Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- Translation progress
- 4,537 / 4,537
- Source language
- en
Study Resources
Bible Commentaries
Browse multiple public-domain commentaries and scripture.how Korean translations by book and chapter. Switch between commentary sources, read the translation alone, or compare it side by side with the original text.
Active commentary
All commentaries
23 sources
Total entries
307,288
81,431 translated
License
Shown per source
Sources and licenses
Each commentary source keeps its original work, author, translation progress, and license information separate. Korean translations and editorial work by scripture.how are managed apart from the source text.
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.
- Translation progress
- 19,831 / 19,831
- Source language
- 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.
- Translation progress
- 22,781 / 22,781
- Source language
- 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.
- Translation progress
- 21,603 / 22,101
- Source language
- 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.
- Translation progress
- 12,528 / 30,759
- Source language
- en
Calvin's Commentaries
John Calvin · 1850
종교개혁 신학 원천 (영역본 PD, 대부분 — 전권 아님)
- Translation progress
- 144 / 7,385
- Source language
- en
Matthew Poole's Annotations upon the Holy Bible
Matthew Poole · 1685
간결 절별 전권 개혁주의 주석
- Translation progress
- 0 / 31,092
- Source language
- en
The Pulpit Commentary
ed. H.D.M. Spence & Joseph S. Exell · 1890
전권 강해·설교·예화 풍부 (항목 대량)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 25,592
- Source language
- en
Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Carl F. Keil, Franz Delitzsch · 1866
구약 학술 표준 — 히브리어·문헌비평·고대근동 배경
- Translation progress
- 0 / 2,044
- Source language
- en
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
ed. Charles J. Ellicott · 1878
학술+가독 균형 전권 주석
- Translation progress
- 0 / 23,497
- Source language
- en
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Cambridge (다저자) · 1900
준전권 준학술 (권별 저자·연도 확인)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 27,176
- Source language
- en
Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament
Marvin R. Vincent · 1887
신약 헬라어 단어 연구
- Translation progress
- 0 / 5,763
- Source language
- en
Word Pictures in the New Testament
A.T. Robertson · 1933
헬라어 시제·문법 해설 결정판 (KR PD / US 1931+ 권별)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 6,935
- Source language
- en
The Expositor's Greek Testament
ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (다저자) · 1910
헬라어 신약 학술 (권별 저자 PD 확인 필요)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 7,010
- Source language
- en
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
Heinrich A.W. Meyer · 1880
신약 학술 정밀주해 (독일 — K&D 대응)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 5,340
- Source language
- en
Wesley's Explanatory Notes
John Wesley · 1755
간결 실용 전권(NT 1755 / OT 1765) 웨슬리안
- Translation progress
- 0 / 5,643
- Source language
- en
Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments
Joseph Benson · 1815
웨슬리안 전권 주석
- Translation progress
- 0 / 14,675
- Source language
- en
The Treasury of David
Charles H. Spurgeon · 1885
시편 주석 고전 (설교 자료 풍부)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 2,290
- Source language
- en
MacLaren's Expositions of Holy Scripture
Alexander Maclaren · 1910
설교형 강해 명저 (전권, 절별 가공 필요)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 1,144
- Source language
- en
The People's New Testament
B.W. Johnson · 1891
평이 절별 신약 해설 (일반신자·모바일)
- Translation progress
- 7 / 3,477
- Source language
- en
Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible
Thomas Coke · 1803
감리교 전권 주석
- Translation progress
- 0 / 10,808
- Source language
- en
Trapp's Complete Commentary
John Trapp · 1660
청교도 전권 주석 — Henry/Gill 보완
- Translation progress
- 0 / 26,397
- Source language
- en
Hodge's Commentary on the New Testament
Charles Hodge · 1860
프린스턴 조직신학 관점 신약 정밀 주석 (롬·고전후·엡)
- Translation progress
- 0 / 1,011
- Source language
- en
Verse 4. - Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? (observe the emphatic position of σὺ) to his own lord he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be made to stand: for the Lord (better supported than God, as in the Textus Receptus) is able (or, has power) to make him stand. The standing or falling here spoken of may be taken to mean standing firm in, or falling from, a state of grace (cf. Romans 11:20, 22), rather than acceptance or rejection at the last judgment. "For God is able," etc., seems to require this meaning. The non-abstainer's freedom does not endanger his position; for God is powerful to sustain him, and to God alone he is accountable.
(4) Who art thou?—This is addressed to the weak. The Apostle indignantly challenges his right to judge. That right belongs to another tribunal, before which the conduct of the stronger Christian will not be condemned but approved and upheld.
