I found some interesting resources on Habakkuk after following up on a quote found in Ryken’s Bible Handbook:

God doesn’t always change the circumstances, but He can change us to meet the circumstances. That’s what it means to live by faith.

–Warren Wiersbe, Conclusion to his outline of Chapter 3

You can find these outlines in HTML format at these links:
Habakkuk 1-2:4
Habakkuk 2:5-3:19

The outline is very colorful–literally. Much of Habakkuk is applied to our present day world and New Testament references are noted. There is quite a bit about Reformed theology throughout.

Another resource I happened to find is by Dr. Thomas L. Constable of Dallas Theological Seminary.
Notes on Habakkuk – 2010 Edition

I like this quote he includes which part of why Habakkuk is so interesting.

Habakkuk is a unique book. Unlike other prophets who declared God’s message to people this prophet dialogued with God about people. Most Old Testament prophets proclaimed divine judgment. Habakkuk pleaded for divine judgment. In contrast with the typical indictment, this little book records an intriguing interchange between a perplexed prophet and his Maker.

–Ronald J. Blue, “Habakkuk.” In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament p. 1505

And of course there is John Hobbin’s blog Ancient Hebrew Poetry which starts out here:
The Book of Habakkuk: An Introduction
I think you can find the rest via Google.

I plan on buying Bruce Waltke’s two volume commentary on Proverbs. Would anyone want to dissuade me from buying this and getting something else? I want something that’s very complete and won’t leave me wanting. I can’t afford any others in addition to this.

I love the book of Colossians and there are and will be quite a few more commentaries coming out on this. Someday after I’ve done some other things like looking further into the OT and reading more of Calvin I’d like to study Colossians as in-depth as I can.

If you’re interested and haven’t seen it, here is a review by Review by David Schrock at The Gospel Coalition Reviews of a commentary/exposition of Colossians and Philemon by Michael F. Bird

I’m still a little dizzy about the back surgery thing and haven’t been posting as much lately.

For some reason I had about $11 of eBay bucks that had to be used today. I’ve got enough books for a while but couldn’t think of anything else I needed. So I looked through my Amazon wish list and found The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary by Robert Alter which has been mentioned a lot on blogs and is highly praised. The cost with shipping was $14.89 and I only had to pay $2.60. Did I do good? What do you think of this book?

I know this is a highly regarded work. What I’d like to know is if I would be more satisfied with a good multi-volume commentary or this which includes a unique translation. Is the commentary mainly on the translation? What I would like is a good commentary but Barnes and Noble has a great price on this which would be an economical solution and I have gift certificates for them. (My relatives don’t know how to buy one from Amazon but I’m thankful to have these.)

I found a page on F.F. Bruce:
Frederick Fyvie Bruce

This includes a lot of PDF files. Especially interesting to me right now is the wisdom literature since we’re studying Ecclesiastes in our small group. Be sure to notice there are other pages for later sections of his life.

I’m considering these:

• The Book of Acts (New International Commentary on the New Testament) by F.F. Bruce
• The Acts of the Apostles (Pillar New Testament Commentary) by David G. Peterson
• Acts (The NIV Application Commentary) by Ajith Fernando

F.F. Bruce is tried and true. The Peterson is new and I’m having a hard time getting a feel for it from the reviews. I like the series having commentaries on John, Ephesians, James and the epistles of John. I have one NIVAC that I don’t really like but the one on Revelation by Keener is fantastic. The one on Acts is actually longer than the one by F.F. Bruce which is a good thing. The commentary by Fernando might give more of a non-Western perspective too. I can only afford one.

Any comments?

I like this succinct explanation of fearing God in Eaton’s commentary on Ecclesiastes:

The way of safety is to fear God. In the wisdom tradition the ‘fear’ of God is the awe and holy caution that arises from realization of the greatness of God: ‘Splendour… terrible… majesty… power… justice… righteousness… Therefore fear him.’ (Job 37:22-24)

–Michael A. Eaton, Ecclesiastes pp. 122-123

Ecclesiastes 8:12-13
But even though a person sins a hundred times and still lives a long time, I know that those who fear God will be better off. 13 The wicked will not prosper, for they do not fear God. Their days will never grow long like the evening shadows.

and earlier he says:

…in the Lord’s Prayer … the twin truths that God is ‘Father’ but ‘in heaven’ guard against craven fear on the one hand and flippancy on the other.

pg.99

Ecclesiastes 5:7
Talk is cheap, like daydreams and other useless activities. Fear God instead.

