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
Bibelkommentare
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
Quellen und Lizenzen
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.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
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.
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 19,831 / 19,831
- Quellsprache
- en
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
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.
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 22,781 / 22,781
- Quellsprache
- en
Adam Clarke's Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
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.
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 21,603 / 22,101
- Quellsprache
- en
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
John Gill · 1763
John Gill(1697-1771), Exposition of the Old and New Testament(1746-1763). Public domain. Retrieval mirror: biblehub.com/commentaries/gill.
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 12,528 / 30,759
- Quellsprache
- en
Calvin's Commentaries
John Calvin · 1850
종교개혁 신학 원천 (영역본 PD, 대부분 — 전권 아님)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 144 / 7,385
- Quellsprache
- en
Matthew Poole's Annotations upon the Holy Bible
Matthew Poole · 1685
간결 절별 전권 개혁주의 주석
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 31,092
- Quellsprache
- en
The Pulpit Commentary
ed. H.D.M. Spence & Joseph S. Exell · 1890
전권 강해·설교·예화 풍부 (항목 대량)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 25,592
- Quellsprache
- en
Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Carl F. Keil, Franz Delitzsch · 1866
구약 학술 표준 — 히브리어·문헌비평·고대근동 배경
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 2,044
- Quellsprache
- en
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
ed. Charles J. Ellicott · 1878
학술+가독 균형 전권 주석
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 23,497
- Quellsprache
- en
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Cambridge (다저자) · 1900
준전권 준학술 (권별 저자·연도 확인)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 27,176
- Quellsprache
- en
Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament
Marvin R. Vincent · 1887
신약 헬라어 단어 연구
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 5,763
- Quellsprache
- en
Word Pictures in the New Testament
A.T. Robertson · 1933
헬라어 시제·문법 해설 결정판 (KR PD / US 1931+ 권별)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 6,935
- Quellsprache
- en
The Expositor's Greek Testament
ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (다저자) · 1910
헬라어 신약 학술 (권별 저자 PD 확인 필요)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 7,010
- Quellsprache
- en
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
Heinrich A.W. Meyer · 1880
신약 학술 정밀주해 (독일 — K&D 대응)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 5,340
- Quellsprache
- en
Wesley's Explanatory Notes
John Wesley · 1755
간결 실용 전권(NT 1755 / OT 1765) 웨슬리안
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 5,643
- Quellsprache
- en
Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments
Joseph Benson · 1815
웨슬리안 전권 주석
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 14,675
- Quellsprache
- en
The Treasury of David
Charles H. Spurgeon · 1885
시편 주석 고전 (설교 자료 풍부)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 2,290
- Quellsprache
- en
MacLaren's Expositions of Holy Scripture
Alexander Maclaren · 1910
설교형 강해 명저 (전권, 절별 가공 필요)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 1,144
- Quellsprache
- en
The People's New Testament
B.W. Johnson · 1891
평이 절별 신약 해설 (일반신자·모바일)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 7 / 3,477
- Quellsprache
- en
Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible
Thomas Coke · 1803
감리교 전권 주석
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 10,808
- Quellsprache
- en
Trapp's Complete Commentary
John Trapp · 1660
청교도 전권 주석 — Henry/Gill 보완
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 26,397
- Quellsprache
- en
Hodge's Commentary on the New Testament
Charles Hodge · 1860
프린스턴 조직신학 관점 신약 정밀 주석 (롬·고전후·엡)
- Übersetzungs-Fortschritt
- 0 / 1,011
- Quellsprache
- en
Romans 6:1. Οὖν] In consequence of what is contained in Romans 5:20-21.
