the further exception in 1 Cor. 7:15). The statement rather continues the same subject that Jesus had mentioned earlier in the sentence, and thus means, “whoever marries such a wrongly divorced woman commits adultery.” See also the notes on Matt. 19:3–9; Mark 10:2–12; Luke 16:18; 1 Cor. 7:15; and Divorce and Remarriage, pp. 2545–2547.

 

5:33–37 An oath involved invoking God’s name, or substitutes for it, to guarantee the truth of one’s statements (cf. Num. 30:2). Jesus’ disciples are not to swear at all. Instead, their character should be of such integrity that their words can be believed without an oath.

 

5:38 eye for an eye. This “law of retaliation” (Latin lex talionis) was God’s means of maintaining justice and purging evil from among his people (see Deut. 19:20–21). It was intended to prevent inappropriate punishment (the punishment should fit the crime) and was imposed by civil authorities rather than individuals.

 

5:39 Do not resist the one who is evil. Jesus is not prohibiting the use of force by governments, police, or soldiers when combating evil (see notes on Luke 3:12–14; Rom. 13:1–4; 1 Pet. 2:13–14). Rather, Jesus’ focus here is on individual conduct, as indicated by the contrast with Matt. 5:38, which shows that he is prohibiting the universal human tendency to seek personal revenge (see note on Rom. 12:19). If anyone slaps you on the right cheek pictures a backhanded slap given as an insult (a right-handed person would use the back of the hand to slap someone on the right cheek; cf. Mishnah, Baba Kamma 8.6). The word “slaps” translates Gk. rhapizō, “to slap, to strike with the open hand.” turn to him the other also. One should not return an insulting slap, which would lead to escalating violence. In the case of a more serious assault, Jesus’ words should not be taken to prohibit self-defense (see Luke 12:11; 22:36–38; Acts 22:1; 24:10) or fleeing from evil (see 1 Sam. 19:10; Luke 4:29–30; John 8:59; 10:39; 2 Cor. 11:32–33), for often a failure to resist a violent attack leads to even more serious abuse. Acting in love toward an attacker (Matt. 5:44; 22:39) will often include taking steps to prevent him from attempting further attacks. Jesus’ teaching must be applied with wisdom in the light of related Scriptures that address similar situations (cf. note on 5:42).

 

5:42 Give to the one who begs from you. Christians should help those who are truly needy (and therefore forced to beg), but they are not required to give foolishly (cf. 7:6) or to a lazy person who is not in need (2 Thess. 3:10), or where giving would bring harm rather than benefit.

 

5:43 You have heard that it was said … hate your enemy. The OT never says that anyone should hate his or her enemy. This shows that, in his “you have heard” statements (21, 27, 33, 38, 43), Jesus is correcting not the OT itself but only misinterpretations of the OT. God’s hatred of evil was a central theme in the OT (e.g., Ps. 5:4–5). Consequently, those who embodied evil were understood to be God’s enemies, and it was natural to hate them (cf. Ps. 26:4–5; 139:21–22), but such hatred is never commanded by God.

 

5:44 Love your enemies. God hates evil, but he still brings many blessings in this life even to his enemies (v. 45) by means of “common grace” (the favor that he gives to all people and not just to believers). These blessings are intended to lead unbelievers to repentance (Acts 14:17; Rom. 2:4). Of course there is a sense in which God hates those who are resolutely and impenitently wicked (cf. Ps. 5:5; 11:5; Eph. 2:3), but God’s blessings of common grace constitute his primary providential action toward mankind here and now.

 

5:45 sons. The children of the heavenly Father are those who respond to his will as expressed in the ministry of Jesus (cf. 12:48–50). (Regarding “sons” [Gk. huioi], see ESV Preface, pp. 19–22.) sun … rain. God shows grace and care for all of his creatures; therefore Jesus’ disciples are to imitate God and love both neighbor and enemy.

 

5:46–47 In Palestine, tax collectors were representatives of the Roman governing authorities. Their tendency to resort to extortion made them despised and hated by their own people (cf. Luke 19:8). Christians should not merely do the same as unbelievers; their transformed lives should result in behavior that shows significantly greater love.

 

5:48 be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Scripture is a reflection of God himself as he has made his will and character known to his people. As Christians seek to live in conformity to Scripture, they are in fact pursuing the very perfection of God. This verse provides the conclusion and summary to the antithesis section (vv. 21–48), showing that all of the Law and the Prophets find their perfect (Gk. teleios) fulfillment in the perfection of the Father, which is what all Jesus’ disciples are called to pursue.

 

Lane T. Dennis and Wayne Grudem, eds. The ESV Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008), n.p.

 

 

Revelation 1

 

 

 

1:1–8 Prologue. John signals how to read the book and receive its promised blessings. The terms “revelation,” “show,” “made it known” (a Gk. verb related to “sign,” 12:1, 3; 15:1), and “he saw” prepare the reader and hearers for symbolic visions, which make history’s hidden realities visible.

 

1:1–3 Title, Transmission, Promise of Blessing. The opening paragraph identifies this book’s genre (“revelation” or apocalypse, a disclosure of unseen realities), its divine author (“Jesus Christ”), and the process by which he is conveying it through the human author (“his servant John”) to believers (“his servants”). It then pronounces the first of seven benedictions on those who rightly receive the book’s message.

 

1:1 revelation of Jesus Christ. Jesus is both the One revealed (referred to variously as Son of Man, Lion of Judah, Lamb, Word of God) and the Revealer. God transmits the unveiled truth to Jesus (5:7), and his angel conveys it to John (10:9) for God’s servants in the churches. The prophecy must … take place because it is secured by God’s sovereign purpose and power. It will take place soon, because “the time is near” (1:3). In the epilogue, John, unlike Daniel, is told not to seal his prophecy (22:10; cf. Dan. 12:4). John’s visions are important for his first-century readers as well as for later generations of believers.

 

1:3 Blessed. The first of seven blessings is given to those who hear and keep God’s Word. Later blessings (14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7, 14) commend purity and perseverance, even to the death. In the early church one would read aloud while others listened. Revelation’s message and its blessing can be received even by hearing it read, but only if that hearing is accompanied by obeying as well. the time is near. See notes on 1 Thess. 5:2–3; 5:4.

 

1:4–6 Epistolary Opening. This greeting identifies author and recipients, then pronounces blessing upon the recipients. the seven churches that are in Asia. Since churches existed in other cities of Roman Asia (e.g., Colossae, Troas), Christ’s selection of “seven,” symbolizing completeness, implies that he addresses the whole church through them. him who is and who was and who is to come. God is eternal, and in Christ he will come at the end of history to judge and save. the seven spirits. Revelation presents the Holy Spirit as one person (3:6, 13; cf. Eph. 4:4), but he also appears as “seven spirits” (cf. Rev. 3:1; 4:5; etc.), representing perfection, and as “seven torches of fire” (4:5) and “seven eyes” (5:6) to express his omnipresence and omniscience. from him who is … from the seven spirits … and from Jesus Christ. John’s greeting comes “from” all three persons of the Trinity. the faithful witness. Witness (cf. “testimony,” 1:2) is central to the church’s calling amid suffering. As Jesus was the faithful witness even to death (1 Tim. 6:13), so must his followers be (Rev. 2:13; 12:11; 20:4). Christians are called to be faithful witnesses, but Jesus is “the” faithful witness par excellence. John comforts his persecuted readers with the truth that Jesus has triumphed over death (the firstborn of the dead) and that he is sovereign over all earthly powers, even Caesar, since he is the ruler of kings on earth (cf. 19:16). made us a kingdom, priests. Israel’s roles now belong to those of all nations who are freed from sins by Jesus’ blood (5:10; Ex. 19:6). From the outset, Jesus’ death is central to the message of Revelation.

 

1:7–8 Announcement of the Coming King. coming with the clouds. See note on 1 Thess. 4:16–17. Jesus will come as the Son of Man with universal dominion (cf. Dan. 7:13–14), though his subjects pierced him (Zech. 12:10). wail. Most scholars think the wailing is a reaction to judgment instead of the kind of grief that leads to salvation. The coming one is the Lord God, Alpha and Omega (first and last letters of the Gk. alphabet) (see Rev. 1:17; 22:13). Jesus is the beginning of all history (the Creator) and also the goal for whom all things are made (all history is moving toward glorifying him).

 

1:9–22:5 Body. John begins the body of his letter with a vision of “one like a son of man,” who addresses edicts of commendation and critique to his seven churches.

 

1:9–3:22 “Things That Are”: Christ’s Presence with and Knowledge of His Churches. John’s first vision, of the glorious Son of Man who is spiritually present with his struggling churches on earth, initiates a cycle of seven letters or edicts in which Jesus omnisciently diagnoses each church’s condition and sovereignly commands appropriate responses of repentance and persevering faithfulness.

 

1:9–20 The Son of Man among His Churches. Jesus Christ appears in resplendent and overpowering glory to reassure his churches that by his death and resurrection he has control of the danger and death that threaten them. Although he is exalted in heaven, he is also present with his churches on earth and knows their needs better than they themselves do.

 

1:9 John’s confinement on Patmos, an Aegean island to which Rome exiled political criminals, shows that he is a partner with the churches’ tribulation and patient endurance. Patmos is an arid island approximately 24 square miles (62 sq. km) in area and roughly 40 miles (64 km) from the mainland of Asia Minor. Since antiquity, it has possessed a working protected harbor near its center (modern Skala) and other places for small boats to anchor. Inscriptions and archaeological remains indicate the existence of a fortress before John’s arrival, and the clear presence of the Artemis cult afterward. The limited population of the island during John’s day was probably largely pagan. Assuming (with church tradition) that John had been officially banished to Patmos, he may have been granted some freedom of movement on the island (even if, as claimed in later tradition, he lived in a cave) and may not actually have been in a prison, though he would have been barred from leaving Patmos.

 

1:10 in the Spirit. John was conscious of being surrounded by the manifest presence of the Holy Spirit. Such strong influence of the Holy Spirit leads to prophetic visions (4:2; 17:3; 21:10; cf. Ezek. 3:12). The Lord’s day is Sunday, the first day of the week, the day on which Christ rose.

 

1:11 The order in which the churches are listed traces the route along which a courier from Patmos would have carried the scroll.

 

1:13 son of man (see note on John 1:51). Jesus’ preferred self-designation in the Synoptic Gospels, derived primarily from the book of Daniel. In contrast to four beasts, symbolizing evil kingdoms, the son of man receives from the Ancient of Days universal and eternal dominion as the saints’ representative (Dan. 7:1–14). Revelation 1:12–20 displays Christ’s divine glory both visually and audibly, setting the scene for his royal edicts to the seven churches (chs. 2–3).

 

1:14 Hairs … like white wool show infinite, divine wisdom (Dan. 7:9; cf. Lev. 19:32; Prov. 16:31; 20:29). As he stands among the lampstands, Jesus’ eyes like a flame of fire see through facades. He can say to each church, “I know,” infallibly diagnosing its condition (e.g., Rev. 2:18–19).

 

1:15 Christ’s feet, like burnished bronze (cf. 2:18), will crush any opponents. roar of many waters. Cf. Ezek. 1:24, “like the sound of many waters, like the sound of the Almighty.”

 

1:16 two-edged sword. God’s Word, which searches hearts and judges rebels (cf. Isa. 49:2; Eph. 6:17; Heb. 4:12; Rev. 19:15).

 

1:17 the first and the last. The Son of Man affirms his divine eternity, echoing the Lord’s boast over idols (Isa. 41:4; 44:6).

 

1:18 I died … I am alive forevermore. Paradoxically, this ever-living One died to redeem believers and now lives forever as “the firstborn of the dead” (v. 5). Because Jesus died and rose again, John must “fear not” (v. 17), and the churches should not fear death, because Jesus has conquered it forever. On Christ’s resurrection, see 1 Cor. 15:42–57.

 

1:19 Jesus’ command to write forecasts the book’s main divisions: The letters (royal edicts) to the churches (chs. 2–3) address the things that are. Thereafter John’s visions turn primarily to those that are to take place after this (see 4:1).

 

1:20 Angels of the seven churches might be human messengers, human pastors, or literal angels sent as messengers, but they are probably personifications of each church’s identity. Jesus will address his encouragement and/or rebuke for each church to that church’s angel. Cf. Dan. 10:13–14.