If you like commentaries as I do, and you could only get a commentary on one Old Testament book other than Genesis or the wisdom literature, which one would it be and why if you care to take the time to tell.

I’m thinking Isaiah or Jeremiah and I’m leaning toward Jeremiah because there are many questions I have about it.

Also, if you would insist on recommending Psalms or Proverbs, please let me know what one(s) you like.

I have Genesis and Ecclesiastes covered and I know I want commentaries on Psalms and Proverbs. With a low budget I’m trying to decide what other one I’d eventually like to get. I think the Treasury of David is very good for the Psalms and it’s free.

There is a real sense in which the book of Ecclesiastes, then and now, is pre-evangelism. It disrupts the comfortable existence of people who are thinking that they are moving toward a meaningful and satisfying existence outside of Christ. The writer says, “I have been there; I have done that. I did it better and to a higher degree. I rose higher, I massed more, I built more than you will ever dream of doing, and I found it to be nothing more than a chasing after wind. It is all ultimately meaningless; trust me.” He says the meaning is in God, but he does not know how to explain that further. We do, because Christ has become man. Christ has become flesh, and we can turn people away from the vain pursuits that will lead them ultimately to depression and despair and say, “There is real meaning, but it is not going to be down that pathway.”

–Dr. V. Philips Long, Psalms & Wisdom Literature, Covenant Theological Seminary

Although God commanding war isn’t something I really struggle with to the point of shaking my faith, even though it seems extremely unfair to us and the thought of violent loss of life is extremely bothersome, I found this article very helpful.
How Could God Command Genocide in the Old Testament?

Edited: 9/26/09 for clarity

Matthew 4:19 NIV
“Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will make you fishers of men.”

Matthew 4:19 France
He said to them, “Come and follow me, and I will send you out to fish for people.”

This famous verse is one of the most difficult in the NT to translate satisfactorily in a way which reflects modern sensitivity to the ‘exclusive’ effect of a generic masculine. Not only has the traditional masculine phrase ‘fishers of men’ become firmly entrenched in Christian usage, but any nonmasculine rendering also loses the echo (in English, not in Greek) of the preceding clause, ‘for they were fishermen.’ Nevertheless, the attempt must be made if we are to avoid the sort of misunderstanding which reputedly caused Fishing for Men (a paperback on evangelism) to be listed among recent publications in the Angling Times, while a young woman of my acquaintance was disappointed to discover that the same paperback was not a guide to dating. Simply to add ‘and women’ invites the response, ‘What about children?’ I adopt the TNIV rendering as the least unsatisfactory.

–R.T. France, Matthew, footnote on pg 144

Matthew 5:22-24 TNIV
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca, ‘ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you,
24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to that person; then come and offer your gift.

The ‘brother or sister’ (adelphos) of vv. 22-24 is probably to be understood as a fellow disciple rather than a literal family member, a similar concern with good relationships among fellow disciples will be the theme of the fourth discource in ch. 18, where the term adelphos will recur in Matthew 18:15, 21, 35; cf. Matthew 12:46-50 for the concept of Jesus’ ‘family’ of disciples. It would, however, be pedantic to suggest that Jesus’ ruling applies only to relations with fellow disciples and not to people in general; Matthew 5:44-47 suggest otherwise.

–R.T. France, Matthew, pg 200

When I read commentaries I often wonder if the commentator sometimes goes too far in analyzing what the Biblical author was saying and the form and structure they were supposedly using to say it.

I always keep in mind the idea below. It was nice to see it articulated in this way as I read it a few days ago. I like the part at the end about amazing its author.

There is a sense that any analysis of any book of the Bible is an imposition. The biblical writers did not use headings and sub-headings, let alone chapters and verses. They present their material with no modern aids. Presumably, however, they knew what they wanted to say, and, evidently, did not write in a totally random manner. By all means let us seek to illumine the main shape of their argument. but let us constantly beware of the danger of imposing on any book a rigid pattern that would amaze its author.

–Michael A. Eaton, Ecclesiastes

I’ve been having a difficult time the last few days and especially today. I like this post that I put on another blog and thought I’d post it here.

