Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- Avanzamento della traduzione
- 4,537 / 4,537
- Lingua di fonte
- en
Risorse di studio
Sfoglia più commentari di pubblico dominio e le traduzioni coreane di scripture.how per libro e capitolo. Passa tra fonti di commentario, leggi solo la traduzione o confrontala affiancata al testo originale.
Commentario attivo
Tutti i commentari
23 fonti
Voci totali
307,288
81,431 tradotte
Licenza
Mostrata per fonte
Ciascuna fonte di commentario mantiene separati opera originale, autore, avanzamento della traduzione e informazioni di licenza. Le traduzioni coreane e il lavoro editoriale di scripture.how sono gestiti a parte rispetto al testo di fonte.
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)
(32) Knowing.—Again the word for “full or thorough knowledge.” With full knowledge of the sentence of eternal death which is in store for them.
They show that it is no mere momentary yielding to the force of temptation or of passion, but a radical perversion of conscience and reason, by the fact that they not only practise such things themselves, but in cold blood commend and applaud those who practise them.
With reference to the truth of the description which is here given of the ancient pagan world, see Excursus C: On the State of the Heathen World at the Time of St. Paul.
Judgment.—Just decree or sentence.
knowing] The Gr. is strong, well knowing. The witness of conscience is here intended, enforced by traditions of primeval truth and by the majesty of creation.
the judgment of God] Rather, His ordinance, His statute of retribution. It is not necessary to understand that they explicitly know that the statute is “ordained of God.” God, as a definite Object of thought, may be to them as if He were not; but a voice not their own bears witness to the eternal difference of right and wrong, however broken that witness may be. They are aware, however imperfectly, of a “statute” whereby impurity and cruelty are evil and condemnable.
death] The extreme penalty of the Divine “judgment.” It is in fact “the death that cannot die;” whether the transgressor estimates it so or not.
have pleasure in] Rather, feel with them and abet them. This is certainly a greater depth of transgression even than personal, and thus perhaps solitary, wrong-doing. It indicates complete victory over conscience, and complete callousness to the moral ruin of others. On the whole of this terrible passage, see as a Scripture parallel Titus 3:3. On that verse Adolphe Monod (Adieux 1) remarks: “For a long while I found it impossible to admit this declaration; even now” (on his death-bed) “I cannot understand it in its fulness. But I have come, by God’s grace—very slowly indeed—to see this doctrine more clearly, and sure I am that, when this veil of flesh shall fall, I shall find in it the perfectly faithful likeness of my natural heart.”
Judgment (δικαίωμα)
Rev., correctly, ordinance.
Commit (πράσσοντες)
Rev., better, practice. See on John 3:21.
Paul would have been familiar with the abominations of the pagan world from the beginning of his life. The belief in paganism was more firmly rooted in the provinces than in Italy, and was especially vigorous in Tarsus; which was counted among the three Kappa Kakista, most villainous K's of antiquity - Kappadokia, Kilikia, and Krete. Religion there was chiefly of an Oriental character, marked by lascivious rites. See Farrar's "Life and Work of Paul," ii., 24-34
Romans 1:32. Οἵτινες] quippe qui, of such a character, that they, cannot be the specification of a reason, as in Romans 1:25, and cannot consequently be intended to repeat once more the laying of the blame on themselves, since Romans 1:32 merely continues the description of the wickedness. It rather serves to introduce the awful completion of this description of vice; and that in such a way, that the Gentile immorality is brought clearly to light as an opposition to knowledge and conscience, and is thereby at the last very evidently shown to be wholly inexcusable (comp Romans 2:1).
ΤῸ ΔΙΚΑΊΩΜΑ Τ. ΘΕΟῦ] i.e. that which God as Lawgiver and Judge has ordained; what He has determined, and demands, as right. Comp Krüger on Thuc. i. 41, 1; and see on Romans 5:16. Paul means the natural law of the moral consciousness (Romans 2:15), which determines: ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες Κ.Τ.Λ[564] This ὅτι κ.τ.λ[565] therefore is not to be treated as a parenthesis.
ἘΠΙΓΝΌΝΤΕς] although they have discerned (comp on Romans 1:28), not merely ΓΝΌΝΤΕς; but so much the greater is the guilt.
ΘΑΝΆΤΟΥ] What in the view of the heathen was conceived of as the state of punishment in Hades (comp Philippi and Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 277), which was incurred through vice and crime, Paul designates, in accordance with the truth involved in it (comp Plat. Rep. p. 330 D), from his standpoint as θανάτος, and by this he means eternal death (comp 2 Thessalonians 1:8); not temporal (Bengel, van Hengel, Mehring); or execution (Grotius, Hofmann); also not indefinitely severe punishments,[570] the misery of sin, and so forth (so even Fritzsche and de Wette).