 

 

Lane T. Dennis and Wayne Grudem, eds. The ESV Study Bible. Accordance electronic ed. (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008), n.p.

 

-Dan

[Ιακοβ]

It frustrates me no end that commentary series can be so uneven, and more so that within a commentary series you get variation from christian seminary style faith in the scriptures through to "Is this commentator even christian?" type of commentaries.

It is definitely worth having a complete set, but over time, you will begin to discover–for each individual book of the bible–a preference for one particular commentary. For example, my favourite commentary on Genesis isn't even part of a commentary series, but a book written by someone who teaches Genesis at a bible college. , he covers all the wide range of topics needed to be learnt, and yet still sounds like he believes the bible is the word of God.

 

This if anyone was curious: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0310224586?keywords=genesis&qid=1446335280&ref_=sr_1_89&sr=8-89

Edited October 31, 2015 by Ιακοβ

[Daniel Francis]

Cool I have seen that work but not used it (I do not own it). If Brian had asked me about a Multivolume I would have without a doubt recommended the NEW INTERPRETER'S BIBLE 12-VOLUME COMMENTARY, which in addition to dealing with the matters he asked also contains wonderful reflection material on most all sections of treatment (although occasionally reflections are put off till a couple sections are covered). I know EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY is a more conservative item and roughly the same price, but unfortunately it often doesn't take in literary points too well.

 

-Dan

 

PS: Covering the catholic books too is also a nice feature of the NIB.

[Daniel Francis]

Having mentioned the EBC, made me go back to see if the abridged version was available it Accordance (I had got it on CDROM years ago), I see it have been released for individual sale now: EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY - ABRIDGED EDITION (2 VOLUMES), here are the samples from it. Although to be honest I do not think it quite fits the bill of what you are looking for but it is a fine moderate evangelical commentary at a decent price.

 

1 Samuel 2

 

2. The Song of Hannah (2:1-11)

 

1-2 Verses 1-10 are commonly referred to as the “Song of Hannah” because of similarities to other ancient OT hymns (e.g., Ex 15:1-18, 21; Dt 32:1-43; Jdg 5; and esp. 2Sa 22). It may have originated as a song of triumph at the Shiloh sanctuary in connection with Israel’s victory over an enemy. Such songs would have been taught to worshipers, and this one perhaps became a personal favorite of Hannah. Therefore she sang it as a means of expressing her gratitude and praise to the Giver of life (cf. esp. v. 5). Hannah’s song may have been the seedplot for Mary’s Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55; cf. also the Song of Zechariah in vv. 68-79).

The song begins on a note of grateful exuberance: Her heart rejoices in the Lord—and in his “deliverance” (or “salvation”; GK H3802) as well (see Pss 9:14; 13:5; 35:9; Isa 25:9). The metaphor of one’s “horn” (GK H7967) being lifted high perhaps comes from the animal world, where members of the deer family use their antlers in playful or mortal combat. “Horn” thus symbolizes strength.

For Hannah, the Lord is holy, unique, and mighty. She therefore celebrates God’s holiness in righteous victory. She then connects his uniqueness with the metaphor of the Rock (cf. 2Sa 22:32; cf. also Ge 49:24; Dt 32:4; Isa 26:4; et al.)

 

3-8d After describing God’s majesty and power, Hannah warns all who would vaunt themselves in their pride (including Peninnah!). Arrogance is both foolish and futile (Pss 31:18; 75:4; 138:6). God judges the heart and weighs it rather than external appearances (cf. 16:7). The “broken” bows are echoed by the “shattered” opponents of v. 10. Making the strong weak and the weak strong is what God does (cf. Heb 11:32-34).

The last half of v. 5 had special meaning for Hannah, who had once been barren (cf. Jdg 13:2-3). “Seven” here means simply “many,” but at the same time also represents the ideal (cf. Job 1:2; 42:13). Just as she who has had many “pines away,” so the mother of seven will “grow faint.” The formerly barren Hannah eventually had a total of six children (v. 21).

The Sovereign God ultimately blesses some and curses others (cf. vv.9c-10c). Verse 6a contrasts death with life; possibly the second half does too, though it may also refer to rescue from the brink of death after a serious illness (therefore contrasting sickness with health; cf. Ps 30:2-3).

The Lord can—and does—reverse the fortunes of poor and rich (Zec 9:3-4), of the humble and the proud (Job 5:11; Ps 75:7; and esp. 2Sa 22:28). He can lift a Baasha “from the dust” and later consume him (1Ki 16:2-3); he can ensconce a Job on an ash heap (Job 2:8) and later restore him (Job 42:10).

 

8e-10 The “foundations of the earth” (cf. 2Sa 22:16) refers pictorially to the firmness and stability of God’s creation—which is always under his sovereign control. How much more is he able to protect his people (Pr 3:26) and confound his (and their) enemies (Dt 32:35)!

The word often translated “saint” (GK H2883) means “one to whom the Lord has pledged his covenant love [GK H2876]“ (cf. Pss 12:1, 8; 50:5, 16; 97:10; 145:10, 20). The final destiny of the ungodly, however, is the silence of Sheol, the “grave” (GK H8619; v. 6), where all is darkness (Job 10:21-22; 17:13; 18:18; cf. also Mt 8:12).

Hannah learned that in the battles of life it is not physical strength that brings victory. Whether through human agency or directly, God always shatters the enemy (cf. Ex 15:6; Ps 2:9). Peninnah may have “thundered against” (1:6, lit.) Hannah, but Hannah knew full well that the Lord would ultimately “thunder against” Peninnah and all others who oppose him.

The Song of Hannah ends as it began, by using the word “horn” in the sense of “strength.” Hannah voices the divine promise of strength to the coming “king”—initially David, who will found a dynasty with messianic implications. The king—the “anointed” one (GK H5431)—will rule by virtue of God’s command and will therefore belong to him body and soul. The king will be “his” (2Sa 22:51).

 

11 With Samuel’s dedication and Hannah’s song complete, the family returned to Ramah—except for Samuel, who began what was to be a continuing ministry.

 

3. The wicked sons of Eli (2:12-26)

 

12-17 The reference to Hophni and Phinehas as “wicked men” (GK H1175) contrasts them with Hannah, who did not consider herself a “wicked woman” (1:16). Furthermore, the sons of Eli “had no regard for the LORD”—unlike Samuel, who “did not yet know” (3:7) the Lord.

Not content with the priests’ portions of the sacrificial animals (cf. Lev 7:34), the servant of Eli’s sons “would take for [themselves] whatever the fork brought up.” And not only that, “even before the fat was burned” (Lev 7:31), Hophni and Phinehas demanded raw meat. On occasion they even preferred roasted meat to boiled—as if in mockery of the necessarily hasty method of preparing the first Passover feast (Ex 12:8-11). They wanted their unlawful portion before the Lord received what was rightfully his. Their rebellion, impatience, and impudence were great sins. These premonarchic priests treated the Lord’s offerings with contempt, which could only lead to disaster (cf. Nu 16:30-32).

 

18-26 As a young apprentice priest under Eli’s supervision, Samuel wore the “linen ephod,” a priest’s garment. Indeed, the little “robe” that Samuel’s mother made for him annually as he was growing up may well have been an example of the “robe of the ephod” (Ex 28:31). By providing Hannah with additional children, the Lord continued to be gracious to her (cf. Ge 21:1). Samuel’s continued growth in the Lord’s presence, in stature and in favor with God and people, anticipates Luke’s portrayal of Jesus’ youth (Lk 2:40, 52).

The hapless Eli, whose advanced age is stressed from this point on (4:15, 18), was unable to restrain the sinful conduct of his sons. To their earlier callous treatment of their fellow Israelites (vv. 13-16), they added sexual promiscuity—and with the women who served at the tabernacle (cf. Ex 38:8)! Such ritual prostitution was specifically forbidden to the people of God (Nu 25:1-5; Dt 23:17; Am 2:7-8). Eli’s rebuke, justified in the light of widespread and public reports of his sons’ evil deeds, fell on deaf ears. His theological arguments, weak at best, were to no avail, especially since God had already determined to put Hophni and Phinehas to death. What is eminently clear is that God’s decision to end the lives of Eli’s sons was irrevocable. Hannah had already expressed her willingness to leave such decisions within the sphere of divine sovereignty (v. 6)—and so must we!

 

4. The oracle against the house of Eli (2:27-36)

 

27-36 The chapter concludes by expanding on the Lord’s intention to put Eli’s sons to death (v. 25). The prophetic oracle to (and against) Eli uses the messenger formula (“This is what the LORD says”) and mediates the divine word through an anonymous “man of God.” The term “man of God” occasionally refers to an angel (cf. Jdg 13:3, 6, 8-9) but is usually a synonym for “prophet” (cf. 1Sa 9:9-10). This man of God reminds Eli that God had revealed himself to his ancestor Levi’s house (in Aaron; see Ex 4:14-16) before the Exodus. Indeed, Aaron had been the object of special divine election to serve the Lord as the first in a long line of priests (Ex 28:1-4). Aaron would go up “to” the Lord’s altar and would wear the ephod in the course of his divinely ordained work (cf. Lev 8:7).

Recipients of such privilege, Eli and his sons nevertheless “scorn” (GK H1246) the Lord’s prescribed sacrifices. Literally, the verb means “to kick” and is found only once elsewhere in the OT (Dt 32:15). Although the Hebrew words for “fat” and “heavy” are different there than the word for “fattening” here, the parallel is striking: Like Israel centuries earlier, the house of Eli has “kicked at” the Lord’s offerings by gorging themselves on the best parts of the sacrifices (vv. 13-17). By condoning the sin of Hophni and Phinehas, Eli has demonstrated that he loves his sons more than he loves God and that he is therefore unworthy of the Lord’s continued blessing (see Mt 10:37).

The Lord had promised that Aaron’s descendants would always be priests (cf. Ex 29:9), and he had confirmed that promise on covenant oath (Nu 25:13). They would “minister [GK H2143] before” the Lord forever. But because of flagrant disobedience, the house of Eli would be judged by God. Although the Aaronic priesthood was perpetual, individual priests who sinned could thereby forfeit covenant blessing. The description of divine judgment, when translated literally, is vivid: “I will chop off your arm and the arm of your father’s house.” Furthermore, Eli would be the last “old man” in his family line, because God’s execution of his death sentence would be swift and sure (4:11, 18; 22:17-20; 1Ki 2:26-27).

Examples of the predicted distress in God’s “dwelling” (GK H5061; the tabernacle is meant) are the capture of the ark by the Philistines (4:11) and the destruction of Shiloh (cf. Jer 7:12, 14; 26:6, 9). Although in Eli’s line there would “never” be an old man, in the line that would replace his there would “always” be a faithful priest. The only member of Eli’s line to “be spared” was Abiathar, and he was later removed from the priesthood (1Ki 2:26-27).

Hophni and Phinehas would die “on the same day” (4:11), a prophetic sign to Eli not only of his own impending death but also of the fulfillment of the other components in the oracle of the man of God. The Lord would bring a “faithful” priest on the scene, who would be privy to the very thoughts of God and obedient to him.

“Faithful” (GK H586) contrasts strongly with the rebellion of Eli’s sons and plays an important role in the succeeding context, both near and remote. In this same verse the Lord says, “I will firmly [GK H586] establish his house”—lit., “I will build for him a faithful house” (cf. 2Sa 7:27). In the present context the faithful priest whose house the Lord would establish refers initially to Samuel (3:1; 7:9; 9:12-13; cf. esp. 3:20). Later, however, the line of Zadok would replace that of Abiathar, Eli’s descendant (2Sa 8:17; 15:24-29; 1Ki 2:35)—a replacement that would constitute a greater fulfillment of the oracle of the man of God. Zadok and his descendants would thus “always” minister before the Lord’s “anointed one”—David’s son Solomon (1Ki 2:27, 35) and his descendants. Ultimate fulfillment would come only in Jesus the Christ, the supremely Anointed One, “designated by God to be high priest” (Heb 5:10) “forever, in the order of Melchizedek” (6:20).

As for the members of Eli’s house, once fattened on priestly perquisites, soon not even the least benefit of priestly office would be theirs.

