Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Jonah 4:10
Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not labored, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night:
10. for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow ] The principle on which the contrast implied by these words rests is that the effort which we have bestowed upon any object, the degree in which our powers of mind or heart or body have been expended upon it, in a word what it has cost us, is a measure of our regard for it. No claim of this kind had the plant on Jonah. No single effort had he made for it. He had not planted, or trained, or watered it, yet he pitied it, and mourned for its decay with a yearning tenderness. But on Almighty God, though the contrast is rather implied than expressed, all creation has such a claim in fullest measure. He “labours” not indeed; He speaks, and it is done; He wills, and it is accomplished. Yet in all things that exist He has the deepest interest. He planned them, He made them, He sustains them, He rules them, He cares for them. His tender mercies are over all His works. “This entire train of thought,” as Kalisch well remarks, “is implied in the following fine lines of the Wisdom of Solomon: ‘The whole world is before Thee as a drop of the morning dew; but Thou hast mercy upon all and overlookest the sins of men, in order that they may amend; for Thou lovest all the things that are, and disdainest nothing that Thou hast made. Indeed Thou sparest all, for they are Thine, O Lord, Thou lover of souls.’ Wis 11:22-26 .”
came up in a night &c. ] lit. was the son of a night, and perished the son of a night, i. e. it came into existence and reached maturity (comp. for this sense of was, And God said Let light be, and light was, Gen 1:3) in a single night, and no less rapidly (not literally in a single night, for it was when the morning arose) withered away.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
10, 11.] The final appeal is forcible and conclusive, a grand and worthy climax to this remarkable book. The contrasts are striking and designed: Thou and I (the pronouns are emphatic, and each of them introduces a member of the comparison), man and God; the short-lived palmchrist and Nineveh that great city; the plant that cost thee nothing, the vast population, the sixscore thousand children, the very much cattle, which I made and uphold continually. Jonah is met upon his own ground, the merely human sentiment of compassion, regard for what is useful and good after its kind, sorrow for its loss, unwillingness to see it perish. The higher moral ground is for the time abandoned. The repentance of the Ninevites is not brought into consideration. But the lower ground is a step to the higher. “The natural God-implanted feeling is the germ of the spiritual.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Thou hadst pity on the palm-christ – In the feeling of our common mortality, the soul cannot but yearn over decay. Even a drooping flower is sad to look on, so beautiful, so frail. It belongs to this passing world, where nothing lovely abides, all things beautiful hasten to cease to be. The natural God-implanted feeling is the germ of the spiritual.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Jon 4:10-11
Thou hast had pity on the gourd.
Jonahs gourd
There is no mention of Israel in this Book of Jonah. It is concerned solely about the welfare of a foreign nation. There can be no doubt that the spirit of the book is entirely opposed to Jewish feeling. While its form is historical, in substance it is prophetical. It contains great and important truths which Israel was in danger of overlooking, and foreshadows a time when Gods mercy towards mankind should no longer be restrained within the limits of the seed of Jacob. All the concern of the writer is to point a moral lesson. The exclusive spirit which regarded all nations as made to subserve the welfare of Israel was always hateful to God. But Jonah is scarcely to be blamed for not seeing what many excellent Christians have failed to see. We must not throw stones at Jonah, for our own houses are sufficiently brittle. Look at the lesson of the gourd. It had cost him nothing, his wisdom had not provided it, nor his care cherished its growth, yet he resented the loss of it as a personal injury. It was a parable designed to convey a needful lesson to abate Jonahs peevish grief at the sparing of Nineveh. God answered Jonah by dealing with the plant as Jonah would have had Him deal with Nineveh. What was there, then, in Nineveh, which answered to the consolation Jonah derived from the plant? Its sentient life and evident happiness, the work of Gods hands, unspoiled as yet by human wickedness, was Gods gourd, the consolation of His heart when the hot wind of Ninevehs wickedness blew upon Him. He could not bear the thought of sending the pestilence to crush in pain and death all this innocent life and enjoyment, or of giving up these tender little ones to the cruel carnage of savage foes. Judgment is His strange work, and only when absolutely necessary will He sacrifice the innocent and helpless for the sake of punishing the world and purifying its moral atmosphere. This is a very beautiful lesson. It sheds a shaft of tender light into Gods dealings with mankind. God will not let the happiness of creation be sacrificed for the sake of punishing human Corruption. The final lesson of this Book of Jonah is full of encouragement, and gives us a conception of God which is scarcely surpassed even in the New Testament. He is represented as more merciful than His servant, and as possessed of far wider sympathies. If God were not more merciful than man there would be little hope for us. Repentance instantly calls forth Divine mercy. The prayer of the contrite no sooner reaches His ear than the justifying word goes forth. (E. W. Shalders, B. A.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 10. Which came up in a night] St. Jerome, speaking of this plant, the kikayon, assigns to it an extraordinary rapidity of growth. It delights in a sandy soil, and in a few days what was a plant grows into a large shrub. But he does not appear to have meant the ricinus; this however is the most likely. The expressions coming up in a night and perishing in a night are only metaphorical to express speedy growth and speedy decay; and so, as we have seen, the Chaldee interprets it, “which existed this night but in the next night perished;” and this I am satisfied is the true import of the Hebrew phrase.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Then, when Jonah had showed his affection of love and pity to the gourd,
said the Lord; showed Jonah the little reason he had to concern himself for the gourd, and the great reason God had on his side in pitying and sparing Nineveh.
