Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary
Matthew Henry · 1714
Matthew Henry 사후(1714) 공개 도메인. 디지털판 CC0-1.0.
- 번역 진행
- 4,537 / 4,537
- 원문 언어
- en
학습 자료
성경 주석서
여러 공개 도메인 주석서와 성서하우 한글 번역을 책과 장별로 탐색합니다. 주석서를 전환하며 번역만 읽거나 원문과 번역을 나란히 볼 수 있습니다.
현재 주석서
전체 주석서
23개 주석서
전체 항목
307,288
번역 81,431건
라이선스
출처별 표시
출처와 라이선스
주석서 원문, 저자, 번역 진행률, 라이선스 정보를 출처별로 구분해 표시합니다. 성서하우의 한글 번역·편집물은 원문 자료와 별도로 관리됩니다.
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.
- 번역 진행
- 19,831 / 19,831
- 원문 언어
- 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.
- 번역 진행
- 22,781 / 22,781
- 원문 언어
- 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.
- 번역 진행
- 21,603 / 22,101
- 원문 언어
- 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.
- 번역 진행
- 12,528 / 30,759
- 원문 언어
- en
Calvin's Commentaries
John Calvin · 1850
종교개혁 신학 원천 (영역본 PD, 대부분 — 전권 아님)
- 번역 진행
- 144 / 7,385
- 원문 언어
- en
Matthew Poole's Annotations upon the Holy Bible
Matthew Poole · 1685
간결 절별 전권 개혁주의 주석
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 31,092
- 원문 언어
- en
The Pulpit Commentary
ed. H.D.M. Spence & Joseph S. Exell · 1890
전권 강해·설교·예화 풍부 (항목 대량)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 25,592
- 원문 언어
- en
Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Carl F. Keil, Franz Delitzsch · 1866
구약 학술 표준 — 히브리어·문헌비평·고대근동 배경
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 2,044
- 원문 언어
- en
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
ed. Charles J. Ellicott · 1878
학술+가독 균형 전권 주석
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 23,497
- 원문 언어
- en
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Cambridge (다저자) · 1900
준전권 준학술 (권별 저자·연도 확인)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 27,176
- 원문 언어
- en
Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament
Marvin R. Vincent · 1887
신약 헬라어 단어 연구
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 5,763
- 원문 언어
- en
Word Pictures in the New Testament
A.T. Robertson · 1933
헬라어 시제·문법 해설 결정판 (KR PD / US 1931+ 권별)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 6,935
- 원문 언어
- en
The Expositor's Greek Testament
ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (다저자) · 1910
헬라어 신약 학술 (권별 저자 PD 확인 필요)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 7,010
- 원문 언어
- en
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
Heinrich A.W. Meyer · 1880
신약 학술 정밀주해 (독일 — K&D 대응)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 5,340
- 원문 언어
- en
Wesley's Explanatory Notes
John Wesley · 1755
간결 실용 전권(NT 1755 / OT 1765) 웨슬리안
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 5,643
- 원문 언어
- en
Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments
Joseph Benson · 1815
웨슬리안 전권 주석
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 14,675
- 원문 언어
- en
The Treasury of David
Charles H. Spurgeon · 1885
시편 주석 고전 (설교 자료 풍부)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 2,290
- 원문 언어
- en
MacLaren's Expositions of Holy Scripture
Alexander Maclaren · 1910
설교형 강해 명저 (전권, 절별 가공 필요)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 1,144
- 원문 언어
- en
The People's New Testament
B.W. Johnson · 1891
평이 절별 신약 해설 (일반신자·모바일)
- 번역 진행
- 7 / 3,477
- 원문 언어
- en
Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible
Thomas Coke · 1803
감리교 전권 주석
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 10,808
- 원문 언어
- en
Trapp's Complete Commentary
John Trapp · 1660
청교도 전권 주석 — Henry/Gill 보완
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 26,397
- 원문 언어
- en
Hodge's Commentary on the New Testament
Charles Hodge · 1860
프린스턴 조직신학 관점 신약 정밀 주석 (롬·고전후·엡)
- 번역 진행
- 0 / 1,011
- 원문 언어
- en
바리새인들이 이혼에 관하여 우리 주께 질문함, 마가복음 10:1-12. 어린 아이들이 그분께 나아옴, 마가복음 10:13-16. 어떻게 해야 영생을 상속받을 수 있는지 물은 사람, 마가복음 10:17-22. 부자가 구원을 받는 것이 얼마나 어려운가, 마가복음 10:23-27. 그리스도와 그분의 복음을 위하여 모든 것을 버린 사람들이 받을 것, 마가복음 10:28-31. 그분이 자신의 죽음을 예고하심, 마가복음 10:32-34. 야고보와 요한이 그리스도의 나라에서 높은 자리를 구함, 마가복음 10:35-41. 그리스도께서 그들에게 겸손의 필요성을 보이심, 마가복음 10:42-46. 맹인 바디매오가 고침을 받음, 마가복음 10:46-52.
