Bible Discussion Thread

I am not familiar with additional commentarys ,Pulpit ,Gill's, Ellicott . Which one or all are as reliable as Matthew Henry ?

I have , over the course of my life , utilized what was available, to study as long as was reliable & accurate .Today ,we have electronically available , everything & anything. Just looking for best reliable references to resource. This website has proven to be such a resource with reliable mentors that I have followed for a long time & have relied upon. Learning is an ongoing process.Thanks be to ....God Bless !

Hello Donna,

I think that you have been given mostly good references to commentaries. The only one I would not recommend is Bullinger, as he was am Ultra-dispensationalist. You may wish to find out more about Ultra dispensationalism before referring to Bullinger to see what e promoted.

I have not spent much time reading commentaries or online sites for most of my life. But I find them helpful when I wish to get a bit more information about certain things presented in Scripture. I often find that after I have sought understanding from the Spirit in Scriptures, and then I read a commentary or site, there is so much agreement with what I understood from Scripture and what the commentators understood. So, seeking such sources can be helpful. I would not discourage you from checking for more understanding using them. I would not read Bullinger, though.

Donna. That is Bishop K.C. Pillia not pillow.

Donna. Another source that I found very inspiring is E.W. Bullinger who

Did figured of speech in the bible among others and Bishop K.C. Pillow who

Light through an eastern window. He was raised in Hindu culture and got

Born again and wrote books on the eastern thought in scripture related to

The gospel message and meaning.

Hello,

It looks like some are questioning whether its morally right to use a commentary. Nothing replaces reading or hearing God's word directly. Ive never met anyone who disagrees with that. But a commentary is just someones interpretation or opinion. I see this as no different than a sermon or a bible study or discussion on this site. I do not believe its wrong to seek other perspectives of Gods word. of course discernment should always be used, not accepting any opinion as truth without a proper vetting including prayer.

All the ones you mentioned, Donna, are good commentaries and I would add, Benson and Barnes into your list as well. But as in all commentaries, they only give a person's understanding of the Scriptures, albeit by very studied men, so as helpful as they might be, our only resort should be to the Holy Scriptures & for the Spirit's enlightening. And as an aside, I've noticed that sometimes these commentators actually copy information from each other! Having a good Lexicon (Hebrew & Greek - available online) is also very useful to better understand where our English translations are coming from.

Thank you ,Chris for your reply, your encouragement & additional information. Will help me in my studies.God Bless you ! I hope you will / can continue communicating / commenting .

What commentary did Jesus read and his apostles?

Thanks that one will do for me .

Maybe the scriptures?

Believing. You will see in the gospel of Luke 4:16+17 where the scrolls or

Writings were handed to Jesus and he found the place where it was written.

What makes that incredible is the original scrolls had no chapters no headings

They were just running hand continuous and He found the place where it was

Written concerning His Ministry. The scrolls in the temple and the synagogues

We're His main source also what God showed Him by the spirit.

Just like me , Jesus didn't read any commentaries . They are an invention of man not God . If you are diligent determined and persistent in your Bible reading you will enjoy the benefits of your patience as things slowly reveal themselves to you . Jesus just had the scriptures , what we call the Old Testament . Once you've read the old a few times , when you read the New , you will recognise how often Jesus refers back to them , it's a lot !

Hello, Sparticus,

Jesus did not need to read any commentaries because He was God in the flesh and had perfect understanding of Scriptures because they are His words. You nor I are not Jesus. We did not author the Scriptures nor have perfect understanding of them on our own.

I don't think that you need to remind anyone on here that none of us are Jesus . We are all Christians here , not dogs barking at each other .

Hello Blackfoot, didn't mean to sound like a dog barking at anyone. It is not wrong to point out the obvious. But sorry if it offended you. I was just making a comparison of Jesus to us. It is good to remember that there is a difference. That's all.

It's impossible for me to forget that I am different to Jesus , I'm guessing most people are very aware that they are not the same as Our Saviour .

You are correct in what you say , the early Jews didn't have any commentaries and I wish I had a dollar for how many times I've heard people on this site say that the Holy Spirit teaches them all things . If we all have the Spirit of Christ then why do we need commentaries , how many times does it say in the New Testament , even Jesus says , that the Spirit of Truth will teach us etc ? I need to be convinced in myself , no one , no human , can convince me of anything , only God's Word is pure and true and righteous and infallible . I trust Him .

Hi Spartacus (& to 'Believing' as well). I do agree with what you both have written, as far as not requiring anything more than the Word of God to read & meditate on. Yet, when I see the word, 'Commentary', or even read what the writers had written, expressing their understanding of the Word, my mind goes back to the Church Fellowship setting. I ask myself, 'isn't my Elder or Pastor also giving a (his) commentary on the Bible, whether on a Lord's Day Service or in a Bible Study? The difference being, he may not go into as much depth as those other commenters, but he still presents a Scriptural analysis of a portion of Scripture - and we, listening to him, decide whether what he says aligns with the Bible & we learn from it & apply it. I suppose that it is possible, though I've never heard of it, that a pastor goes to his pulpit, gives the subject of his message, tells the congregation to note down the following ten Scriptures that pertain to his message, and then for the next thirty to forty-five minutes for them to read & meditate on them. He then sits down with them, so as not to give any comment(ary) on the Bible.

So yes, I understand the absolute worth of just reading from the Bible without resorting to any other views or Bible helps, but can't seem to place much difference between what may be written on the printed page to what is shared from the pulpit. Am I assessing this correctly or am I missing out on something? Or, even on these pages here, maybe some of should do as a couple of others do when answering a question: just give our answers only as listed Scriptures to look up & prayerfully consider so as to gain the true answer they seek.

Chris,

Thank you for this post. We are a community of saints and need each other. We are to teach each other, for teachers are given to the church body for that purpose. We are to preach to one another, for pastors are given to the church body for that purpose. We are to evangelize, for evangelists are given to the church body for that purpose. We are to build each other up in the most holy faith, which involves doctrinal instruction as well as Bible reading. We are to check whatever we hear or read from others against the Scripture, but this does not mean that we only read the Bible and do not listen to or read another person expounding on the Scriptures.

I realize that each believer is free to choose the approach to learning Scriptural truths that they believe is best. For me, I believe that God planned for us to be united together with Jesus in a common fellowship (body) where we worship, serve on another, and learn from each other communally rather than as individuals who wish to be "loners" and only use their own minds, reason, and understanding in learning Scriptural truths from the Bible. These do use something other than the Bible -their own minds, whether they will admit it or not. But, I do believe that the Bible does say in Proverbs 11:14 that "where there is no counsel, the people all; but in the multitude of counselor there is safety." This wisdom is from God and therefore good to follow. We need one another to help with our growth in knowledge of God, Jesus, and the Scriptures.

Thank you for sharing those extra thoughts on this subject, GiGi. What I would object to & give counsel on, is if someone uses a commentary solely to understand Scriptures, thereby forming a view/belief based on what interpretation, of the many, seems best rather than first resting on the Word, doing a scriptural search & waiting for light on that portion. I think this would be a lopsided approach to understanding the Bible & may give very limited value to the reader & a distorted Bible-reading exercise in the future.

Agreed, Chris. We all need to be teachable and receptive to how God does bring His Truth to us. This is what I think is being meek. It is an attitude of being submitted to God's ways for me and a willingness to go His way.