Thou, a man, of narrow and uneven compassions,
hast both
had and showed pity on the gourd, a common and worthless weed.
For the which thou hast not laboured; it was not the work of thy hand to set it.
Neither madest it grow; nor didst thou water, and give growth to it; it was not thine.
Which came up, as a mushroom, was the birth of one night,
and perished, died, and was only fit for the fire when withered, in a night; with equal suddenness withered.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10, 11. The main lesson of thebook. If Jonah so pities a plant which cost him no toil to rear, andwhich is so short lived and valueless, much more must Jehovah pitythose hundreds of thousands of immortal men and women in greatNineveh whom He has made with such a display of creative power,especially when many of them repent, and seeing that, if all in itwere destroyed, “more than six score thousand” ofunoffending children, besides “much cattle,” wouldbe involved in the common destruction: Compare the same argumentdrawn from God’s justice and mercy in Ge18:23-33. A similar illustration from the insignificance of aplant, which “to-day is and to-morrow is cast into the oven,”and which, nevertheless, is clothed by God with surpassing beauty, isgiven by Christ to prove that God will care for the infinitely moreprecious bodies and souls of men who are to live for ever (Mt6:28-30). One soul is of more value than the whole world; surely,then, one soul is of more value than many gourds. The point ofcomparison spiritually is the need which Jonah, for the timebeing, had of the foliage of the gourd. However he might dispensewith it at other times, now it was necessary for his comfort, andalmost for his life. So now that Nineveh, as a city, fears God andturns to Him, God’s cause needs it, and would suffer by itsoverthrow, just as Jonah’s material well-being suffered by thewithering of the gourd. If there were any hope of Israel’s beingawakened by Nineveh’s destruction to fulfil her high destination ofbeing a light to surrounding heathenism, then there would not havebeen the same need to God’s cause of Nineveh’s preservation, (thoughthere would have always been need of saving the penitent). But asIsrael, after judgments, now with returning prosperity turns back toapostasy, the means needed to vindicate God’s cause, andprovoke Israel, if possible, to jealousy, is the example of the greatcapital of heathendom suddenly repenting at the first warning, andconsequently being spared. Thus Israel would see the kingdom ofheaven transplanted from its ancient seat to another which wouldwillingly yield its spiritual fruits. The tidings which Jonah broughtback to his countrymen of Nineveh’s repentance and rescue, would, ifbelievingly understood, be far more fitted than the news of itsoverthrow to recall Israel to the service of God. Israel failed tolearn the lesson, and so was cast out of her land. But even this wasnot an unmitigated evil. Jonah was a type, as of Christ, so also ofIsrael. Jonah, though an outcast, was highly honored of God inNineveh; so Israel’s outcast condition would prove no impediment toher serving God’s cause still, if only she was faithful to God.Ezekiel and Daniel were so at Babylon; and the Jews, scattered in alllands as witnesses for the one true God, pioneered the way forChristianity, so that it spread with a rapidity which otherwise wasnot likely to have attended it [FAIRBAIRN].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then said the Lord, thou hast had pity on the gourd,…. Or, “hast spared it” c; that is, would have spared it, had it lain in his power, though but a weeds and worthless thing:
for the which thou hast not laboured; in digging the ground, and by sowing or planting it; it being raised up at once by the Lord himself, and not by any, human art and industry; nor by any of his:
neither madest it grow; by dunging the earth about it, or by watering and pruning it:
which came up in a night, and perished in a night; not in the same night; for it sprung up one night, continued a whole any, and then perished the next night. The Targum is more explicit,
“which was in this (or one) night, and perished in another night;”
by all which the Lord suggests to Jonah the vast difference between the gourd he would have spared, and for the loss of which he was so angry, and the city of Nineveh the Lord spared, which so highly displeased him; the one was but an herb, a plant, the other a great city; that a single plant, but the city consisted of thousands of persons; the plant was not the effect of his toil and labour, but the inhabitants of this city were the works of God’s hands. In the building of this city, according to historians d a million and a half of men were employed eight years together; the plant was liken mushroom, it sprung up in a night, and perished in one; whereas this was a very ancient city, that had stood ever since the days of Nimrod.