 

Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

 

Psalms 1

 

Psalm 1: God’s Blessing on the Godly

 

I. The Discriminating Way of the Godly (1:1-2)

II. The Future of the Godly and the Wicked Contrasted (1:3-5)

III. The Discriminating Way of God (1:6)

 

The first psalm with its pronouncement of blessing on all who respond in fidelity to the God of the covenant appropriately introduces the book of Psalms. The placing of this psalm is significant because it both invites and encourages God’s people to live godly lives. It also provides the assurance that the righteous will be rewarded and that, in the end, God “knows the way of the righteous.” The first psalm sets the tone for the entire Psalter because of its concern for God, for godly living, and for the hope of the godly in the realization of the promises of the covenant.

Psalm 1 is a wisdom psalm and shares many features common to the book of Proverbs and to other psalms designated as wisdom psalms (34; 37; 49; 73; 111-12; 119; 127-28; 133). Psalm 1 holds forth the blessedness of godliness and encourages wisdom as the way of life.

 

I. The Discriminating Way of the Godly (1:1-2)

 

1 The opening phrase of the psalm is an appropriate introduction to the book of Psalms. The formula “Blessed is the man” evokes joy and gratitude, as man may live in fellowship with his God. The word “happy” is a good rendition of “blessed” (GK H897), provided one keeps in mind that the condition of “bliss” is not merely a feeling. Even when the righteous do not feel happy, they are still considered “blessed” from God’s perspective. Such happiness is promoted by two kinds of activities: dissociation from the wicked and association with and devotion to God. The godly do not (1) walk in the counsel of the wicked, (2) stand in the way of sinners, or (3) sit in the seat of mockers. Rather, they reflect on the Lord in their walking, standing, and sitting (cf. Dt 6:7). The parallelism is synonymous and profoundly portrays the totality of evil.

In contrast, the “mockers” (GK H4370) have no regard for God and his commandments. They do not respond to instruction (Pr 9:7; Pr 15:12) but stir up strife by their insults (22:10). Thus the way of folly entails a devotion to self and to the group in all areas of life.

 

2 The righteous are positively identified by their association with “the law of the LORD.” The “law” (torah; GK H9368) signifies primarily instruction that comes from God for the purpose of helping us to live in harmony with God’s will. The believer’s delight is not only in knowing, studying, and memorizing the Word of God but especially in doing God’s will.

“Delight” (GK H2914) expresses all that makes the child of God happy. The law is more than a delight; it is the believer’s chief desire. The fear of the Lord, as the beginning of wisdom, is expressed as a delight in God’s law (112:1). The delight of the godly in doing God’s will on earth (Mt 6:10) is the result of a special relationship with the Lord.

The godly person “meditates” (GK H2047) on the law of God day and night. Since the Bible was generally not available to God’s people, they memorized and meditated on the word (cf. 119:11), the perfections of the Lord (63:6), and his mighty acts (77:12; 143:5). The one who meditates continually reflects God’s word in life.

 

II. The Future of the Godly and the Wicked Contrasted (1:3-5)

 

3 The happiness of the godly is likened to a tree. Unlike trees growing wild or planted in the fields, where the amount of rainfall varies, the tree the psalmist envisions has been planted purposely by irrigation canals.

The imagery of leaves and fruit assures the godly that they will receive God’s blessing and will enjoy life as a gift of God (cf. Eze 47:12). The “prosperity” of the righteous is God’s blessing on their words and works (cf. 90:14-17). The psalmist thus encourages the godly to pursue the way of wisdom. The prosperity of the righteous—guaranteed or limited to the godly—is a gift of God, a by-product of wise living.

 

4-5 How different is the end of the wicked! The metaphor of chaff reveals both the uselessness of the wicked and the ease with which God will deal with them. Even as the winnower casts the chaff to the afternoon breeze, so the Lord will drive away the wicked.

The end of the wicked may not be clear while they are alive, but from God’s perspective they have no future. They cannot withstand the judgment of God. They are judged by being alienated from the congregation of the righteous, i.e., those who have a relationship with God and enjoy his presence—both now and in the life to come.

 

III. The Discriminating Way of God (1:6)

 

6 The reason for the certainty of the judgment lies in God’s knowledge of the affairs of humankind. God’s “knowledge” is a deep commitment to, love for, and care of his own; hence the translation “the LORD watches over.” The Lord offers no protection to those who are not reconciled to him; rather, their end is destruction (cf. Mt 7:23; cf. vv. 15-27).

 

Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

 

 

Isaiah 6

 

H. The Vision and Call of the Holy One (6:1-13)

 

1 The date of Uzziah’s death has been much disputed. Isaiah 14:28-32 is an oracle from the year of the death of King Ahaz, and it is clearly appropriate to the political situation of that time. We are not surprised, therefore, to find something similar here; and we can well imagine the spiritual value to the prophet himself of a vision of the almighty King when an earthly reign of over fifty years had come—or was coming—to its end. The vision of the Lord’s transcendence never left Isaiah: the exaltation of Israel’s great God is a frequent theme in his oracles (cf. 2:10-22; 37:16; 40:12-26; 57:15).

 

2 This is the only biblical passage where heavenly beings are called “seraphs” (GK H8597). They are part of the great variety of heavenly beings created by God (along with others such as angels, archangels, principalities, powers, and cherubim). The seraphs are bright creatures, for the word means “burning ones”; yet they hide their faces from the greater brightness and the glory of the Lord. Covering the feet suggests humility.

 

3 There is no indication of the number of seraphs seen by Isaiah. Possibly he was present at an act of worship in the temple, perhaps at the New Year, and that the antiphonal singing of the Levitical choir was echoed by the heavenly seraphs of his vision. The apostle Paul evidently believed that angels are present at Christian worship (cf. 1Co 11:2-16, which likewise deals with veiling and unveiling in the presence of God).

The threefold ascription of holiness to God (cf. Rev 4:8) has been interpreted in reference to the Trinity since the early Church Fathers. It is best for us simply to say that—in the fuller light of the NT—we can see the appropriateness of this threefold expression. The theme of divine holiness is of towering importance in Isaiah. This man of God could never forget the disclosure of transcendent purity he encountered when he was called to prophetic service (cf. Eze 1).

The language of fullness occurs three times in these verses (vv. 1, 3, 4), twice in reference to the temple and once to the whole earth. So this passage, insisting as it does on the awesome transcendence of the sovereign God, also emphatically teaches his immanence. His transcendence is not remoteness or aloofness but is known through his presence in his created world and temple. Divine transcendence and immanence are always held in balance in the Bible’s view of God (cf. 12:6).

The word “glory” (GK H3883) is used of God in his manifestation to his creatures. The essence of deity is inscrutable, but something of his glory can be seen if God is pleased to disclose it (Ex 33:17-23; Eze 1:28). In Jn 12:41, after quoting Isa 6:10, John said that Isaiah “saw [Jesus’ ] glory and spoke about him.” This amazing statement is in fact altogether consistent with the high Christology of the NT writers, for Jesus is God incarnate, and the same God is revealed in both OT and NT. This might in fact suggest that John understood the threefold use of “holy” in trinitarian terms.

 

4 God’s power is sometimes manifested in a physical tremor (cf. Ex 19:18; Ac 4:31) and his presence in a cloud of smoke (cf. Isa 4:5; Ex 33:9). So the God who normally hides himself from the senses occasionally made himself known in a form accessible to them, and he ultimately did so in the consummate unveiling of himself in his Son (1Jn 1:1-4).

 

5 The word translated “woe” (GK H208) here is different from that used several times in ch. 5. They are, in fact, synonyms, each possessing various nuances ranging from the threat to the sigh. This verse teaches us that to be an effective channel for God’s penetrating word, the power of that word must be felt in the person’s own conscience. It is true that the lips of the prophet were destined to proclaim God’s truth; but if he was in the temple at worship, the primary reference may be to the defiled lips of the worshiper (cf. 1:15; 29:13). The people of the OT always felt a deep apprehension at the prospect of seeing God. This must have been underlined still more for Isaiah as he saw even the unfallen seraphs covering their faces in the presence of the Most High.

 

6-7 To serve God, Isaiah needed to be a clean instrument. The God of burning holiness himself (cf. 33:13-16) provides this cleansing from the sacrificial altar (cf. Nu 31:22-23; Mal 3:2). Significantly, one of the seraphs (see comment on v. 2) is the instrument of purification administered to the prophet. Isaiah may well have learned from this experience that sinful human beings can join in the worship of the “burning ones” only when purified by the fire of God (cf. 4:4).

 

8 Isaiah is not coerced into service; rather, his will makes its ready response as a grateful reaction to God’s forgiving grace. No doubt Isaiah’s very response was itself the product of divine grace, but this is not where the stress falls here. Instead, we see him faced with the challenge to personal commitment.

The plural “us” is often taken to be either a reference to the Trinity (cf. v. 3; Ge 1:26; 11:7) or to a council of heavenly beings. Many passages picture God surrounded by the heavenly hosts; but none suggests that God called on them for advice or even identified them with him in some way in his utterance. In a context that speaks both of waters and mountains (nature) and of nations (history), the Lord refutes the notion that he consulted others (40:13-14). The plural, therefore, suggests either the divine majesty or that fullness of his being that was to find its ultimate theological expression in the doctrine of the Trinity.

 

9-10 Isaiah was apprised of the people’s hardness of heart by the Lord Almighty, who not only knew what would occur but had planned it; for he is King (vv. 1, 5). The words of God to Isaiah are quoted in each of the Gospels (Mt 13:14-15; Mk 4:10-12; Lk 8:10; Jn 12:39-41) and twice by Paul (Ac 28:26-27; Ro 11:8). Each quotation is given as a comment on the rejection of God’s word in Christ. The synoptic references all occur in connection with the parable of the sower, which, like here, anticipates widespread failure to make proper response to God’s word, but which also, as here (v. 13), shows cause for hope. The holy seed of the vision finds its NT counterpart in the good soil of the parable.

 

11-12 The tone of Isaiah’s question is one of lament. The prophets did not find God’s message of judgment easy to utter (cf. Jer 1:6, 8, 17; Eze 2:3-8; et al.). They belonged to the nation they addressed and must often have wept for its sins and its certain judgment (Jer 9:1; 14:17). The opening chapters of the book (as well as later passages), recording material from the events of the prophet’s day (1:7-9) and from oracles of future judgment (e.g., 3:25-26; 5:8-9, 13, 17), illustrate these verses.

 

13 The devastation, great as it was to be, would not be total; but even its survivors would have to submit to further judgment. The illustration from nature introduces an element of hope. God has so ordered nature that almost total destruction does not always extinguish life. He has a continuing purpose of life for the remnant of his people (see comment on 4:2). The word “seed” (GK H2446) suggests a link with the promise given to Abraham that his seed (“offspring”; GK H2446) would continue and be blessed by God (Ge 17:1-8; cf. Isa 51:2). That God should use the word “holy” (GK H7731) of the remnant of his people when it has been used already in v. 3 in relation to his own transcendent being is condescending grace indeed!

 

Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

 

Matthew 5

 

B. First Discourse: The Sermon on the Mount (5:1-7:29)

 

This commentary on the Sermon on the Mount proceeds with the assumption that Matthew presents the real, historical setting for this discourse, though it recognizes that these chapters are condensed notes rather than the entire sermon verbatim. Thus we find Matthew’s idiom selected and presented in accord with his own concerns. Lk 6:20-49 is a separate report of the same occasion, with a somewhat different selection of material (for more on this, see EBC 8:122–26).

The unifying theme of the sermon is the kingdom of heaven. It envelopes the Beatitudes (5:3, 10) and appears in 5:17-20, which details the relation between the OT and the kingdom. It returns at the heart of the Lord’s Prayer (6:10), climaxes the section on kingdom perspectives (6:33), and is presented as what must finally be entered (7:21-23). Matthew places the sermon immediately after two verses insisting that the primary content of Jesus’ preaching was the Gospel of the kingdom (4:17, 23). It provides ethical guidelines for life in the kingdom, but does so within an explanation of the place of the contemporary setting within redemption history and Jesus’ relation to the OT (5:17-20). The community forming around him, his “disciples,” is not yet so cohesive and committed a group that exhortations to “enter” (7:13-14) are irrelevant. The glimpse of kingdom life (horizontally and vertically) in these chapters anticipates not only the love commandments (22:34-40) but also grace (5:3; 6:12; 7:7-11; cf. 21:28-46).

