Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 4,537 / 4,537
- Quellsprache
- en
Studien-Ressourcen
Durchsuche mehrere gemeinfreie Kommentare und koreanische scripture.how-Übersetzungen nach Buch und Kapitel. Wechsle zwischen Kommentar-Quellen, lies nur die Übersetzung oder vergleiche sie Seite an Seite mit dem Originaltext.
Aktiver Kommentar
Alle Kommentare
23 Quellen
Einträge gesamt
307,288
81,431 übersetzt
Lizenz
Pro Quelle angezeigt
Jede Kommentar-Quelle behält ihr Originalwerk, den Autor, den Übersetzungsfortschritt und die Lizenzinformationen getrennt. Koreanische Übersetzungen und redaktionelle Arbeit von scripture.how werden getrennt vom Quelltext verwaltet.
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, David Brown · 1871
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871). CCEL expanded electronic edition states it is in the public domain.
Albert Barnes · 1834
Albert Barnes' Notes on Revelation Of St. John The Divine (New Testament, English original, public domain). Sourced from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL). Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes.
Adam Clarke · 1831
Public domain English commentary by Adam Clarke, normalized from Wikisource book pages for scripture.how. Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/clarke.
John Gill · 1763
John Gill(1697-1771), Exposition of the Old and New Testament(1746-1763). Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/gill.
John Calvin · 1850
종교개혁 신학 원천 (영역본 PD, 대부분 — 전권 아님)
Matthew Poole · 1685
간결 절별 전권 개혁주의 주석
ed. H.D.M. Spence & Joseph S. Exell · 1890
전권 강해·설교·예화 풍부 (항목 대량)
Carl F. Keil, Franz Delitzsch · 1866
구약 학술 표준 — 히브리어·문헌비평·고대근동 배경
ed. Charles J. Ellicott · 1878
학술+가독 균형 전권 주석
Cambridge (다저자) · 1900
준전권 준학술 (권별 저자·연도 확인)
Marvin R. Vincent · 1887
신약 헬라어 단어 연구
A.T. Robertson · 1933
헬라어 시제·문법 해설 결정판 (KR PD / US 1931+ 권별)
ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (다저자) · 1910
헬라어 신약 학술 (권별 저자 PD 확인 필요)
Heinrich A.W. Meyer · 1880
신약 학술 정밀주해 (독일 — K&D 대응)
John Wesley · 1755
간결 실용 전권(NT 1755 / OT 1765) 웨슬리안
Joseph Benson · 1815
웨슬리안 전권 주석
Charles H. Spurgeon · 1885
시편 주석 고전 (설교 자료 풍부)
Alexander Maclaren · 1910
설교형 강해 명저 (전권, 절별 가공 필요)
B.W. Johnson · 1891
평이 절별 신약 해설 (일반신자·모바일)
Thomas Coke · 1803
감리교 전권 주석
John Trapp · 1660
청교도 전권 주석 — Henry/Gill 보완
Charles Hodge · 1860
프린스턴 조직신학 관점 신약 정밀 주석 (롬·고전후·엡)
Acts 28:31. Solemn close of the whole book, which is not to be regarded as incomplete (see Introd. § 3). The Gospel also concludes with a sonorous participial ending (but less full and solemn).
κηρύσσων κ.τ.λ.] thus his word was not bound in his bonds, 2 Timothy 2:9.
ἀκωλύτως] Plat. Crat. p. 415 D; Herodian. i. 12. 15; “Victoria verbi Dei. Paulus Romae, apex evangelii, actorum finis,” Bengel.