He standeth or falleth.—It seems most in accordance with what precedes to take this of judicial condemnation or approval from the Master whom he serves—i.e., Christ.
Holden up.—The same word as that in the clause following, and similar to that in the clause preceding—“Made to stand.”
God is able to make him stand.—The true reading here is “the Lord”—i.e., Christ; the word is the same as “his Master” above. “Make him stand” seems to be still judicial. “Secure his acquittal,” but with reference to his previous course of conduct on which that acquittal is grounded. The trial is not necessarily reserved for the last day, but is rather the judgment which Christ may be supposed at any moment to pass upon His servants. If they can sustain this judgment, it is only because His grace has enabled them so to act as not to be condemned by it.
- The question has been much debated whether the observance of the Sabbath was one of the tenets of the “weak brethren,” and so whether it is here ruled by St Paul to be not of permanent moral obligation. (Cp. Colossians 2:16.) If by “the Sabbath” is meant the last day of the week strictly, the answer to both questions must be yes. But as to the observance of a divinely-consecrated Weekly Rest, it is evident (from Genesis 2:3 and Exodus 20:8-11, and cp. such passages of prophetic doctrine as Isaiah 58:13-14,) that the institution stands on a very different level from that of the monthly and yearly Mosaic festivals. It is antecedent to all Jewish law, and in the Decalogue of Exodus it is based on strictly universal grounds, and placed among the great elements of moral duty. No doubt it is impossible to trace the whole process of transition from the observance of the Seventh day to that of the First; but the plain fact remains that the sanctity of the primeval weekly worship-rest was of a kind most unlikely to be slightingly put aside by the Apostles; and thus in such places as this and Colossians 2:16 it is far more likely that the wrong opinion in question was that the whole Mosaic code of festivals was still binding in full detail; that therefore the Saturday was the only possible Sabbath; and that it was to be observed by the Rabbinic rules.
How to deal with those who might reject the Weekly Rest altogether might be a difficult question. But all we are here called on to enquire is whether it was likely that St Paul, with the O. T. before him, would treat the Sabbath (the Sabbath apart from its Rabbinic aspect) as a thing of the same quality as, for example, the new-moon feast.
- Who art thou that judgest] The verb “judge” connects this with the “judgment” passed by the “eater of herbs” upon the Christianity of his “stronger” brother.—The word “judge” here (as in Matthew 7:1) manifestly does not forbid the entertainment, nor the right expression, of opinions, but the assumption of a tone of judicial opinion: the thinking of others from a level of isolated authority and sanctity.
standeth or falleth] In the sense of acceptance or non-acceptance.
Yea, he shall be holden up] Lit. But he shall he made to stand. The “but” points out that of the two alternatives just given (“standing,” “falling,”) the former, in this case, is certain.
Who art thou? (σὺ τίς εἷ)
Thou, first in the Greek order and peculiarly emphatic. Addressing the weak brother, since judgest corresponds with judge in Romans 14:3.
Servant (οἰκέτην)
Strictly, household servant. See on 1 Peter 2:18. He is a servant in Christ's household. Hence not another man's, as A.V., but the servant of another, as Rev. Ἁλλότριον of another is an adjective.
He shall be holden up (σταθήσεται)
Rev., shall be made to stand; better, both because the rendering is more truthful, and because it corresponds with the kindred verb stand - he standeth, make him stand.
Is able (δυνατεῖ)
Stronger than δύναται can. The sense is, is mighty. Hence Rev., hath power.
Who art thou? (συ τις ει?). Proleptic position of συ, "thou who art thou?" The servant of another (αλλοτριον οικετην). Not another (αλλον) servant (household servant, οικετην), but "another's servant." For the adjective αλλοτριος, see Luke 16:12; 2 Corinthians 10:15. Shall be made to stand (σταθησετα). Future passive of ιστημ. In spite of your sharp criticisms of one another. Hath power (δυνατε). Verb found only in Paul (2 Corinthians 9:8; 2 Corinthians 13:3; Romans 14:4), from verbal adjective δυνατος.