Matthew does not record any controversies with Jewish teachers as to the OT law’s meaning prior to this Sermon. This means that the antitheses in 5:17-48 (“You have heard . . . but I tell”) should not be read as tokens of confrontation but in the light of the fulfillment themes richly set out in chs. 1-4 and made again explicit in 5:17-20: Jesus comes “to fulfill” the Law and the Prophets (i.e., the OT Scriptures). Therefore his announcements concerning the kingdom must be read against that background. Whatever controversies occupied Jesus’ attention, the burden of his kingdom proclamation always made the kingdom the goal of the Scriptures, the long-expected messianic reign foretold by the Law and the Prophets alike.

 

1. The Setting (5:1-2)

 

1 The “crowds” are those referred to in 4:23-25. Here Jesus stands at the height of his popularity. Although his ministry touched the masses, he saw the need to teach his “disciples” closely, though this word must not be restricted to the Twelve, whom Matthew has yet to mention (10:1-4). Those who especially wanted to attach themselves to him, Jesus takes aside to instruct. As such, they are paradigms for believers of any age.

At this point in his ministry, Jesus could not escape the mounting crowds; and by the end of his sermon (7:28-29), he was surrounded by yet larger crowds. This suggests that his teaching covered several days, not just an hour or two. The place of retreat Jesus chose was in the hill country (see comment on Lk 6:17). He “sat down” to teach. Sitting was the accepted posture of synagogue or school teachers (Lk 4:20).

 

2 Literally, this verse translates, “he opened his mouth and taught them,” found elsewhere in the NT (13:35; Ac 8:35; 10:34; 18:14) and reflecting OT roots (Job 3:1; 33:2; Da 10:16). It is used in solemn or revelatory contexts.

 

2. The kingdom of heaven: its norms and witness (5:3-16)

 

a. The norms of the kingdom (5:3-12)

 

The Beatitudes (from the Latin beatus, “blessed”) find their roots in wisdom literature and especially the Psalms. The OT never bunch more than two beatitudes together (e.g., Ps 84:4-5).

 

3 The Greek word for “blessed” (GK G3421) describes the person who is singularly favored by God and therefore in some sense “happy,” though the word can also apply to God (1Ti 1:11; 6:15). The common factor between these two views is approval: humans “bless” God, approving and praising him; God “blesses” humans, approving them in gracious condescension. In the eschatological setting of Matthew, “blessed” refers to a promised eschatological blessing, specified by the second clause of each beatitude.

Because Luke has “poor” (GK G4777) rather than “poor in spirit,” many have concluded that he preserves the true teaching of the historical Jesus—concern for the economically destitute—while Matthew has “spiritualized” it by adding “in spirit.” But already in the OT, “the poor” has religious overtones, i.e., those who because of sustained economic privation and social distress have confidence only in God (e.g., Pss 40:17; 69:32-33; Isa 61:1). Poverty itself is not the chief thing; it can be turned to advantage only if it fosters humility before God. In other words, to be poor in spirit is not to lack courage but to acknowledge one’s spiritual bankruptcy and one’s need to depend on God alone.

The “kingdom of heaven” (see comment on 3:2) belongs to such people; it is they who enjoy Messiah’s reign and his blessings. They joyfully accept his rule and participate in the life of the kingdom (7:14). While the rewards of vv. 4-9 are future (“they will be comforted,” “will inherit,” etc.), the first and last are present (“for theirs is the kingdom of heaven”). Yet one must not make too much of this, for the present tense can function as a future; and the future tense can emphasize certainty. There is little doubt that here the kingdom idea is primarily future, made explicit in v. 12. However, though the full blessedness of those described in these beatitudes awaits the consummated kingdom, they already share in the kingdom’s blessedness so far as it has been inaugurated (see comment on 4:17).

 

4 The godly remnant of Jesus’ day weeps because of the humiliation of Israel, but they understand that it comes from personal and corporate sins. Weeping for sins can be deeply poignant (Ezr 10:6; Ps 51:4; Da 9:19-20) and can cover a global as well as personal view of sin and our participation in it.

“Comfort, comfort my people” (Isa 40:1) is God’s response to human sin. These first two beatitudes deliberately allude to the messianic blessing of Isa 61:1-3. But these blessings, already realized partially but fully only at the consummation (Rev 7:17), depend on a Messiah who has come to save his people from their sins (1:21; cf. also 11:28-30).

 

5 The word “meek” (GK G4558) generally suggests gentleness (cf. 11:29; Jas 3:13) and the self-control it entails. To be meek toward others implies freedom from malice and a vengeful spirit. Jesus exemplifies it best (11:29; 21:5). We may acknowledge our own spiritual bankruptcy (v. 3) and mourn (v. 4). But to respond with meekness when others tell us of our bankruptcy is far more difficult. Meekness therefore requires such a true view about ourselves as will express itself even in our attitude toward others.

And the meek—not the strong, aggressive, harsh, tyrannical—will inherit the earth. The verb “inherit” (GK G3099) often relates to entrance into the Promised Land (e.g., Dt 4:1; 16:20). But the specific OT allusion here is Ps 37:9, 11, 29—a psalm recognized as messianic in Jesus’ day. Entrance into the Promised Land ultimately became a pointer toward entrance into the new heaven and the new earth (“earth” is the same word as “land”; cf. Isa 66:22; Rev 21:1), the consummation of the messianic kingdom.

 

6 “Hunger and thirst” vividly expresses desire (cf. Pss 42:2; 63:1). It is best to take “righteousness” (GK G1466) here as simultaneously personal righteousness and justice in the broadest sense. These people desire not only that they may wholly do God’s will from the heart, but also that justice may be done everywhere. All unrighteousness grieves them and makes them homesick for the new heaven and earth—the home of righteousness (2Pe 3:13). What they taste now whets their appetites for more. Ultimately they will be satisfied without qualification only when the kingdom is consummated.

 

7 This beatitude is akin to Ps 18:25. Mercy embraces both forgiveness for the guilty and compassion for the suffering and needy. No particular object of the demanded mercy is specified, because mercy is to be a function of Jesus’ disciples, not of a particular situation. This theme is common in Matthew (e.g., 6:12-15; 9:13). The reward is not mercy shown by others but by God. This does not mean that our mercy is the causal ground of God’s mercy but its occasional ground (see comment on 6:14-15).

 

8 “Pure [GK G2754] in heart” has two interrelated meanings. It means inner moral purity as opposed to merely external piety (cf. Dt 10:16; 1Sa 15:22; Ps 24:3-4; Mt 23:25-28); it also means singlemindedness, a heart free from deceit.

It is impossible to have one characteristic without the other. The one who is singleminded in commitment to the kingdom and its righteousness (6:33) will also be inwardly pure. Inward sham, deceit, and moral filth cannot coexist with sincere devotion to Christ. Either way, this beatitude excoriates hypocrisy (see comment on 6:1-18). The pure in heart will “see God”—now with the eyes of faith and finally in the dazzling brilliance of the beatific vision (cf. Heb 12:14; 1Jn 3:1-3; Rev 21:22-27).

 

9 Jesus’ concern in this beatitude is not with the peaceful but with the “peacemakers.” “Peace” (GK G1645) is of constant concern in both OT and NT (e.g., Isa 52:7; Eph 2:11-22; Heb 12:14). The making of peace itself has messianic overtones (cf. “Prince of Peace” in Isa 9:6-7). Jesus does not limit the peacemaking to only one kind, and neither will his disciples. In the light of the Gospel, Jesus himself is the supreme peacemaker, making peace between God and us (Eph 2:15-17; Col 1:20) and among human beings. Our peacemaking will include the promulgation of that Gospel. It must also extend to seeking all kinds of reconciliation. Those who undertake this work are acknowledged as God’s “sons” (GK G5626). In the OT, Israel has the title “sons” (Dt 14:1; Hos 1:10). Now it belongs to the heirs of the kingdom who are especially equipped for peacemaking and so reflect something of the character of their heavenly Father.

 

10 It is no accident that Jesus should pass from peacemaking to persecution, for the world enjoys its cherished hates and prejudices so much that the peacemaker is not always welcome. Opposition is a normal mark of being a disciple of Jesus (cf. Jn 15:18-25; 2Ti 3:12; 1Pe 4:13-14). The reward of these persecuted people is the same as the reward of the poor in spirit: the kingdom of heaven (see comment on 5:3).

 

11-12 These two verses, switching from third person to second, apply the force of the last beatitude to Jesus’ disciples. Verse 11 extends the persecution of v. 10 to include insult, persecution, and slander. The reason for the persecution in this verse is “because of me.” It so identifies the disciples of Jesus with the practice of Jesus’ righteousness that there is no place for professed allegiance to Jesus that is not full of righteousness. Moreover, this is an implicit Christological claim, for the prophets to whom the disciples are likened were persecuted for their faithfulness to God and the disciples for their faithfulness to Jesus. Not Jesus but the disciples are likened to the prophets; Jesus places himself on a par with God.

The appropriate response of the disciples is rejoicing. They are to rejoice under persecution because their heavenly reward will be great at the consummation of the kingdom. Opposition is sure, for the disciples are aligning themselves with the OT prophets who were persecuted before them (e.g., 2Chron 24:21; Ne 9:26; Jer 20:2). The “reward” (GK G3635) that Jesus promises is not earned or merited, but is entirely in keeping with the nature of the kingdom. Life lived under kingdom norms is inherently linked with the bliss of life in the consummated kingdom.

 

b. The witness of the kingdom (5:13-16)

 

13 In this verse and v. 14, “You” is emphatic—“You, my followers and none others, are the salt of the earth.” Salt was used in the ancient world to flavor foods and even in small doses as fertilizer. Above all, salt was used as a preservative. Rubbed into meat, a little salt would slow decay. Strictly speaking salt cannot lose its saltiness; sodium chloride is a stable compound. But most salt in the ancient world derived from salt marshes rather than by evaporation of salt water, and thus contained many impurities. The actual salt, being more soluble than the impurities, could be leached out, leaving a residue so dilute it was of little worth.

The question “How can it be made salty again?” is not meant to have an answer. The point is that if Jesus’ disciples are to act as a preservative in the world by conforming to kingdom norms, they can discharge this function only by retaining their own virtue.

 

14-15 Though the Jews saw themselves as the light of the world (Ro 2:19), the true light is the Suffering Servant (Isa 42:6; 49:6), fulfilled in Jesus himself (Mt 4:16; cf. Jn 8:12; 1Jn 1:7). Derivatively his disciples constitute the new light (cf. Eph 5:8-9; Php 2:15). In the OT as in the NT, light most frequently symbolizes purity as opposed to filth, truth as opposed to error, knowledge as opposed to ignorance, and divine revelation and presence as opposed to reprobation and abandonment by God.

The reference to the “city on a hill” is at one level fairly obvious. Often built of white limestone, ancient towns gleamed in the sun and could not easily be hidden. At night the inhabitants’ oil lamps would shed some glow over the surrounding area. As such cities could not be hidden, so also it is unthinkable to light a lamp and hide it under a peck-measure. A lamp is put on a lampstand to illuminate all. The “city on a hill” saying may also refer to OT prophecies about the time when Jerusalem or the mountain of the Lord’s house would be lifted up before the world and the nations would stream to it (e.g., Isa 2:2-5). Jesus’ disciples constitute the true locus of the people of God and the means of witness to the world.

 

16 Jesus drives the metaphor home. His disciples must show their “good works”—i.e., all righteousness, everything they are and do that reflects the mind and will of God. And others must see this light. It may provoke persecution (vv. 10-12), but that is no reason for hiding the light by which others may come to glorify the Father. Witness includes not just words but deeds as well.

Thus the kingdom norms (vv. 3-12) so work out in the lives of the kingdom’s heirs as to produce the kingdom witness (vv. 13-16). If salt (v. 13) exercises the negative function of delaying decay and warns disciples of the danger of compromise and conformity to the world, then light (vv. 14-16) speaks positively of illuminating a sin-darkened world and warns against a withdrawal from the world that does not lead others to glorify the Father in heaven.

 

3. The kingdom of heaven: its demands in relation to the OT (5:17-48)

 

a. Jesus and the kingdom as fulfillment of the OT (5:17-20)

 

The phrase “the Law and the Prophets” is repeated in 7:12. The two occurrences of this phrase mark the beginning and end of the body of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and show that Jesus is taking pains to relate his teaching and place in the history of redemption to the OT Scriptures.