CHAPTER 10.
MARRIAGE QUESTION. LITTLE CHILDREN. QUEST AFTER ETERNAL LIFE. TWO SONS OF ZEBEDEE. BARTIMAEUS.
CHAPTER 10
Mark 10:1. διὰ τοῦ] is wanting in C** D G Δ, min. Syr. Pers. Aeth. Goth. Vulg. It. On the other hand, B C* L א, Copt. have καί. So rightly Lachm. and Tisch. This καί was, in some cases, deleted in accordance with Matthew 19:1; in others, more precisely defined by the description contained in διὰ τοῦ.
Mark 10:4. With Lachm. and Tisch. the order ἐπέτρεψεν Μωϋσῆς, following B C D L Δ, min., is to be preferred.
Mark 10:6. ὁ Θεός is wanting in B C L Δ א, Copt. Colb. Corb. Bracketed by Lachm., deleted by Tisch. An addition by way of gloss, which appeared necessary here, although not at Matthew 19:4.
Mark 10:7. πρὸς τ. γυν.] Lachm. has τῇ γυναικί, following A C L N Δ, min. codd. It. Jer. From Matthew. Tisch. has now again deleted κ. προσκολλ. πρὸς τ. γυν. αὐτοῦ, nevertheless only following B א, Goth. It lies under a strong suspicion of being an addition from Matthew.
Mark 10:10. εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν] So also Lachm. and Tisch., following B D L Δ א, min. Cant. 10 :The Recepta ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ (Fritzsche, Scholz) is an emendation.
αὐτοῦ περὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ] On decisive evidence we must read, with Fritzsche, Lachm., and Tisch., merely περὶ τούτου. The first αὐτοῦ is a current addition to οἱ μαθηταί; by τοῦ αὐτοῦ (D: τοῦ αὐτοῦ λόγου) τούτου was glossed for the purpose of more precise definition.
Mark 10:12. Tischendorf’s reading: καὶ ἐὰν αὐτὴ ἀπολύσασα τὸν ἄνδρα αὐτῆς γαμήσῃ (B C L א and Δ, which, however, has καί before γαμ.), is a stylistic emendation.
γαμηθῇ ἄλλῳ] Lachm. Tisch. have γαμήσῃ ἄλλον, following B C* D L Δ א, min. A mechanical repetition from Mark 10:11 (whence Δ has even ἄλλην instead of ἄλλον!).
Mark 10:14. Before μή Elz. Fritzsche, Lachm. have καί, which is wanting in witnesses deserving consideration, and is added from the parallels.
Mark 10:16. Instead of ηὐλόγει Lachm. (as also Scholz) has εὐλόγει. But B C Δ א, min. Vict, have κατευλόγει (L N: κατηυλ.). It is to be adopted, with Tisch.; this compound, which does not elsewhere occur in the N. T., was unfamiliar to the transcribers. Its position before τιθείς (omitting the last αὐτά) is attested by B C L Δ א, min. Copt. Syr. p. ms. Vict. (Fritzsche, Tisch.). But it was precisely the threefold αὐτά that gave occasion to error and correction.
Mark 10:19. The arrangement μὴ φον., μὴ μοιχ. (Lachm. Tisch.), is found in B C Δ א** min. Copt. Ar. Colb.; but it is from Matthew 19:18.
Mark 10:21. The article before πτωχοῖς is wanting in witnesses of such preponderating character (condemned by Griesb., deleted by Fritzsche, Lachm.) that it appears (as also in Matthew 19:21) as an addition.
ἄρας τὸν σταυρόν] is wanting in B C D Δ א, 406, Copt. Vulg. It. Clem. Hilar. Aug. Ambr. Other witnesses have it before δεῦρο. Bracketed by Lachm. But how easily the words were passed over, as the parallels have nothing of the kind!