With ἐπιμένωμεν κ.τ.λ[1377] Paul proposes to himself, as a possible inference from what he had just said “de pleonasmo gratiae” (Bengel), the problem, whose solution in the negative was now to be his further theme—a theme in itself of so decisive an importance, that it does not require the assumption of a Jewish-Christian church (Mangold) to make it intelligible. On the introduction in interrogative form by τί οὖν ἐροῦμεν, comp Dissen, a[1379] Dem. de cor. p. 346 (ΤΊ ΟὖΝ ΦΗΜῚ ΔΕῖΝ;). As however the “what shall we say then?” inquires after a maxim in some sort of way to be inferred, the deliberative “shall we continue, etc?.” could at once follow directly, without any need for supplying before it a repeated ἐροῦμεν, or ΜῊ ἘΡΟῦΜΕΝ ὍΤΙ, and for taking ἘΠΙΜΈΝΩΜΕΝ in a hortatory sense (van Hengel, Hofmann).
ἐπιμένειν τῇ ἁμαρτ., to continue in sin, not to cease from it. Comp Romans 11:22 f.; Colossians 1:23; 1 Timothy 4:16; Acts 13:43; Xen. Hell. iii. 4, 6; Oec. 14, 7 : ἐπιμένειν τῷ μὴ ἀδικεῖν.
[1377] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.
[1379] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
Noch keine Übersetzung.
Romans 6:1-2. What shall we say then — What shall we think of this doctrine? namely, taught in the latter part of the preceding chapter, that where sin abounded grace did much more abound? Does it not follow from thence that we may continue in sin, that grace may abound still more, and may appear more glorious in pardoning and saving us? The apostle here sets himself more fully to vindicate his doctrine from this consequence, suggested Romans 3:7-8. He had then only, in strong terms, denied and renounced it. Here he removes the very foundation thereof; proceeding to speak of some further benefits (besides those mentioned Romans 5:1, &c.) of justification by faith in Christ, namely, the promoting of holiness, and not of sin, as some might imagine: to which subject his transition is at once easy and elegant. God forbid — That such an unworthy thought as that of continuing in sin should ever arise in our hearts! We have disclaimed such a consequence above, and we most solemnly disclaim it again, and caution all that hear us, against imagining that our doctrine allows any such cursed inferences. For though it is true, that where sin abounds grace does frequently still more abound, yet this is not owing to sin in any degree; which of itself brings death, Romans 6:23; James 1:15; and the more sin, the more punishment; but wholly to the superabounding mercy and love of God in Christ. For how shall we that are dead to sin — By profession, obligation, and communion with Christ our head in his death; or who are freed both from the guilt and the power of it; live any longer therein — In the love and practice of it? Surely it would be the grossest contradiction to our profession, and the obligations we are under to do so: on the contrary, it is apparent that nothing has so great a tendency to animate us to avoid sin, as this doctrine of gospel grace.
Romans 6:1.— The Apostle having now proved, by three distinct arguments, that both Gentiles and Jews can be pardoned, and made partakers of the privileges and blessings of the kingdom of God under the Messiah, no otherwise than by the grace of God, through faith alone; he next proceeds, in proper order, to shew the obligations that both Gentiles and Jews were under to a life of holiness in this their new state, and the means and advantages which they enjoyed for that purpose. This he does, not only to instruct the Christians, and to prevent their mistakes, but also to wipe away a calumny industriously spread, as if, in asserting justification by grace without works, he had taught that we are under no obligation to obedience, chap. Romans 3:8. Against this objection, mistake, or calumny, he puts in a caveat, chap. Rom 3:31 and handlesthe point at large. See the introductory notes to this chapter.
return to '
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
Shall we continue — Quasi dicat, that were most unreasonable, and to an ingenuous nature, impossible. To argue from mercy to liberty, is the devil’s logic. Should we not after deliverance yield obedience? said holy Ezra, Ezra 9:13-14 . A man may as truly say, the sea burns, or fire cools, as that certainty of salvation breeds security and looseness.
return to '
Chapter VI
Contents
As the gospel reveals the only effectual method of justification, so also it alone can secure the sanctification of men. To exhibit this truth is the object of this and the following chapter. The sixth is partly argumentative and partly exhortatorty. In Romans 6:1-11, the apostle shows how unfounded is the objection, that gratuitous justification leads to the indulgence of sin. In Romans 6:12-23, he exhorts christians to live agreeably to the nature and design of the gospel; and presents various considerations adapted to secure their obedience to this exhortation.