 

17 The formula “Do not think that” is a teaching device used by Jesus to clarify certain aspects of the kingdom and of his own mission and to set aside potential misunderstandings as to the nature of the kingdom (see also 10:34). Comparison with 10:34 shows that the antithesis may not be absolute. Few would want to argue that there is no sense in which Jesus came to bring peace (cf. comment on 5:9). Why then argue that there is no sense in which Jesus abolishes the law?

Jesus’ mission was not “to abolish” (GK G2907; a term more frequently connected with the destruction of buildings [24:2; 26:61; 27:40]) “the Law or the Prophets,” i.e., the Scriptures. The disjunctive “or” makes it clear that neither is to be abolished.

The nub of the problem lies in the verb “to fulfill” (GK G4444), for which a variety of interpretations have been offered. The best one says that Jesus fulfills the Law and the Prophets in that they point to him, and he is their fulfillment. Therefore we give “fulfill” exactly the same meaning as in the formula quotations, which in the prologue (chs. 1-2) have already laid great stress on the prophetic nature of the OT and the way it points to Jesus. Even OT events have this prophetic significance (see comment on 2:15). A little later Jesus insists that “all the Prophets and the Law prophesied” (11:13).

The manner of the prophetic foreshadowing varies. The Exodus, Matthew argues (2:15), foreshadows the calling out of Egypt of God’s “son.” The writer to the Hebrews argues that many cultic regulations of the OT pointed to Jesus and are now obsolete. In the light of the antitheses (vv. 21-48), the passage before us insists that just as Jesus fulfilled OT prophecies by his person and actions, so he fulfilled OT law by his teaching. In no way does this “abolish” the OT as canon, any more than the obsolescence of the Levitical sacrificial system abolishes tabernacle ritual as canon. Instead, the OT’s real and abiding authority must be understood through the person and teaching of him to whom it points and who so richly fulfills it.

The chief objection to this view is that the use of “to fulfill” in the fulfillment quotations is in the passive voice, whereas here the voice is active. But it is doubtful whether much can be made out of this distinction. Three conclusions are inevitable. (1) If the antitheses (vv. 21-48) are understood in the light of this interpretation of vv. 17-20, then Jesus is not primarily engaged there in extending, annulling, or intensifying OT law, but in showing the direction in which it points, on the basis of his own authority (to which, again, the OT points). (2) In vv. 17-20 Jesus presents himself as the eschatological goal of the OT, and thereby its sole authoritative interpreter, the one through whom alone the OT finds its valid continuity and significance. (3) This approach eliminates the need to pit Matthew against Paul. Paul well understood that the Law and the Prophets pointed beyond themselves (e.g., Ro 3:21; Gal 3-4; cf. Ro 8:4) to Jesus, which is where, on the face of it, Matthew also intends the focus to be.

 

18 “I tell you the truth [amen; GK G297]“ signals that the statement to follow is of the utmost importance; v. 18 further explains and confirms the truth of v. 17. The “jot” (KJV) refers to “the smallest letter” (NIV) of the Hebrew alphabet. “The least stroke of a pen” may refer to the small stroke that distinguishes several pairs of Hebrew letters. In any event Jesus here upholds the authority of the OT Scriptures right down to its individual letters. His is the highest possible view of the OT.

But vv. 17-18 do not wrestle abstractly with OT authority but with the nature , extent , and duration of its validity and continuity. The nature of these has been set forth in v. 17. The reference to “jot and tittle” (KJV) establishes its extent to the entire OT Scriptures, not just the Pentateuch or moral law. That leaves the duration of the OT’s authority. The two “until” clauses answer this. The first—“until heaven and earth disappear”—simply means “until the end of the age.” The second clause—“until everything is accomplished”—is more difficult, but “everything” is best understood as referring to everything in the OT, considered under its prophetic function. In other words, the entire divine purpose prophesied in Scripture must take place; not a single element will fail of its fulfillment (cf. 11:13). The OT reveals God’s redemptive purposes and points to their fulfillment, their “accomplishment,” in Jesus and the eschatological kingdom he is now introducing and will one day consummate.

 

19 The contrast between the least and the greatest in the kingdom probably supports gradation with kingdom ranks (as in 11:11; cf. 20:20-28; Lk 12:47-48). The one who breaks “one of the least of these commandments” is not excluded from the kingdom, but is very small or very unimportant in the kingdom. Distinctions are made not only according to the measure by which one keeps “the least of these commandments” but also according to the faithfulness with which one teaches them.

But what are “these commandments”? The expression most likely refers to the commandments of the OT Scriptures. The entire Law and the Prophets are not scrapped by Jesus’ coming but fulfilled. Therefore the commandments of these Scriptures must be practiced. But the nature of the practicing has already been affected by vv. 17-18. The law pointed forward to Jesus and his teaching; so it is properly obeyed by conforming to his word. As it points to him, so he, in fulfilling it, establishes the true direction to which it points and the way it is to be obeyed. Thus ranking in the kingdom turns on the degree of conformity to Jesus’ teaching as that teaching fulfills OT revelation.

 

20 And that teaching, far from being more lenient, is nothing less than perfection (see comment on 5:48). The Pharisees and teachers of the law were among the most punctilious in the land. Jesus criticizes them because they domesticated the law and lost the radical demand for absolute holiness demanded by the Scriptures. What Jesus demands is the “righteousness” (GK G1466) to which the law truly points, exemplified in the antitheses that follow (vv. 21-48). The verb “surpasses” suggests that the new righteousness outstrips the old both qualitatively and quantitatively.

 

b. Application: the antitheses (5:21-48)

 

Verses 21-48 are often called the six antitheses because all six sections begin with some variation of “you have heard it said . . . but I say.” By this phrase, Jesus is not criticizing the OT but the understanding of the OT many of his hearers adopted (cf. esp. vv. 22, 43, where part of what was “heard” certainly does not come from the OT).

The contrast between what the people had heard and what Jesus taught is not based on distinctions like outer legalism versus inner commitment or false interpretation versus true. Rather, in every case Jesus contrasts the people’s misunderstanding of the law with the true direction in which the law points, according to his own authority as the law’s “fulfiller” (in the sense established in v. 17). Thus if certain antitheses revoke at least the letter of the law, they do so not because they are thereby affirming the law’s true spirit, but because Jesus insists that his teaching on these matters is the direction in which the law actually points.

 

21-22 Jesus’ contemporaries had heard that the law given their ancestors forbade murder and that the murderer must be brought to “judgment.” But Jesus insists—the “I” is emphatic in each of the six antitheses—that the law really points to his own teaching: the root of murder is anger, and anger is murderous in principle. One has not conformed to the better righteousness of the kingdom simply by refraining from homicide. The angry person will be subject to God’s “judgment” (GK G3213; for no human court tries cases of inner anger). To stoop to insult exposes one not merely to (God’s) council but to the “fire of hell” (on this expression, see comment on Mk 9:43-48).

“Brother” (GK G81) cannot in this case be limited to male siblings but to one’s fellow believers. The Christian habit of calling one another “brother” and “sister” goes back to Jesus’ instruction as part and parcel of his training them to address God as Father (6:9). Among Christians anger must be eliminated.

 

23-24 Jesus gives two illustrations exposing the seriousness of anger, the first in a setting of temple worship (vv. 23-24) and the second in a judicial setting (vv. 25-26). The first concerns a “brother”; the second an “adversary.” Remarkably neither illustration deals with “your” anger but with “your” offense that has prompted the brother’s or the adversary’s rancor. We are more likely to remember when we ourselves have something against others than when we have done something to offend others. If we are truly concerned about our anger and hate, we should be no less concerned when we engender them in others.

The “altar” is the one in the inner court. There amid solemn worship, recollection of a brother with something against one should in Christ’s disciples prompt immediate efforts to be reconciled. Only then is formal worship acceptable.

 

25-26 Jesus again urges haste to settle matters with an offended adversary while still “with him on the way” to court. In the ancient world debtors were jailed till the debts were paid. Jesus insists on immediate action: malicious anger is so evil—and God’s judgment so certain (v. 22)—that we must do all in our power to end it (cf. Eph 4:26-27).

 

27-28 The OT command not to commit adultery (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18) is often treated in Jewish sources not so much as a function of purity as of theft: it was to steal another’s wife. Jesus insisted that the seventh commandment points in another direction—toward purity that refuses even to lust after any woman. Insofar as a man looks at the woman with a view to enticing her to lust, he is committing adultery with her; i.e., he makes her an adulteress.

 

29-30 The radical treatment of parts of the body that cause one to sin has led some (notoriously the church father Origen) to castrate themselves. But that is not radical enough, since lust is not thereby removed. The “eye” is the member of the body most commonly blamed for leading us astray, especially in sexual sins (cf. Nu 15:39; Pr 21:4; et al.); the “right eye” refers to one’s better eye. But why the “right hand” in a context dealing with lust? More likely it is a euphemism for the male sexual organ.

Cutting off or gouging out the offending part is a way of saying that Jesus’ disciples must deal radically with sin. Imagination is a God-given gift; but if it is fed dirt by the eye, it will be dirty. All sin, not least sexual sin, begins with the imagination. Therefore what feeds the imagination is of maximum importance in the pursuit of kingdom righteousness (compare Php 4:8). The alternative is sin and hell, sin’s reward.

 

31-32 This two-verse unit carries further the argument of the preceding section. The OT not only points toward insisting that lust is the moral equivalent of adultery (vv. 27-30) but that divorce is as well. This arises out of the fact that the divorced woman will in most circumstances remarry (esp. in first-century Palestine, where this would probably be her only means of support). That new marriage, whether from the perspective of the divorcee or the one marrying her, is adulterous.

The OT passage to which Jesus refers is Dt. 24:1-4, whose thrust is that if a man divorces his wife because of “something indecent” (not further defined) in her, he must give her a certificate of divorce; and if she then becomes another man’s wife and is divorced again, the first man cannot remarry her. This double restriction in the OT—the certificate and the prohibition of remarriage—discouraged hasty divorces. Here Jesus does not go into the force of “something indecent.” Instead he insists that the law was pointing to the sanctity of marriage.

The natural way to take the “except” clause is that divorce is wrong because it generates adultery except in the case of fornication. In that case, where sexual sin has already been committed, nothing is laid down, though it appears that divorce is then implicitly permitted, even if not mandated (cf. further discussion at 19:3-12).

 

33-36 Jesus now cites an antithesis on a new theme. What the people have heard is not given as direct OT quotation but as a summary statement accurately condensing the burden of Ex 20:7; Lev 19:12; Nu 30:2; and Dt 5:11; 6:3; 22:21-33. The Mosaic law forbade irreverent oaths, light use of the Lord’s name, and broken vows. Once the Lord’s name was invoked, the vow to which it was attached became a debt that had to be paid to the Lord (see comments on 23:16-22).

If oaths designed to encourage truthfulness become occasions for clever lies and casuistical deceit, Jesus will abolish oaths (v. 34). For the direction in which the OT points is the fundamental importance of thorough and consistent truthfulness. If one does not swear at all, one does not swear falsely. Jesus insists that whatever anyone swears by is related to God in some way, and therefore every oath is implicitly in God’s name—heaven, earth, Jerusalem, even the hairs of the head are all under God’s sway and ownership (v. 36; see also 23:18-22).

 

37 The Greek might better be translated “But let your word be, ‘Yes, Yes; No, No.’” The doubling is probably part of Jesus’ rhetoric. This saying is not, however, a ban on any and all oaths. God himself “swears” in Scripture (e.g., Ge 9:9-11; Lk 1:68, 73; Heb 6:17), the earliest Christians took oaths (cf. Ro 1:9; 2Co 1:23; et al.), and Jesus himself testified under oath (Mt 26:63-64). It must be frankly admitted that here Jesus formally contravenes OT law: what it permits or commands (Dt. 6:13), he forbids. But if his interpretation of the direction in which the law points is authoritative, then his teaching fulfills it.

 

38-39a The OT prescription of the lex talionis (Ex 21:24; Lev 24:19-20; Dt 19:21) was not given to foster vengeance; the law explicitly forbade that (Lev 19:18). Rather, it was given, as the OT context shows, to provide the nation’s judicial system with a ready formula of punishment, not least because it would decisively terminate vendettas. The trouble is that a law designed to limit retaliation and punish fairly could be appealed to as justification for vindictiveness.