I sense that people often feel a need to be right and one way to exercise this is to give advice to those who are suffering so that they can fix them. Then if they get better they can feel good about how they were right. Two problems with this is that it makes the sufferer feel like they are seen as not as smart as those who don’t suffer as much because much of the “advice” is already known by the sufferer and in fact the sufferer usually knows much more about the subject than the person giving the advice! People don’t always suffer because of lack of knowledge.  It also shows that we can forget that although we can help each other, God is ultimately the who heals, who decides a person’s fate and who is always right.

From Still Higher For His Highest by Oswald Chambers
January 20

Temperamental-the way a man looks at life. My temperament is an inner disposition which influences my thoughts and actions to a certain extent, i.e., I am either pessimistic or optimistic according to the way my blood circulates. It is an insult to take the temperamental line in dealing with human beings-”Cheer up, look on the bright side”; there are some types of suffering before which the only thing you can do is to keep your mouth shut. There are times when a man needs to be handled by God, not by his fellow men, and part of the gift of a man’s wisdom is to know how to be reverent with what he does not understand.

Job 2:13
Then they sat on the ground with him for seven days and seven nights. No one said a word to him, because they saw how great his suffering was.

I think Oswald Chambers had a good knowledge of what I call “real psychology” as opposed to our typical psycho-babble. (That’s not the main topic of his devotionals though.) D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones is another one who was ahead of his time in this regard.

Revelation 3:15-17 NIV
I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16 So, because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth. 17 You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.

I was always slightly puzzled by what these verses mean but never really looked into it until I read about it in Craig Keener’s commentary on Revelation.

Regarding verse 15, although it may be well known to most of my readers, who are generally more well educated in things Bible than I, Jesus is referring to the water temperature and quality or lack thereof in Laodicea, the church He is addressing here.

Keener writes:

Laodicea lacked its own water supply, having no direct access to the cold water of the mountains or the hot water of the nearby springs in Hierapolis to the north. In contrast to its claims to self-sufficiency (Rev. 3:17), it had to pipe in its water; though much of the aqueduct from the south was underground, nearer the city it came through stone barrel pipes, thus remaining vulnerable to any intended besiegers who wished to cut off the city’s water supply. More important, this water had grown lukewarm by the time of its arrival.

Other sources speak more about how displeasing this water was.

NLT Study Bible:

neither hot nor cold: The hot springs in Hierapolis were famous for their healing qualities. Colosse was equally famous for its cold, refreshing springs. In contrast, the water available in Laodicea was smelly and lukewarm. Such water is distasteful; Jesus was saying that the church’s indecisive commitment to him was revolting.

ESV Study Bible:

The waters of the nearby Lycus River were muddy and undrinkable, and the waters flowing by aqueduct from hot springs 5 miles (8 km) away were lukewarm when they reached Laodicea. Likewise, Jesus found his church’s tepid indifference repugnant. Cold and hot water represent something positive, for cold water refreshes in the heat, and hot water is a tonic when one is chilly.

So in mentioning the hot and cold water Jesus wasn’t speaking to their spiritual zeal or lack. And it doesn’t make sense that Jesus would rather they be spiritually cold than lukewarm. He’s not saying, “Pick a side, any side, as long as you commit to something.” Or that He would rather we be willfully cold towards Him as a way of showing some sort of truthful integrity if we aren’t very thrilled about how we feel about God at the moment.

What Jesus is saying is much more shocking. As Keener puts it,

In today’s English, he is telling the self-satisfied church in Laodicea: ‘I want water that will refresh me, but you remind me instead of the water you always complain about. You make me want to puke.’

The Laodiceans, who prided themselves on their wealth and self-sufficiency (Rev. 3:17) didn’t even have water that tasted good and Jesus used this to illustrate their spiritual self sufficiency and pride, and how He felt about it.

I was wondering if puke was a little overboard.

Thayer: to vomit, vomit forth, throw up, i. e. to reject with extreme disgust,

Louw-Nida: Since a term meaning ‘to vomit’ often carries somewhat vulgar connotations, ἐμέω in Re 3.16 has frequently been translated as ‘to spit out of my mouth.’ It is also possible to interpret ‘to vomit out of the mouth’ as an idiom meaning ‘to reject.’