Romans 6:1-11
Analysis
The most common, the most plausible, and yet the most unfounded objection to the doctrine of justification by faith, is, that it allows men to live in sin that grace may abound. This objection arises from ignorance of the doctrine in question, and of the nature and means of sanctification. It is so preposterous in the eyes of an enlightened believer, that Paul deals with it rather by exclamations at its absurdity, than with logical arguments. The main idea of this section is, that such is the nature of the believer’s union with Christ, that his living in sin is not merely an inconsistency, but a contradiction in terms, as much so as to speak of a live dead man, or a good bad one. Union with Christ, being the only source of holiness, cannot be the source of sin. In Romans 6:1, the apostle presents the objection. In Romans 6:2, he declares it to be unfounded, and exclaims at its absurdity. In Romans 6:3, Romans 6:4, he exhibits the true nature and design of Christianity, as adapted and intended to produce newness of life. In Romans 6:5-7, he shows that such is the nature of union with Christ, that it is impossible for any one to share the benefits of his death, without being conformed to his life. Such being the case, he shows, Romans 6:8-11, that as Christ’s death on account of sin was for once, never to be repeated, and his life, a life devoted to God; So our separation from sin is final, and our life a life consecrated to God.
Commentary
Romans 6:1
What shall we say then? What inference is to be drawn from the doctrine of the gratuitous acceptance of sinners, or justification without works, by faith in the righteousness of Christ?
Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? i.e., be more conspicuously displayed. The form in which the objection to the apostle’s doctrine is here presented, is evidently borrowed from the close of the preceding chapter. Paul had there spoken of the grace of the gospel being the more conspicuous and abundant, in proportion to the evils which it removes. It is no fair inference from the fact that God has brought so much good out of the fall and sinfulness of men, that they may continue in sin. Neither can it be inferred from the fact that he accepts of sinners on the ground of the merit of Christ, instead of their own, (which is one way in which grace abounds,) that they may sin without restraint.
return to '
Noch keine Übersetzung.
Romans 6:1-14. In the fifth chapter, Paul has concluded his exposition of the “righteousness of God” which is revealed in the Gospel. But the exposition leaves something to be desired—something hinted at in Romans 3:8 (“Let us do evil that good may come”) and recalled in Romans 5:20 f. (“Where sin abounded, grace did superabound”). It seems, after all, as if the gospel did “make void the law” (Romans 3:31) in a bad sense; and Paul has now to demonstrate that it does not. It is giving an unreal precision to his words to say with Lipsius that he has now to justify his gospel to the moral consciousness of the Jewish Christian; it is not Jewish Christians, obviously, who are addressed in Romans 6:19 ff., and it is not the Jewish-Christian moral consciousness, but the moral consciousness of all men, which raises the questions to which he here addresses himself. He has to show that those who have “received the reconciliation” (Romans 5:11), who “receive the abundance of the grace and of the gift of righteousness” (Romans 5:17), are the very persons in whom “the righteous requirement of the law” is fulfilled (Romans 8:4). The libertine argument is rather Gentile than Jewish, though when Paul speaks of the new religion as establishing Law, it is naturally the Mosaic law of which he thinks. It was the one definite embodiment of the concept. The justification, to the moral consciousness, of the Gospel in which a Divine righteousness is freely held out in Jesus Christ to the sinner’s faith, fills the next three chapters. In chap. 6 it is shown that the Christian, in baptism, dies to sin; in chap. 7, that by death he is freed from the law, which in point of fact, owing to the corruption of his nature, perpetually stimulates sin; in chap. 8, that the Spirit imparted to believers breaks the power of the flesh, and enables them to live to God.
Romans 6:1. Τί οὖν ἐροῦμεν; What inference then shall we draw, i.e., from the relations of sin and grace expounded in Romans 5:20 f.? Are we to continue in sin (cf. Romans 11:22 f.) that grace may abound? Lightfoot suggests “the sin” and “the grace” just referred to. The question was one sure to be asked by some one; Paul recognises it as a natural question in view of his doctrine, and asks it himself. But he answers it with an indignant negative.