Jesus’ disciple is not to “resist [GK G468] an evil person.” In the context of lex talionis , the most natural way of understanding the resistance is “do not resist in a court of law.” This interpretation is required in the next example (v. 40). As in vv. 33-37, therefore, Jesus’ teaching formally contradicts the OT law. But in the context of vv. 17-20, what Jesus is saying is reasonably clear: the OT, including the lex talionis , points forward to Jesus and his teaching. But like the OT laws permitting divorce, enacted because of the hardness of human hearts (19:3-12), the lex talionis was instituted to curb evil because of the hardness of the heart.

As this legal principle is overtaken by that toward which it pointed, so also is this hardness of heart. The OT prophets foretold a time when there would be a change of heart among God’s people, living under a new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Eze 36:26). Not only would the sins of the people be forgiven (Jer 31:34; Eze 36:25), but obedience to God would spring from the heart (Jer 31:33; Eze 36:27) as the new age dawned. Thus Jesus’ instruction on these matters is grounded in eschatology. In Jesus and the kingdom, the eschatological age that the Law and Prophets had prophesied (11:13) has arrived; the prophecies that curbed evil while pointing forward to the eschaton are now superseded by the new age and the new hearts it brings.

 

39b-42 Four illustrations clarify Jesus’ point and drive it home. In the first, a man strikes another on the cheek—not only a painful blow, but a gross insult (cf. 2Co 11:20). If a right-handed person strikes someone’s right cheek, presumably it is a slap by the back of the hand, probably considered more insulting than a slap by the open palm. Instead of seeking recompense at law under the lex talionis , Jesus’ disciples will gladly endure the insult again.

Although under Mosaic law the outer cloak was an inalienable possession (Ex 22:26; Dt 24:13), Jesus’ disciples, if sued for their tunics (an inner garment like our suit but worn next to the skin), far from seeking satisfaction, will gladly part with what they may legally keep.

The third example refers to the Roman practice of commandeering civilians to carry the luggage of military personnel a prescribed distance, one Roman “mile.” Impressment, like a lawsuit, evoked outrage; but the attitude of Jesus’ disciples under such circumstances must not be spiteful or vengeful but helpful—willing to go a second mile.

The final illustration requires not only interest-free loans (Ex 22:25; Lev 25:37; Dt 23:19) but a generous spirit (cf. Dt 15:7-11; Pss 37:26; 112:5). These last two illustrations confirm our interpretation of vv. 38-39, that the entire pericope deals with the heart’s attitude, the better righteousness. For there is actually no legal recourse to the oppression in the third illustration, and in the fourth no harm that might lead to retaliation has been done.

While these four vignettes have powerful shock value, they were not meant to be new legal prescriptions. Verse 42 does not commit Jesus’ disciples to giving endless amounts of money to everyone who seeks a “soft touch.” Verse 40 is clearly hyperbolic: no first-century Jew would go home wearing only a loincloth. Nor does this pericope deal with the validity of a state police force. Yet the illustrations must not be diluted by endless equivocations; the only limit to the believer’s response in these situations is what love and the Scriptures impose.

 

43 The command “Love your neighbor” is found in Lev 19:18; no OT Scripture adds “and hate your enemies,” though this seems to be the result of popular reasoning. Such reasoning seems to have said that if God commands love for “neighbor,” then hatred for “enemies” is implicitly conceded and perhaps even authorized.

 

44-47 Jesus allowed no casuistry. The real direction indicated by the law is love, rich and costly, and extended even to enemies. Many take the verb and the noun “love” (GK G26 & G27) as always signifying self-giving regardless of emotion, but such an interpretation is unwarranted. The content of Christian love is not based on a presupposed definition but on Jesus’ teaching and example. To love one’s enemies, though it must result in activities such as doing them good (Lk 6:32-33) and praying for them (Mt 5:44), cannot justly be restricted to activities devoid of any concern, sentiment, or emotion. There is no reason to think the verb here in Matthew does not include emotion as well as action.

The specific “enemy” referred to here is one’s persecutors. Jesus himself repeatedly warns his disciples of impending persecution (e.g., vv. 10-12; 10:16-23; 24:9-13). If Matthew’s first readers were being persecuted for their faith, that was doubtless one application they made.

Jesus’ disciples have as their example God himself, who loves so indiscriminately that he sends sun and rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous. Yet we must not thereby conclude that God’s love toward people is in all respects without distinction, and that therefore all will be saved (see 25:31-46). Theologians call this love of God his “common grace” (i.e., the gracious favor God bestows “commonly,” without distinction, on everyone).

God’s example provides the incentive for Jesus’ disciples to be “sons of [their] Father” (v. 45). Ultimately this clause points to the necessity of pursuing a certain kind of sonship patterned after the Father’s own character. Jesus’ disciples must live and love in a way superior to the patterns around them. Jesus goes on to point out that even the despised tax collectors (see comment on Mk 2:14) love those who love them; Christian love must go beyond what naturally takes place.

 

48 It is best to understand v. 48 as the conclusion to all the antitheses. The OT background to this verse is Lev 19:2, with “holy” displaced by “perfect” (GK G5455). Here for the first time perfection is predicated of God.

In the light of the preceding verses (vv. 17-47), Jesus is saying that the true direction in which the law has always pointed is not toward mere judicial restraints, concessions arising out of the hardness of human hearts, still less casuistical perversions, nor even the “law of love.” No, it pointed rather to all the perfection of God, exemplified by the authoritative interpretation of the law bound up in the preceding antitheses. This perfection Jesus’ disciples must emulate if they are truly followers of him who fulfills the Law and the Prophets (v. 17).

 

 

Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

 

Revelation 1

 

I. Introduction (1:1-8)

 

A. Prologue (1:1-3)

 

The Prologue contains a description of the nature of the book, a reference to the author, and a statement that the book was meant for congregational reading.

 

1 The book is called the “revelation of Jesus Christ.” “Revelation” (apokalypsis; GK G637) means to expose in full view what was formerly hidden, veiled, or secret. In the NT this word occurs exclusively in the religious sense of a divine disclosure. It may refer either some to present or future aspect of God’s will (Lk 2:32; Ro 16:25; Eph 3:5) or to persons (Ro 8:19) or especially to the future unveiling of Jesus Christ at his return in glory (2Th 1:7; 1Pe 1:7, 13). In the only occurrence of this word in John’s writings, the meaning is not primarily the appearing or revealing of Christ—though certainly the book does this—but rather the disclosure of “what must soon take place.”

The content of the book comes from its author, Jesus Christ. Yet even Christ is not the final author but a mediator, for he receives the revelation from God the Father (“which God gave him to show”). John is the human instrument for communicating what he has seen by the agency of Christ’s messenger or angel (cf. 22:6, 8, 16). Through John the revelation is to be made known to the servants of God who comprise the churches (cf. 22:16). Thus there are five links in the chain of authorship: God, Christ, his angel, his servant John, and the servants in the churches.

“What must soon take place” implies that the revelation concerns events that are future (cf. Da 2:28-29, 45; Mk 13:7; Rev 4:1; 22:6). But in what sense can we understand that the events will arise “soon” (GK G5443)? From the preterist point of view (see the introduction), all will take place in John’s day. But we do not need to follow this interpretation of the book. In eschatology and apocalyptic literature, the future is always viewed as imminent without the necessity of intervening time (cf. Lk 18:8). “Soon” does not, in other words, preclude delays or intervening events, as Revelation itself suggests. In ch. 6 we hear the cry of the martyred saints: “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you . . . avenge our blood?” They are told to “wait a little longer” (vv. 10-11). Therefore, “soonness” means imminency in eschatological terms. The church in every age has always lived with the expectancy of the consummation of all things in its day. Imminency describes an event possible any day, impossible no day.

Two more focal points of the book are introduced by the words “by sending his angel to his servant John.” (1) They introduce us to the significance of angels in the worship of God, in the revelation of God’s Word, and in the execution of his judgments in the earth. John refers to angels sixty-seven times. (2) The word “servant” (GK G1528) is important. All of God’s people are known in Revelation as his servants, described as such at least eleven times (e.g., 2:20; 7:3; 22:3). John is one servant selected to receive this revelation and communicate it to other servants of God. “Servant,” used throughout the NT to describe those who are designated as the special representatives of the Lord Christ himself, becomes a beautiful title of honor for God’s people.

 

2 Two elements in the book are of chief importance: “The word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ.” In referring to his visions as the “word of God,” John emphasizes his continuity with the prophets in the OT as well as the apostles in the NT (see 1:9; 3:8, 10; 6:9; 12:11; 17:17; 19:9; 20:4). In 19:13 Jesus is himself identified with the name “the Word of God.” Here, in ch. 1, the reference is not directly to Christ but to the promises and acts of God revealed in this book that are realized through Jesus, the Word of God incarnate (cf. Jn 1:1-2; 1Jn 1:1). The church needs to be reminded that this book is the very Word of God to us. While John’s literary activity is evident throughout, he claims that what he presents he actually “saw” in divinely disclosed visions. And in the book God himself bears witness to the readers that these things are not the product of John’s own mind (1:1-2; 21:5; 22:6; cf. 2Pe 1:21).

“Testimony” (GK G3456) can mean “witness,” “validation,” or “verification” (cf. 1:9; 6:9; 12:11, 17; 19:10; 20:4; 22:16-20). While “the testimony of Jesus” can mean John’s own testimony about Jesus, here it means the testimony that Jesus himself gives. John testifies both to the Word of God received in the visions and to the validation of his message from Jesus himself.

 

3 “The one who reads” reflects the early form of worship where a reader read the Scriptures aloud on the Lord’s Day. “Those who hear” are the people of the congregation who listen to the reading. “This prophecy” is John’s way of describing his writing and refers to the entire book of Revelation (10:11; 19:10; 22:7, 9-10, 18). Prophecy involves not only future events but also the ethical and spiritual exhortations and warnings contained in the writing. Thus John immediately sets off his writing from the late Jewish apocalyptic literature (which did not issue from the prophets) and puts himself on a par with the OT prophets.

The twofold benediction “blessed” (GK G3421), pronounced on the reader and the congregation, emphasizes the importance of the message in that they will be hearing not only the word of John the prophet but the inspired word of Christ (see other beatitudes in 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7, 14). John wrote in anticipation of the full and immediate recognition of his message as worthy to be read in the churches as the Word of God coming from Christ. In the ancient Jewish synagogue tradition in which John was raised, no such blessing was promised on anyone who recited a mere human teaching, even if from a rabbi, while one who read a biblical text was worthy to receive a divine blessing.

All must listen carefully and “take to heart what is written” because “the time [GK G2789] is near,” the season for the fulfillment of the return of Christ (v. 7; cf. Lk 11:28, 21:8) and for all that is written in this book (cf. 22:10). The season for Christ’s return is always imminent—now as it has been from the days of his ascension (Jn 21:22; Ac 1:11).

A comparison of the Prologue (1:1-3) with the Epilogue (22:7-21) shows that John has followed throughout Revelation a deliberate literary pattern. This should alert us to the possibility that the entire book was designed to be heard and interpreted as a single unit, and every part should fit into the message of the book as a whole. This should not in any way detract from the fact that John claims to have seen real visions (“saw,” v. 2), which we may assume were arranged by John in their particular literary form for purposes of communication.

 

B. Greetings and Doxology (1:4-8)

 

John now addresses the recipients of his book: “To the seven churches in the province of Asia” (cf. v. 11; 2:1-3:22). Almost immediately he introduces an expanded form of the Christian trinitarian greeting that merges into a doxology to Christ (vv.5b-6) and is followed by a staccato exclamation calling attention to the return of Christ to the world (v. 7). The Father concludes the greeting with assurances of his divine sovereignty.

 

4 The epistolary form of address immediately distinguishes this book from all other Jewish apocalyptic works. John writes to actual, historical churches, addressing them in the same way the NT letters are addressed. These churches actually existed in the Roman province of Asia (the western part of present-day Turkey). But why did John address these churches and only these seven churches? There were other churches in Asia at the close of the first century. The NT itself refers to congregations at Troas (Ac 20:5-12), Colosse (Col 1:2), and Hierapolis (Col 4:13).