Acts 28:31. τὰ περὶ: on the phrase see p. 481.—τοῦ Κ. Ἰ. Χ., see critical note, and cf. Acts 11:17, Acts 15:26, the full phrase corresponds with the solemn conclusion of the book.—μετὰ π. παῤῥ.: the phrase with or without πάσης four times in Acts, and nowhere else in N.T., see on p. 128. In Jerusalem by the Twelve, Acts 4:29, and in Rome no less than in Jerusalem by St. Paul, the witness was given “with all boldness,” cf. Php 1:14; and so the promise in the vision vouchsafed to the Apostle of the Gentiles was verified, Acts 23:11, and the aim of the Gentile historian fulfilled when the Gospel was thus preached boldly and openly, ἕως ἐσχ. τῆς γῆς, see note on Acts 1:8.—ἀκωλύτως: “eadem plane dicuntur in ep. ad Phil. Roma data, Acts 1:12 sqq.,” Blass, and the word of God had free course and was glorified. The adverb is found in Plato, Epict., Herodian, and also in Josephus. In LXX the adjective is found in Wis 7:22, and the adverb is used by Symm., Job 34:31. There is a note of triumph in the word, Bengel, Zöckler, and we may note with Wordsworth and Page the cadence of these concluding words, μετα π. π. ἀκωλ. But all this does not forbid the view that the writer intended to give a third book to complete his work. This latter view is strongly insisted upon by Prof. Ramsay, St. Paul, p. 23 ff., while Bishop Lightfoot, B.D., i., 27, can see no conceivable plea for any third treatise, if the purpose of the narrative is completed by Paul coming to Rome and there delivering his message, so, although less strongly, Harnack, Chron., i. p. 248, see note on Acts 1:8. But Prof. Ramsay has received the strong support not only of Zöckler, and curiously enough of Spitta, Apostelgeschichte, p. 318, but still more recently amongst English writers of Rendall, and in Germany of Dr. Zahn. Just as in St. Luke’s Gospel Luke 24:44 forms not merely a starting—point for, but an anticipation of, the succeeding history, or just as Luke 24:44-53 contain in a summary what is afterwards related in greater detail, Acts 1, 2, so in Acts 28:30-31 of Acts 28 we have, as it were, a brief sketch of what succeeded the events hitherto recorded, and an anticipation of what followed upon them. This probability remains quite apart from the additional force which is given to it if Ramsay is right in regarding πρῶτος, Acts 1:1, as signifying not simply πρότερος, but the first of a series, a view strongly supported by Zahn, Einleitung, ii., p. 371. Certainly the aorist, Acts 28:30 (see above), and the expression διετίαν ὅλην seem to show that some fact was known to the writer which followed the close of the two years, and we can therefore hardly say that he wrote no more because he knew no more, unless we also suppose that he wrote his history at the conclusion and not during the course of the two years. This he may have done while the result of St. Paul’s first trial was still unknown, although Php 1:25-27; Php 2:24, Philemon 1:22, show us plainly with what confidence the Apostle awaited the issue. At all events almost any conjecture seems more probable than that the writer should have concluded so abruptly if he had nothing more to chronicle than the immediate and tragic death of his hero! Zöckler, Apostelgeschichte, p. 162, Spitta, Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Urchristentums, I., 15, 16. To say with Jülicher, Einleitung, p. 27, that he refrained from doing this because in such an event he would chronicle not the triumph but the defeat of the Gospel is certainly a strange argument, and no one has given a better answer to it than Harnack by asking, Since when did the early Christians regard martyrdom as a defeat? Is the death of Christ, or of Stephen, in the mind of the author of Acts a defeat? is it not rather a triumph? Chron., i., 247. The elaborate discussion of the abrupt conclusion in Acts by Wendt, 1899, pp. 31, 32, is entirely based upon the assumption that Luke was not the author of Acts, and that therefore this author, whoever he was, wrote no more because his information failed him, and he knew no more. This could not have been so in the case of Luke, who was with the Apostle at Rome, as we have from undoubted testimony quite apart from Acts. See further Introd. For the release of St. Paul, his subsequent journeys to Spain and to the East, and his second imprisonment, see in support, Zahn, Einleitung, i., p. 435 ff., Harnack, Chron., i., 239, Spitta, u. s., Salmon, Introd., p. 403 ff., Die zweite römische Gefangenschaft des Apostels Paulus, Steinmeyer (1897), and Critical Review (July), 1898. There were many possible reasons why the hearing of St. Paul’s appeal was so long delayed. The record of the previous proceedings forwarded by Festus may have been lost in the wreck, and it was therefore necessary to wait for fresh official information, as the prisoner’s accusers had not arrived. And when they arrived, it is very possible that they may have been glad to interpose fresh obstacles, and that they would be content to keep Paul bound as before; as evidence was probably wanted, not only from Jerusalem, but from various parts of the empire, the interposition of these fresh delays was easy. St. Paul had himself suggested that the Jews in Asia ought to be summoned, or to be present, Acts 24:19. That such delays would not be unusual we may learn from Tacitus, e.g., Ann., xiii., 43; cf. Suet., Nero, 15. When we remember how long a delay occurred in the case of the Jewish priests, the friends of Josephus, Vita, 3, who were sent to Rome by Felix to plead their cause, it ceases to be surprising that St. Paul was detained so long without a trial; see on the whole question Lewin, St. Paul, ii., 277 ff.; Lightfoot, Phil., p. 4; Knabenbauer, Actus Apostolorum, pp. 453, 454, 1899.