Mark 10:24. τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐπὶ τοῖς χρήμ.] is not found in B Δ א, Copt. ms. Deleted by Tisch. But if it had been added, the addition would have been made in accordance with the text of Matt. or Luke, or according to Mark 10:23. The omission was meant in the interest of stricter morality, which regarded the πεποιθότας, etc., as quite excluded.
Mark 10:25. διελθεῖν] The εἰσελθεῖν, commended by Griesb., adopted by Tisch., has indeed considerable attestation, but it is from Matthew 9:24, and in this case the significant change of the verbs in Mark was not observed.
Mark 10:28. ἠκολουθήσαμεν] Lachm. and Tisch. have ἠκολουθήκαμεν, following B C D. A mechanical similarity of formation with ἀφήκαμεν, occurring also in some witnesses in Matthew and Luke.
Mark 10:29. Only B Δ א (ἐ. αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰ.), Copt. have the simple ἔφη ὁ Ἰησ. (Tisch.) instead of ἀποκρ. ὁ Ἰ. εἶπεν, but they are correct. Comp. on Mark 9:12; Mark 9:38.
ἢ πατέρα ἢ μητέρα] The reverse order is found in B C Δ 106, Copt. Goth. Colb. Brix. Lachm. and Tisch. It is to be preferred, ἢ πατέρα was in some cases placed first, in accordance with the natural relation; in some cases also, in consideration of Mark 10:30, it was altogether omitted (D, Cant. Verc. Corb Harl.). On account of Mark 10:30 ἢ γυναῖκα has also been omitted (B D Δ א, min. Copt. Arm. Vulg. It. Or. Lachm. Tisch.).
After καί the second ἕνεκεν is added by Griesb. and Tisch., following preponderating evidence. The omission is explained from Mark 8:35.
Mark 10:30. μητέρας] Lachm. has μητέρα, following A C D, Verss.; the plural was objectionable.
Mark 10:31. The article before the second ἔσχατοι is indeed deleted by Griesb. Lachm. Tisch.; but following Matthew 19:30 it dropped out so easily, and, moreover, it is found still in such important testimonies, that it must be restored.
Mark 10:32. καὶ ἀκολουθ.] B C* L Δ א, 1, Copt. have οἱ δὲ ἀκολουθ. This is rightly followed by Ewald, and is now adopted by Tisch. The οἱ δὲ not being understood was set aside by καί. But the attestation is to be the more regarded as sufficient, that D K, min. Verc. 10 :Chrys. are not to be reckoned in favour of the Recepta, because they altogether omit κ. ἀκολ. ἐφοβ., of which omission the homoioteleuton was manifestly the cause.
Mark 10:33. The article before γραμμ. (Elz.) is, with Scholz and Tisch. (in opposition to Griesb. Matth. Fritzsche, and Lachm.), to be maintained. The testimony in favour of its omission is not preponderating, and comp. Matthew 20:18.
Mark 10:34. The order ἐμπτύσουσιν αὐτ. κ. μαστιγ. αὐτ. (Lachm. Tisch. Rinck) is found in B C L Δ א, min. vss., including Vulg. and codd. It. But the ἐμπαίξ. and ἐμπτύσ. were considered as belonging together. Comp. Luke 18:33.
Elz. has τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ; so also Fritzsche, Scholz. But B C L Δ א, vss. have μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας. Approved by Griesb. Schulz, adopted by Lachm. Tisch. The Recepta is to be maintained. See on Mark 9:31.
Mark 10:35. After αἰτήσ. Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch. have σε, following A B C L Δ א** min. vss. To be adopted. It was easily passed over as being superfluous. D K have it before the verb. An incorrect restoration. א* has entirely omitted ὃ ἐάν down to δὸς ἡμῖν.
Mark 10:36. ποιῆσαί με ὑμῖν] Lachm. Tisch. have ποιήσω ὑμῖν, which was also approved by Griesb. An alteration in remembrance of passages such as Mark 10:51, Mark 14:12, Matthew 20:32, in which also the bare subjunctive was sometimes completed by ἵνα ποιήσω.
Mark 10:38. Instead of καί (in Elz. Scholz, Fritzsche) read, with Rinck, Lachm. and Tisch., ἤ, which Griesb. also approved, following B C* D L Δ א, min. Copt. Arm. Ar. Vulg. It. Or.; καί came from Mark 10:39.