At present it is difficult to say why the Lord selected just these seven churches. Some have suggested that these churches were prophetic of the church ages throughout history. Yet there is no reason from the text itself to hold this view. The churches are simply representative churches found in every age. Seven churches were chosen and were placed in this order because seven was simply the number of completeness, and here it rounds out the literary pattern of the other sevens in the book. These seven churches contained typical or representative qualities of both obedience and disobedience that are a constant reminder throughout every age to all churches (cf. 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; esp. 2:23). As for the order of their mention (1:11), it is the natural ancient travel circuit beginning at Ephesus and arriving finally at Laodicea (consult a map of the area).

“Grace and peace” are the usual greetings in NT letters: “grace” (GK G5921) represents a traditional Greek greeting, and “peace” (GK G1645; cf. G8934) represents a traditional Hebrew greeting. The source of blessing is described by employing an elaborate triadic formula for the Trinity:

“From him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” i.e., the Father;

“From the seven spirits before his throne,” i.e., the Holy Spirit;

“From Jesus Christ,” i.e., the Son (v. 5).

Similarly there follows a threefold reference to the identity and function of Christ: “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth”; and three indications of his saving work: “who loves us and has freed us from our sins . . . and has made us to be a kingdom and priests.”

The descriptive name of the Father occurs nowhere else except in Revelation (4:8; cf. 11:17; 16:5). It is generally understood as a paraphrase for the divine name represented throughout the OT by the Hebrew tetragrammaton YHWH (see comment on Ex 3:14; cf. also Isa 41:4, where the Lord is described as the one “who is to come”). The complete combination of these three tenses occurs in a Palestinian Targum on Dt 32:39. The force of the name has been widely discussed. In 1:8 and 4:8 it is parallel with the divine name “Lord God, the Almighty.” The tenses indicate that the same God is eternally present with his covenant people to sustain and encourage them through all the experiences of their lives.

“And from the seven spirits before his throne” seems clearly to focus on the Holy Spirit. But why “seven spirits”? Some understand John to mean the “sevenfold spirit” in his fullness (see NIV note). Borrowing from the imagery of Zec 4, where the ancient prophet sees a lampstand with seven bowls supplied with oil from two nearby olive trees, John seems to connect the church (“lampstands” [v. 20]) to the ministry of the Holy Spirit (3:1; 4:5; 5:6). The “seven spirits” represent the activity of the risen Christ through the Holy Spirit in and to the seven churches. This figure brings great encouragement to the churches, for it is “‘not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’says the LORD Almighty” (Zec 4:6), that the churches serve God. Yet the figure is also a sobering one because the history of each church (chs. 2-3) is an unfolding of that church’s response to the Holy Spirit—“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches” (2:7, 11, et al.).

 

5 Finally, greetings come from the Son—“from Jesus Christ.” John immediately adds three descriptive epithets about Christ and a burst of doxology to him. (1) He is the “faithful witness.” His credibility is proved by his earthly life of obedience in the past; it is proved in the present by his witness to the true condition of the churches; and it will be proved in the future by the consummation of all things in him. In the past he was loyal to the point of death (cf. Jn 7:7; 18:37; Php 2:8; 1Ti 6:13), as was his servant Antipas (2:13). That Christ was a reliable witness to God’s kingdom and salvation—even to the point of suffering death at the hands of the religious-political establishment of his day—is an encouragement to his servants who also are expected to be loyal to him, even to their death (2:10).

(2) The fact that he is “the firstborn from the dead” brings further encouragement. As Christ gave his life in faithfulness to the Father’s calling, so the Father has raised Christ from the dead, pledging him as the first of a great company who will follow (cf. 7:13-14). John nowhere else refers to Christ as the “firstborn” (GK G4758), though Paul uses it in Ro 8:29; Col 1:15, 18 (cf. also Heb 1:6). In Col 1:18, this same expression is associated with words of supreme authority or origin such as “head,” “beginning,” and “supremacy.” In Col 1:15 Paul refers to Christ as the “firstborn over all creation,” meaning that he is the source, ruler, or origin of all creation (see comment on that verse). So for Christ to be the “firstborn” of the dead signifies not merely that he was first in time to be raised from the dead but also that he was first in importance, having supreme authority over the dead (cf. 1:18).

(3) “The ruler of the kings of the earth” virtually connects John’s thought with Ps 89. Christ’s rulership of the world is a key theme of John (11:15; 17:15; 19:16). Who are the “kings of the earth”? John could mean emperors such as Nero and Domitian, territorial rulers such as Pilate and Herod, and their successors. In that case John was affirming that even though Jesus is not physically present and the earthly monarchs appear to rule, in reality it is he, not they, who rules over all (6:15; 17:2). Another approach holds that Jesus rules over the defeated foes of believers, e.g., Satan, the dragon, sin, and death (1:18). A third possibility sees believers as “the kings of the earth” (2:26-27; 3:21; cf. 11:6); in the immediate context John refers to Christ’s redeeming activity, and in v. 6 he refers to believers as a “kingdom.” All three ideas are true; so it is difficult to decide which was uppermost in John’s mind. We should be careful, however, not to read into the term “king” our own power concepts but to allow the biblical images to predominate.

The mention of the person and offices of Christ leads John to a burst of praise to his Savior: “To him who loves us . . . be glory and power.” In the present, Christ is loving us. Through all the immediate distresses, persecutions, and even banishment, John is convinced that believers are experiencing Christ’s continual care. Moreover, in the past Christ’s love was unmistakably revealed in his atoning death, by which he purchased our release from the captivity of sin. Christ’s kingly power is chiefly revealed in his ability to transform individual lives through his “blood” (i.e., his death; cf. 5:9; 7:14). Through his death on the cross, he defeated the devil; those who follow Christ in the battle against the devil share his victory (12:11).

 

6 This transformation simultaneously involves the induction of blood-freed sinners into Christ’s “kingdom” and priesthood. Of Israel it was said that they would be a “kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Ex 19:6; cf. Isa 61:6). As Israel of old was redeemed through the Red Sea and was called to be a kingdom under God and a nation of priests to serve him, so John sees the Christian community as the continuation of the OT people of God, redeemed by Christ’s blood and made heirs of his future kingly rule on the earth (5:10; 20:6). Furthermore, all believers are called to be priests in the sense of offering spiritual sacrifices and praise to God (Heb 13:15; 1Pe 2:5). While John sees the church as a kingdom, this does not mean that it is identical with the kingdom of God. Nor do the new people of God replace the ancient Jewish people in the purpose of God (cf. Ro 11:28-29).

 

7 What Christ will do in the future is summed up in the dramatic cry: “Look, he is coming”—a clear reference to his return (22:7, 12, 20). The preceding affirmation of Christ’s rulership over the earth’s kings and the Christians’ share in the messianic kingdom leads to tension between the believers’ actual present condition of oppression and suffering and what seems to be implied in their royal and priestly status. So the divine promise of Christ’s return is given by the Father, and the response of the prophet and congregation follows in the words “So shall it be! Amen.” Or we might think of Christ as saying, “So shall it be!” and the prophet and the congregation responding, “Amen” (cf. 22:20). The promise combines Da 7:13 with Zec 12:10. Daniel 7 provides a key focus for John throughout the whole book (there are no fewer than thirty-one allusions to it).

Christ’s coming will be supernatural (“with the clouds”) and in some manner open and known to all (“every eye”), even to those who put him to death. “Those who pierced him” might be those historically responsible for his death (e.g., Pilate, Annas, and Caiaphas) and the Jewish leaders of the Sanhedrin who pronounced him guilty. Yet, when he comes, there will be mourning among “all the peoples of the earth.” From the NT point of view, Pilate, Annas, Caiaphas, and the others were acting as representatives for all humankind in crucifying Jesus. Thus the mourning mentioned here is probably that which results from the judgment Christ brings upon “all the peoples of the earth.”

 

8 Such a stupendous promise requires more than the prophet’s own signature or even Christ’s “Amen.” God himself speaks and, with his own signature, vouches for the truthfulness of the coming of Christ. Of the many names of God that reveal his character and memorialize his deeds, there are four strong ones in this verse. (1) “Alpha and Omega” are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. Their mention here is similar to the “First” and “Last” in v. 17 and is further heightened by the “Beginning” and the “End” in 21:6 and 22:13. Only this book refers to God as the “Alpha and the Omega.” (2) He is the absolute source of all creation and history, and nothing lies outside him. Thus he is the “Lord God” of all. (3) He is the one “who is, and who was, and who is to come” (see comment on v. 4). (4) He is continually present to his people as the “Almighty” (lit., “the one who has his hand on everything”; GK G4120; cf. 4:8; 11:17; 15:3; 16:7, 14; 19:6, 15; 21:22; 2Co 6:18).

 

II. Vision of the Son of Man Among the Seven Churches of Asia (1:9-3:22)

 

A. The Son of Man Among the Lampstands (1:9-20)

 

1. Introduction and voice (1:9-11)

 

9 This verse begins a third introduction in which the author again identifies himself as John and adds significant information about where and when the visions took place together with their divinely appointed destination. John stresses his intimate identification with the Asian Christians and the reason for his presence on Patmos.

Patmos lies about thirty-seven miles west-southwest of Miletus, in the Icarian Sea. Consisting mainly of volcanic hills and rocky ground, it is about ten miles long and six miles wide at the north end; it was used for Roman penal purposes. It was “because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus” that John was on Patmos (cf. 1:2; 6:9; 20:4). He was not there to preach that Word but because of religious-political opposition to his Christian faith.

John sees his plight as part of God’s design and says he is a partner with the Asian Christians in three things. (1) Both share with Christ and one another the “suffering” (GK G2568) or agony that comes because of faithfulness to Christ as the only true Lord and God (Jn 16:33; Ac 14:22; Col 1:24; 2Ti 3:12). (2) They also share with Christ in his “kingdom” (i.e., his power and rule; GK G993). In one sense they already reign (1:6), though through suffering. Yet, in another sense, they will reign with Christ in the eschatological manifestation of his kingdom (20:4, 6; 22:5). (3) The present hidden rule of Christ and his followers is manifested through their “patient endurance” (GK G5705). As they look beyond their immediate distresses and put full confidence in Christ, they share now in his royal dignity and power. Whether those distresses were imprisonment, ostracism, slander, economic discrimination, hostility, disruption of the churches by false prophets, and the constant threat of death from mob violence or judicial action, believers are to realize their present kingship with Christ in their faithful endurance. Such endurance produces conflict with the powers of the world, and it calls for long-suffering as the mark of Christ’s kingship in their lives (2:2, 19; 3:10; 13:10; 14:12; cf. Lk 8:15; 21:19; Ro 2:7; Col 1:11; et al.). Christ uses suffering to test and purify the loyalty of his servants. His strength is revealed through their weakness (2Co 12:9).

 

10 “I was in the Spirit” describes John’s experience on Patmos. The words imply being transported into the world of prophetic visions by the Spirit of God (4:2; 17:3; 21:10; cf. Eze 3:12, 14; 37:1; Ac 22:17). At least the first vision—if not this whole book—was revealed on “the Lord’s [GK G3258] Day.” Since this is the only place in the NT where this expression is used, its identification is difficult. Some feel that John was transported into the great future day of the Lord, but John nowhere uses the common expression “the day of the Lord.” Most commentators, both ancient and modern, have taken the expression to mean Sunday, the first day of the week. This usage occurs early in the apostolic fathers. Tendencies toward recognizing Sunday as a day designated by Christ to celebrate his redemption occur even earlier in the NT (Ac 20:7; 1Co 16:2). Such a reference would bind the exiled apostle to the worshiping churches in Asia through his longing to be with them on Sunday. More specifically, John may have had an Easter Sunday in mind.

 

11 The “voice” (GK G5889) John heard could be Christ’s or, more likely, that of the angel who appears frequently to John (4:1; 5:2). What John sees (both visions and words), he is to write down in a papyrus scroll and send to the seven Asian churches (v. 4). This writing would include the substance of the whole book, not just the first vision.

 

2. The sight of the vision (1:12-20)

 

Certain important literary features of John’s first vision are noted. (1) Beginning with v. 12, the vision extends as a unit through ch. 3. The quotation that begins in v. 17 is not closed till the end of ch. 3.

(2) This introductory section (1:12-20) can be divided into two sections—the sevenfold features in the description of the glorified Christ (vv. 12-16) and the address to John (vv. 17-20).