It seems to me that a disservice is done when translations water this down (no pun intended). Most popular translations use spit. Among those that I looked at, the HCSB, LITV, Mounce Sr. (Interlinear), NET, NKJV, The Message and WEB use vomit. The Geneva Bible and King James use spewe and spue. (I think they were ahead of their time.)

Further reading:
The Letter to the Church in Laodicea at Ligonier Ministries

The late Alan Cole, in the introduction to his commentary on Mark has a section about women. I’d like to outline what he says and start off with a quote he writes at the end of the section, which is just as true today as when he wrote it.

[W]omen take their natural place as followers of Jesus alongside men, with no special comment, in this the first story of Jesus* and his earliest disciples. Mark is sometimes described as a ‘primitive’ gospel, but this attitude shows true Christian maturity and naturalness of approach, to which it is hard to feel that we have attained today, in spite of all our artificial striving for it. Perhaps the simplicity of the Spirit brings more balance than all the complicated theological argument on either side, with their ‘special pleading’, that we so often hear today.

* meaning “the earliest Christian gospel”

• Jesus had a close group of women followers, several of whom are named in Mark — Mary Magdalene, Mary, mother of James and Joses, and Salome, for instance (Mark 15:40; 15:47; 16:1).
• A young girl, daughter of Jairus, raised from the dead, is the first recorded miracle that Jesus performed (Mark 5:23). She was addressed as ‘talitha’, ‘child’ (Mark 5:41). The girl’s mother was called in to witness her resurrection along with her father which shows a “thoughtfulness and consideration for women rarely seen in the ancient world.”
• On the way to the house of Jairus Jesus healed a woman of a long-standing hemorrhage. She was addressed as ‘daughter’ (Mark 5:34); also signifying she was saved and forgiven her sins. Her faith is singled out for praise by Jesus (Mark 5:34). Mark records these as matter of fact without comment.
• Jesus was identified as ‘Mary’s son’.
• Jesus saw women and men equally as God’s creation (Mark 10:6) and demanded that women, as much as men, should be protected in marriage, disagreeing with the Pharisees interpretation of the law of Moses regarding divorce (Mark 10:11).
• Jesus rebuked the disciples when they tried to deny mothers from bringing their children to Him for a blessing.
• Jesus saw the giving up of sisters, mother or wife as great a sacrifice for the kingdom as giving up brothers or father (Mark 10:29).
• Jesus seemed to have special concern for mothers with young children who would be living during the trials of the end times (Mark 13:17).
• A woman anointed Jesus’ head with costly perfume at a meal that took place at Simon the leper’s house (Mark 14:3). “Wherever the Good News is preached throughout the world, this woman’s deed will be remembered and discussed.” (Mark 14:9)
• The women disciples stayed and watched Jesus while He was on the cross (and some say women are emotionally weaker?).
• Women disciples were witnesses to both his death and resurrection even though Jewish law wouldn’t accept the testimony of women as evidence.

Addendum: Coincidentally, there have been quite a few posts on women’s issues lately. I just want to be clear in that this post isn’t in response to any of them. I just happened to have this in the hopper for a while. I will say though that in his actions and words, Jesus was a feminist as far as advocating equality for women without needing to explicitly say so, as Mark demonstrates. It should be obvious.

Photo © Jeff at Scripture Zealot

I noticed a few interesting points in this portion of the Gospel of Mark. There are ironically more details in Mark’s usually concise account of events.

Mark 11:11 HCSB
And He went into Jerusalem and into the temple complex. After looking around at everything, since it was already late, He went out to Bethany with the Twelve.

If he was angry at this point, Jesus held it until the next day. He didn’t just burst on the scene and start driving people out in a sudden fit of rage.

Mark 11:15-17 HCSB
They came to Jerusalem, and He went into the temple complex and began to throw out those buying and selling in the temple. He overturned the money changers’ tables and the chairs of those selling doves, 16 and would not permit anyone to carry goods through the temple complex. 17 Then He began to teach them: “Is it not written, My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations? But you have made it a den of thieves!”

This wasn’t a political or revolutionary act but it was a demonstration of Jesus’ wrath (Rev. 6:16)–his anger at using His house for pilfering and even using it as a shortcut for those who lived nearby (“would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts”)! As always, He is perfectly sane even though “He is not a tame lion” as C.S. Lewis said of Aslan and which our culture often betrays.