In Mark 10:40 also ἤ is to be adopted on almost the same evidence (with Rinck, Lachm., and Tisch.); καί is from Matthew 20:23.
After εὐων. Elz. has μου, which is deleted on decisive evidence.
Mark 10:42. Read καὶ προσκαλ. αὐτοὺς ὁ Ἰησοῦς, with Lachm. and Tisch., following B C D L Δ א, 406, Syr. Copt. codd. It. The Recepta is from Matthew 20:25.
Mark 10:43. Instead of the first ἔσται, Lachm. and Tisch. have ἐστίν, which Schulz also approved, in accordance with B C* D L Δ א, Vulg. It. The future came in from Matt., and on account of what follows.
Mark 10:44. ὑμῶν γενέσθαι] Lachm. has ἐν ὑμῖν εἶναι, following important evidence, but it is from Matthew 20:27.
Mark 10:46. After τυφλός read with Tisch. προσαίτης, omitting the subsequent προσαιτῶν. So B L Δ Copt. Comp. א, τυφλὸς καὶ προσαίτης. The Recepta is from Luke 18:35.
Mark 10:47. ὁ υἱός] Lachm. has υἱέ, following B C L Δ א, min. From Luke. Comp. Mark 10:48.
Mark 10:49. αὐτὸν φωνηθῆναι] B C L Δ א, min. Copt. have φωνήσατε αὐτόν. So Fritzsche and Tisch. And rightly; the accusative with the infinitive was introduced through the fact of ἐκέλευσεν being written instead of εἶπεν, after Luke 18:40 (so still Ev. 48, It. Vulg.), and remained, after εἶπεν was restored, the more easily because Luke has it also.
ἔγειρε] See on Mark 2:9.
Mark 10:50. ἀναστάς] Lachm. and Tisch. have ἀναπηδήσας, according to B D L Δ א, min. vss. (including Vulg. It.) Or. The Recepta is a “scriptorum jejunitas” that mistakes the peculiarity of Mark (Tisch.).
Mark 10:51. The form ῥαββουνί (Elz. ῥαββονί) has decisive evidence.
Mark 10:52. Instead of τῷ Ἰησοῦ (Elz., Scholz, Rinck), A B C D L Δ א have αὐτῷ (Tisch.), which attestation is decisive.
아직 번역이 없습니다.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Mr 10:1-12.
마가복음 10:1-12. 갈릴리를 최종적으로 떠나심, 이혼 문제(마태복음 19:1-12; 누가복음 9:51과 병행). 마태복음 19:1-12 주석을 보라.
이혼에 관한 이 질문에 대한 설명은 마 19:1-12 주석을 보라.
예수께서 거기서 떠나 — Κακειθεν αναϚας는 ‘그분이 거기서 떠나셨다’로 번역될 수 있다. 동사 ανιϚημι는 가장 순수한 몇몇 그리스 저자들에게서 이 뜻을 가진다. 킵케를 보라. 앞 장에 언급된 일들과 이어지는 일들 사이에는 많은 사건이 있었는데, 마태와 마가는 그것들을 생략했다. 그러나 누가와 요한은 모두 그것들을 기록한다. 라이트풋과 뉴컴 주교를 보라.
이 장에서 우리는 다음 내용을 살펴보게 된다. I. 이혼에 관한 그리스도와 바리새인들의 논쟁(막 10:1-12). II. 축복을 받으러 그분께로 데려와진 어린아이들을 그리스도께서 친절히 맞아 주심(막 10:13-16). III. 천국에 들어가려면 무엇을 해야 하는지 물은 그 부자를 그리스도께서 시험하심(막 10:17-22). IV. 그 일을 계기로 제자들과 나누신 강론, 곧 재물의 위험에 관한 말씀(막 10:23-27)과 그분을 위하여 가난하게 되는 것의 유익에 관한 말씀(막 10:28-31). V. 다가오는 자신의 고난과 죽음에 대하여 제자들에게 거듭 일러 주심(막 10:32-34). VI. 야고보와 요한에게 주신 권면, 곧 그분과 함께 다스릴 것을 생각하기보다 오히려 그분과 함께 고난받을 것을 생각하라는 권면(막 10:35-45). VII. 가난한 맹인 바디매오를 고쳐 주심(막 10:46-52). 이 모든 이야기의 내용은 앞서 마 19:1-20:34에서 그 요지를 살펴본 바 있다.