(3) In this symbolic picture the glorified Lord is seen in his inner reality that transcends his outward appearance. The sword coming out of his mouth (v. 16) alerts us to this. In words drawn almost entirely from imagery used in Daniel, Ezekiel, and Isaiah of God’s majesty and power, John uses hyperbole to describe the indescribable reality of the glorified Christ. These same poetic phrases reappear in the letters to the churches in chs. 2-3 as well as throughout the rest of the book (see 14:2; 19:6, 12, 15).

(4) The words of Christ substantiate his absolute authority to address the churches, and the vision (vv. 12-16) leads to John’s transformed understanding of Jesus as the Lord of all through his death and resurrection (vv. 17-18).

 

12 For the OT tabernacle, Moses constructed a seven-branched lampstand (Ex 25:31ff.). Subsequently this lampstand symbolized Israel. Another golden seven-branched lampstand appears in a vision of Zechariah; it was fed by seven pipes and was explained to him as the “eyes of the LORD, which range through the earth” (Zec 4:10). Thus the lampstand relates directly to the Lord himself. Since other allusions to Zechariah’s vision of the lampstand appear in the Revelation—e.g., “seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God” (Rev 5:6) and the “two witnesses” that are “the two olive trees” (11:3-4), it is logical to assume here a connection with that vision as well.

But there are problems in any strict identification. In v. 20 Christ tells John that the “seven lampstands are the seven churches,” and in 2:5 that it is possible to lose one’s place as a lampstand through a failure to repent. Thus, the imagery represents the individual churches scattered among the nations—churches that bear the light of the divine revelation of the gospel of Christ to the world (Mt 5:14). If Zechariah’s imagery was in John’s mind, it might mean that the churches, which correspond to the people of God today, are light bearers only because of their intimate connection with Christ, the source of the light, through the power of the Holy Spirit (1:4b; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6).

 

13 Evidently the words “someone ‘like a son of man’” are to be understood in connection with Da 7:13 as a reference to the heavenly Messiah who is also human. Jesus preferred the title “Son of Man” for himself throughout his earthly ministry, though he did not deny, on occasion, the appropriate use of “Son of God” as well (Jn 10:36; cf. Mk 14:61). Both titles are nearly identical terms for the Messiah. The early church, however, rarely used the title “Son of Man” for Jesus, except when there was some special connection between the suffering of believers and Christ’s suffering and glory (e.g., Ac 7:56; Rev 14:14).

“Dressed in a robe” begins the sevenfold description of the Son of Man. This vision creates an impression of the whole rather than of particular abstract concepts. John saw Christ as the divine Son of God in the fullest sense of that term. He also saw him as fulfilling the OT descriptions of the coming Messiah by using terms drawn from the OT imagery of divine wisdom, power, steadfastness, and penetrating vision. The long robe and golden sash were worn by the priests in the OT (Ex 28:4) and may here signify Christ as the great High Priest to the churches in fulfillment of the OT Aaronic priesthood, or, less specifically, it may indicate his dignity and divine authority (Eze 9:2, 11).

 

14 In an apparent allusion to Daniel, Christ’s head and hair are described as “white like wool, as white as snow” (Da 7:9; cf. 10:5). For John, the same functions of ruler and judge ascribed to the “Ancient of Days” in Daniel’s vision relate to Jesus. In Eastern countries, white hair commands respect and indicates the wisdom of years. This part of the vision may have shown John something of the deity and wisdom of Christ (cf. Col. 2:3). Christ’s eyes were like a “blazing fire,” a detail not found in Da 7 but occurring in Da 10:6. This simile is repeated in the letter to Thyatira (2:18) and in the vision of Christ’s triumphant return and defeat of his enemies (19:12). It may portray either his penetrating scrutiny or fierce judgment.

 

15 The Son of Man’s feet appeared like shining bronze (cf. 2:18), as if it were fired to white heat in a kiln (cf. a similar figure of glowing metal in Eze 1:13, 27; 8:2; Da 10:6). In both Ezekiel and Daniel the brightness of shining metal like fire is one of the symbols connected with the appearance of the glory of God. This image may represent Christ’s triumphant judgment (i.e., his trampling down) of unbelievers.

“His voice . . . like the sound of rushing [lit., many; GK G4498] waters” (cf. 14:2; 19:6) describes the glory and majesty of God in a way similar to that which Ezekiel heard (Eze 1:24; 43:2). Anyone who has heard the awe-inspiring sound of a Niagara or Victoria Falls cannot but appreciate this image of God’s power and sovereignty (Ps 93:4).

 

16 “In his right hand he held seven stars.” The right hand is the place of power and safety, and the “seven stars” Christ held in it are identified with the seven angels of the seven churches in Asia (v. 20). This is the only detail in the vision that is identified. The seven angels are those to whom the letters to the seven churches are addressed (chs. 2-3). Stars are associated in the OT and in Revelation with angels (Job 38:7; Rev 9:1) or faithful witnesses to God (Da 12:3). The letter to Ephesus includes in its introduction a reference to the seven stars (2:1), and in 3:1 they are associated closely with the “seven spirits of God.”

John sees a “sharp double-edged sword” going forth from the mouth of Christ. The metaphor of a sword coming from the mouth is important for three reasons: (1) John refers to this characteristic of Christ several times (1:16; 2:12, 16; 19:15, 21); (2) he uses a rare word for “sword” (GK G4855), one found only once outside Revelation (Lk 2:35); and (3) there is no scriptural parallel to the expression except in Isa 11:4, where it is said that the Messiah will “strike the earth with the rod of his mouth” and “with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked.”

The sword is both a weapon and a symbol of war, oppression, and political authority. But John intends a startling difference in the function of this sword, since it proceeds from the mouth of Christ rather than being wielded in his hand. Christ will overtake the Nicolaitans at Pergamum and make war with them by the sword of his mouth (2:12, 16). He will strike down the rebellious at his coming with such a sword (19:15, 21). The figure points definitely to divine judgment, but not to the type of power wielded by the nations. Christ conquers the world through his death and resurrection, and the sword is his faithful witness to God’s saving purposes. The weapons of his followers are loyalty, truthfulness, and righteousness (19:8, 14).

Finally, the face of Christ is likened to “the sun shining in all its brilliance.” This is a simile of Christ’s divine glory, preeminence, and victory (Mt 13:43; 17:2; cf. Rev 10:1).

 

17-18 These verses identify Christ to John and connect the vision of the glorified Christ (vv. 13-16) with his existence in history. The vision is seen in the light of the Eternal One who identifies himself in these verses. “I fell at his feet as though dead” indicates that John saw a supernatural being and was stricken with trembling and fear, as had prophets before him (Eze 1:28; Da 8:17; 10:9). Immediately Christ placed his hand on John and assured him that he would not die: “Do not be afraid” (cf. 2:10; 19:10, 22:8; cf. Mt 17:6-7). The title “the First and the Last,” which belongs to God in Isa 44:6 and 48:12 (where it means that he alone is God, the absolute Lord of history and the Creator), shows that in John’s Christology, Christ is identified with the Deity.

Christ is also “the Living One” in that he, like God, never changes. Probably this expression is a further elaboration of what it means to be “the First and the Last,” i.e., he alone of all the gods can speak and act in the world (Jos 3:10; 1Sa 17:26; Ps 42:2; Rev 7:2). These divine qualities of his person are now linked to his earthly existence in first-century Palestine—“I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever!” John’s view of Jesus and his kingdom revolves around the Cross and the Resurrection, i.e., around atonement theology—an interpretation that sets the tone for all the visions that follow.

It was through Jesus’ suffering, death, and resurrection that he won the right to have the “keys of death and Hades.” Keys grant the holder access to interiors and their contents, and in ancient times the wearing of large keys was a mark of status in the community (cf. 3:7; 9:1; 20:1; 21:25). “Hades” (GK G87) translates the Hebrew term Sheol (“death” or “grave”; GK H8619) almost everywhere in the LXX. In the NT the word has a twofold usage: in some cases it denotes the place of all the departed dead (Ac 2:27, 31); in others, it refers to the place of the departed wicked (Lk 16:23; Rev 20:13-14). Since Christ alone has conquered death and has himself come out of Hades, he alone can determine who will enter death and Hades and who will come out of them. He has the “keys.” For the Christian, death can only be seen as the servant of Christ.

 

19 John is told to “write, therefore, what you have seen.” This verse faces us with an important exegetical problem concerning the sense of the words and the relationship of the three clauses: “what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.” Does Christ give John a chronological outline as a key to the visions in the book? Many think he does. If so, are there three divisions: “seen,” “now,” and “later”? Or are there two: “seen,” i.e., “now” and “later”? In the latter case, where does the chronological break take place in the book? For others, v. 19 simply gives a general statement of the contents of all the visions throughout the book as containing a mixture of the “now” and the “later.”

While no general agreement prevails, the key to the problem may lie in the middle term “what is now” (lit., “which [things] are”). There are two possibilities. (1) The verb can be taken temporally (“now”), as NIV has done. This would refer to things that were present in John’s day, e.g., matters discussed in the letters to the churches (chs. 2-3). (2) The verb can be taken in the sense of “what things mean.” This explanation agrees with John’s usage of the verb “to be” throughout the book (cf. v. 20; 4:5; 5:6, 8; 7:14; 17:12, 15). “What they are [mean]“ is then immediately given in the next verse, i.e., the explanation of the mystery of the lamps and stars.

Most commentators understand the phrase “what you have seen” as referring to the first vision (1:12-16); but it may refer to the whole book as the expression “what you see” in v. 11 does. In this case the translation could be either “what you saw, both the things that are and the things that will occur afterward,” or “what you saw, both what it means and what will occur afterward.” “What will take place later” clearly refers to the future, but to the future of what? Some have taken the similar but not identical phrase in 4:1 to mean the same as here and have rendered it “what shall take place after these present things,” i.e., after the things relating to the seven churches (chs. 2-3). This results in either the historicist view of chs. 4-22 or the futurist view of them. But if the future is simply the future visions given to John after this initial vision, then the statement has little significance in indicating chronological sequence in the book. While v. 19 may provide a helpful key to the book’s plan, on careful analysis it by no means gives us a clear key to it.

In my understanding, John is being told here to write down a description of the vision of Christ that he has just seen, what it means, and what he will see afterward—i.e., not the end-time things, but the things revealed later to him. Whether these other things are wholly future, wholly present, or both future and present depends on the content of the vision.

 

20 The first vision is called a “mystery” (GK G3696). In the NT a “mystery” is something formerly secret but now revealed or identified (cf. John’s identification of the “mystery” of the harlot in ch. 17 as the “great city” that rules over the kings of the earth).

The seven stars represent the “angels of the seven churches.” Who are these angels? There is no totally satisfactory answer to this question. “Angels” (GK G34) occurs sixty-seven times in Revelation, and in every other instance it refers to heavenly messengers, though occasionally in the NT it can mean a human messenger (Lk 7:24; 9:52; Jas 2:25). A strong objection to the human messenger sense here is the fact that the word is not used that way anywhere else in apocalyptic literature. John’s reference should thus be understood as the heavenly messengers who have been entrusted by Christ with responsibility over the churches and yet who are so closely identified with them that the letters are addressed at the same time to these “messengers” and to the congregation (cf. the plural form in 2:10, 13, 23-24).

Whatever may be the correct identification of the angels, the emphasis rests on Christ’s immediate presence and communication through the Spirit to the churches (cf. the link of “stars” in 3:1 with the seven spirits of God). In some sense, the reference to angels in the churches shows that the churches are more than a gathering of mere individuals or a social institution; they have a corporate and heavenly character (cf. 1Co 11:10; Eph 3:10; Heb 1:14). That the “seven lampstands are the seven churches” not only shows that the churches are the earthly counterpart of the stars but links the vision of Christ with his authority to rule and judge his churches.

 

Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

 

-Dan

[ucfgrad93]

Cool I have seen that work but not used it (I do not own it). If Brian had asked me about a Multivolume I would have without a doubt recommended the NEW INTERPRETER'S BIBLE 12-VOLUME COMMENTARY, which in addition to dealing with the matters he asked also contains wonderful reflection material on most all sections of treatment (although occasionally reflections are put off till a couple sections are covered). I know EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY is a more conservative item and roughly the same price, but unfortunately it often doesn't take in literary points too well.

 

-Dan

 

PS: Covering the catholic books too is also a nice feature of the NIB.

 

Thank you so much, Dan, for posting these comparisons.  They are very helpful, and I really appreciate the time and effort it took for you to do it.