It’s also interesting that he used this as an opportunity to teach (v. 17). He didn’t just ransack the place and then storm out of there.

R. Alan Cole in his commentary on Mark states:

The Greek verb edidasken, taught (i.e. ‘continued teaching’), implies a deliberate teaching programme adopted by Jesus rather than a casual pronouncement, uttered in the heat of anger, amid the justification for his action, as any rabbi would. The Scripture quoted by him is Isaiah 56:7, telling how foreign proselytes will one day be welcomed to the temple. It is noteworthy that Jesus here quotes only the clause in Isaiah about prayer, and omits that about offering sacrifice, for he himself was soon to be the sacrifice that would unite Jew and non-Jew in one (John 11:51-52).

Since I’m a fan of commentaries and they are a staple in my book collection I was glad to read this:

When the wonder of the gospel breaks into your life, you feel as though you are the first person to discover its power and glory. Where has Christ been hidden all these years? He seems so fresh,
so new, so full of grace. Then comes a second discovery—it is you who have been blind, but now you have experienced exactly the same as countless others before you. You compare notes. Sure enough, you are not the first! Thankfully you will not be the last.

Discovering a Key

If my own experience is anything by which to judge, discovering Romans can be a similar experience.

I still remember, as a Christian teenager, the slow dawning of this thought in my mind: all Scripture is God-breathed and useful to me, but it also seems to have a shape and structure, a center and circumference. If that is so, then some biblical books may be foundational; these should be mastered first.

Then came the realization that (alongside systematic theologies) biblical commentaries must be the foundation of my book collection.

–In Christ Alone, by Sinclair B. Ferguson

The NIV Application Commentary: Revelation by Craig Keener

I liked this commentary so much I thought I’d write a mini-review with some information about Craig Keener and type out some of the quotes I liked.

Craig Keener is someone who has an extraordinary passion for the Bible and a very high view of Scripture and God’s sovereignty. He’s an excellent exegete influenced by Gordon Fee and nearly as objective in his interpretation.

He’s also lived in dangerous urban environments where his life has been threatened and he knows what it is to be persecuted, as much as can be in the U.S. and he writes briefly about some of these experiences as they relate to the book of Revelation.

If you’d like to learn more about him you can read Fridays with Craig Keener at Word and Spirit, a series of eight interviews (in reverse order here).

Here is a brief video where Craig S. Keener tells the story behind the NIVAC Revelation commentary. He writes about this in the preface of the commentary.

My exposure to Revelation has been reading through it a few times, participating in a group Bible study on it which I have almost no recollection of and reading about bits of it here and there in various books. I wanted a commentary that was substantial, but not a large technical tome such as Aune or Beale. The only other NIVAC commentary I have is the one on Luke and I was a little disappointed in it as a commentary. It’s a great book on the life and teachings of Jesus, but many questions weren’t addressed. So I was reluctant to try another one but this didn’t disappoint at all. It seemed to be tailor made for someone like me.

In the commentary portion Keener addresses nearly all of the text of Revelation succinctly but fully. I never felt that there was a portion that was glossed over without addressing it.

In the Bridging Contexts sections he often writes about common gross misinterpretations, interpretations throughout history and how the passage relates to other parts of Scripture among other things which is extremely helpful.

Some may think it difficult to write about how the whole book of Revelation is relevant to us today but Keener does this with ease in the Contemporary Significance sections.

Here are some of my favorite quotes.

The necessity of remaining faithful until the end (Revelation 2:26) fits historic Calvinist and Arminian belief: The former argue that those who fall away were never converted, whereas the latter argue that they have lost their salvation–but both concur that they will not be saved. Verses such and this one and countless others, however, may prove uncomfortable to those who think that merely praying a prayer without truly persevering in Christian faith is adequate for salvation.

One [also] wonders how Luther, Calvin, Wesley, or others would feel about some who in their name privilege theological traditions above firsthand study of Scripture itself.

…not a single text supports addressing the devil as if he were omnipresent, during prayer. [On spiritual warfare, rebuking the devil etc. Revelation 12:7-9]

More quotes to come in future posts.

Buy it from:

• Amazon.com

This is news to me:
High-quality, FREE commentaries at Word and Spirit

They’re basic, but might serve as a good resource when another commentary needs to be consulted.