return to '
Romans 14:4. σὺ τίς εἶ ὁ κρίνων ἀλλότριον οἱκέτην; the sharpness of this rebuke (cf. Romans 9:20) shows that Paul, with all his love and consideration for the weak, was alive to the possibility of a tyranny of the weak, and repressed it in its beginnings. It is easy to lapse from scrupulousness about one’s own conduct into Pharisaism about that of others. οἰκέτης is rare in the N.T. Paul has no other example, and may have used it here for the suggestion (which δοῦλος has not) that the person referred to belonged to the house. τῷ ἰδίῳ κυρίῳ στήκει ἢ πίπτει: for the verbs in the moral sense see 1 Corinthians 10:12. The dative is dat[36] comm[37] It is his own Lord who is concerned—it is His interest which is involved and to Him (not to you) he must answer—as he stands or falls. σταθήσεται δέ: but he shall be made to stand, i.e., shall be preserved in the integrity of his Christian character. δυνατεῖ γὰρ ὁ Κύριος στῆσαι αὐτόν: for the Lord has power to keep him upright. Paul does not contemplate the strong man falling and being set up again by Christ; but in spite of the perils which liberty brings in its train—and the Apostle is as conscious of them as the most timid and scrupulous Christian could be—he is confident that Christian liberty, through the grace and power of Christ, will prove a triumphant moral success.
[36] dative case.
[37] commentary, commentator.
Romans 14:4 then adds what a presumptuous intermeddling such a κρίνειν is. In this the emotion rises to an animated apostrophe, addressed to the weak in faith who passes judgment, not to both parties, as Reiche and Tholuck think; for κρίνων corresponds to the κρινέτω of Romans 14:3.
σὺ τίς εἶ] comp. Romans 9:20. It discloses the presumption, without however standing in the relation of apodosis to the preceding ὁ Θεὸς αὐτὸν προσελάβετο (Hofmann), which is nowise indicated and is forbidden by the fact that the following relation of domestic slave points to Christ as Master.
ἀλλότριον οἰκέτην] who is not in thy domestic service, but in that of another. This other is Christ (see Romans 14:6), not God, who is rather distinguished from the master by δυν. γὰρ κ.τ.λ.
τῷ ἰδίῳ κυρίῳ] to his own master. The dative denotes the relation of subordination to the interest of the ἴδιος κύριος (Bernhardy, p. 85). His own master, and no other, is interested therein; whence the incompetence of the κρίνειν is obvious.
The figurative standing and falling is either explained of standing firm (Psalm 1:4; Luke 21:36), and of being condemned (causa cadere) in the divine judgment (Calvin, Cornelius a Lapide, Grotius, Estius, Wolf, and others, including Reiche, Köllner, Borger, Tholuck, Philippi), or, as in 1 Corinthians 10:12, of continuance and non-continuance in the state of true Christian faith and life. So in substance, Erasmus, Beza, Vatablus, Toletus, Bengel, Semler, and others, including Flatt, de Wette, Fritzsche, Rückert, Maier, Baumgarten-Crusius, Umbreit, van Hengel, Hofmann. The use of πίπτειν would not tell against the former (Hofmann), for it would have its warrant as contrast to the σώζεσθαι in the divine judgment figuratively set forth by the standing (Soph. Trach. 84, and see Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 568); but the second explanation is to be preferred, partly because the unwarranted κρίνειν denied to the more free the possession of a right Christian frame of life, partly because of the following δυνατεῖ γὰρ κ.τ.λ. For to make to stand in the judgment, i.e. without figure, to acquit and pronounce righteous, is not the work of divine power, but of grace. But according to His power (against Reiche’s objection to this, see Ephesians 3:20) God effects an inner strengthening, so that the Christian stands in that which is good, and even he who thinks more freely does not succumb to the dangers to which the nature of his Christian faith and life is exposed by the very fact of his freer principles, but perseveres in the true Christian state. For this Paul looks to God’s power, and promises it. When Tholuck, on the ground of the reading ὁ κύριος, finds the thought, that the Judge will even find out sufficient reasons for exculpation, this is a pure importation into the text.
δυνατεῖ] See on 2 Corinthians 13:3. Comp. Clem. Hom. i. 6.
Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth: a sharp reprehension of the forementioned evil. You have the like: Jam 4:12. q.d. This phrase is repugnant not only to the law of God, but to the very law of nature, which tells us, that one man must not condemn the servant of another, over whom he hath no right or power; much less may any man condemn him that is the Lord’s servant. Every Christian hath Christ alone for his own or his proper Master; and it is his judgment by which he must abide; it is to him that he standeth or falleth, that he doth well or ill.
Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand: q.d. If (as thou thinkest) he be fallen or falling, he shall be upheld and supported;
for God is able, & c. But how doth this follow, because God can make him stand, therefore he shall be holden up?
Answer. It is a rule in divinity, that in all God’s promises, his power is joined with his will; so that where the latter is once revealed, there is no question of the former: now of the word of God in this matter, there was no doubt; for he had said, Romans 14:3, that God had received him. You had the like way of arguing, Romans 11:23, where the apostle proves the calling of the Jews by an argument taken from the power of God, because he is able to graft them in again: see Romans 4:21 Hebrews 10:23.