συνευδοκ. τοῖς πράσσ.] they are consenting with them that do them (comp Luke 11:48; Acts 8:1; 1 Corinthians 7:12; 1Ma 1:60; 2Ma 11:24). They not only do those things, but are also in their moral judgment (so wholly antagonistic to conscience has the latter become in the abandonment unto which God has decreed them, Romans 1:28) in agreement with others who so act. Bengel well remarks: “pejus est συνευδοκεῖν; nam qui malum patrat, sua sibi cupiditate abducitur,” etc., and how sharply are we otherwise ourselves accustomed to see and judge the mote in the eye of another! (Matthew 7:3). This climax[572] to the description of immorality, moreover, is neither to be referred with Grotius and Baumgarten-Crusius to the philosophers, who approved of several vices (paederastia, revenge, etc.) or regarded them as adiaphora; nor with Heumann and Ewald to the magistrates, who left many crimes unpunished and even furthered them by their own example; but, in harmony with the quite general delineation of Gentile depravity, to be taken as a general feature marking the latter, which is thus laid bare in the deepest slough of moral perversity.
The πράσσοντες and πράσσουσι are more comprehensive than the simple ποιοῦσιν (do), designating the pursuit of these immoralities as the aim of their activity. See on John 3:20. Comp Romans 2:3; Romans 7:15; Romans 13:4; Dem. de cor. 62: τί προσῆκον ἦν ἑλέσθαι πράττειν κ. ποιεῖν.
[564] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.
[565] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.
[570] Melancthon says well against this view: “P. non loquitur de politica gubernatione, quae tantum externa facta punit: verum de judicio proprio in cujusque conscientia intuente Deum.”
[572] The climax lies necessarily in ἀλλὰ καὶ (in opposition to Reiche, Comm. crit. p. 6).
Romans 1:32. Who, knowing the judgment — Δικαιωμα, the righteousness, or righteous judgment, or appointment; of God — And because God’s law is founded in righteousness, and is the rule thereof to us, the word is often used in Scripture to denote an ordinance, statute, or particular law, Numbers 27:11; Numbers 31:21; and in the plural, the appointments, or institutions of God moral, or ceremonial, Luke 1:6; Romans 2:26; Hebrews 9:1; even those which were purely ceremonial, Hebrews 9:10. Here the word signifies the law of God written on men’s hearts, called by philosophers the law of nature, and by civilians, the law of nations. For the Greeks could know no other law of God, being destitute of revelation; that they which commit such things are worthy of death — God hath written on the hearts of men not only his law, but the sanction of his law. For the fear of punishment is inseparable from the consciousness of guilt. Further, that the heathen knew that the persons guilty of the crimes mentioned here by the apostle merited death, is evident from the laws which they enacted for punishing such persons with death. Not only do the same — Allow themselves in the practice of these sins; but have pleasure in them that do them — Approve, encourage, and patronise them in others, and even take pleasure in their committing them. This is the highest degree of wickedness. A man may be hurried by his passions to do the thing he generally hates. But he that has pleasure in those that do evil, loves wickedness for wickedness’ sake; and thereby he encourages them in sin, and heaps the guilt of others upon his own head. In this stricture, Dr. Macknight thinks “the apostle glances at the Greek legislators, priests, and philosophers, who, by their institutions, example, and presence, encouraged the people in the practice of many of the debaucheries here mentioned, especially in the celebration of the festivals of their gods.”
Verse 32. - Who (οἵτινες, with its usual significance, as before) knowing the judgment of God, that they which practise such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also have pleasure in them that practise them. In this concluding verse the main point of the whole argument, with which also it began (ver. 19), is repeated, viz. that all this sin was in spite of better knowledge - the original knowledge of God revealed, as above set forth, to the human race, and (as is implied further) an inward witness of conscience still remaining, however stifled, even in the most corrupt society. By ἄξιος θανάτου is not meant "deserving of capital punishment;" Divine judgment is evidently implied. There is no need to inquire what conception of future retribution the heathen themselves may be supposed to have had, or to have been capable of entertaining. St. Paul constantly denotes by θάνατος, in a general and comprehensive sense, the penal consequence of unatoned sin due to the Divine δικαιοσύνη (cf. Romans 6:21-23; Romans 8:6, etc.). It is to be observed that in the latter part of this verse the distinction between πράσσειν, meaning habitual practice, and ποιεῖν, is not shown in the Authorized Version. The evidence of the "reprobate mind" is not simply that such things are done occasionally under temptation, but that they are the habits of people's lives. And still more: such habits are not only participated in by those who have knowledge enough to perceive their guilt (αὐτὰ πποιοῦσιν), but even condoned and approved (συνευδοκοῦσι τοῖς πράσσουσι); there was no general protest or indignation in society against the prevalent abominations; and those familiar with the writers of the Augustan age must be well aware that this was so. Here we have the final proof of the prevalence of the ἀδόκιμος νοῦς, the climax of the picture of general moral degradation. "Ideo autem sic interpreter, quod video apostolum voluisse hic gravius aliquid et sceleratius ipsa vitioram perpetratione per-stringere. Id quale sit non intelligo, nisi referamus ad istam nequitiae summam, ubi miseri homines contra Dei justitiam, abjecta verecundia, vitiorum patrocinium suscipiunt" (Calvin).