c “pepercisiti”, Pagninus, Montanus, Mercerus, Burkius; “pepercisses”, Piscator. d Eustathius in Dionys. Perieg. p. 125.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Here God explains the design he had in suddenly raising up the gourd, and then in causing it to perish or wither through the gnawing of a worm; it was to teach Jonah that misconduct towards the Ninevites was very inhuman. Though we find that the holy Prophet had become a prey to dreadful feelings, yet God, by this exhibition, does in a manner remind him of his folly; for, under the representation of a gourd, he shows how unkindly he desired the destruction of so populous a city as Nineveh.
Yet this comparison may appear ill suited for the purpose. Jonah felt sorry for the gourd, but he only regarded himself: hence he was displeased, because the relief with which he was pleased was taken away from him. As then this inconvenience had driven Jonah to anger, the similitude may not seem appropriate when God thus reasons, Thou wouldest spare the gourd, should I not spare this great city? Nay, but he was not concerned for the gourd itself: if all the gourds of the world withered, he would not have been touched with any grief; but as he felt the greatest danger being scorched by the extreme heat of the sun, it was on this account that he was angry. To this I answer, — that though Jonah consulted his own advantage, yet this similitude is most suitable: for God preserves men for the purpose for which he has designed them. Jonah grieved for the withering of the gourd, because he was deprived of its shade: and God does not create men in vain; it is then no wonder that he wishes them to be saved. We hence see that Jonah was not unsuitably taught by this representation, how inhumanely he conducted himself towards the Ninevites. He was certainly but one individual; since then he made such an account of himself and the gourd only, how was it that he cast aside all care for so great and so populous a city? Ought not this to have come to his mind, that it was no wonder that God, the Creator and Father, had a care for so many thousands of men? Though indeed the Ninevites were alienated from God, yet as they were men, God, as he is the Father of the whole human race, acknowledged them as his own, at least to such an extent as to give them the common light of day, and other blessings of earthly life. We now then understand the import of this comparison: “Thou wouldest spare,” he says, “the gourd, and should I not spare this great city?”
It hence appears how frivolous is the gloss of Jerome, — that Jonah was not angry on account of the deliverance of the city, but because he saw that his own nation would, through its means, be destroyed: for God repeats again that Jonah’s feeling was quite different, — that he bore with indignity the deliverance of the city from ruin. And less to be endured it is still, that Jerome excuses Jonah by saying that he nobly and courageously answered God, that he had not sinned in being angry even to death. That man dared, without any shame or discernment, to invent a pretense that he might excuse so disgraceful an obstinacy. But it is enough for us to understand the real meaning of the Prophet. Here then he shows, according to God’s representation, that his cruelty was justly condemned for having anxiously desired the destruction of a populous city.
But we ought to notice all the parts of the similitudes when he says, Thou wouldest have spared, etc. There is an emphasis in the pronoun אתה, ate, for God compares himself with Jonah; “Who art thou? Doubtless a mortal man is not so inclined to mercy as I am. But thou takest to thyself this right — to desire to spare the gourd, even thou who art made of clay. Now this gourd is not thy work, thou hast not labored for it, it has not proceeded from thy culture or toil; and further, thou hast not raised it up, and further still, it was the daughter of a night, and in one night it perished; it was an evanescent shrub or herb. If then thou regardest the nature of the gourd, if thou regardest thyself, and joinest together all the other circumstances, thou wilt find no reason for thy hot displeasure. But should not I, who am God, in whose hand are all things, whose prerogative and whose constant practice it is mercifully to bear with men — should not I spare them, though they were worthy of destruction? and should not I spare a great city? The matter here is not concerning a little plant, but a large number of people. And, in the last place, it is a city, in which there are a hundred and twenty thousand men who know not how to distinguish between their right hand and the left.”
We now then see how emphatical are all the parts of this comparison. And though God’s design was to reprove the foolish and sinful grief of Jonah, we may yet further collect a general instruction by reasoning in this manner, “We feel for one another, and so nature inclines us, and yet we are wicked and cruel. If then men are inclined to mercy through some hidden impulse of nature, what may not be hoped from the inconceivable goodness of God, who is the Creator of the whole world, and the Father of us all? and will not he, who is the fountain of all goodness and mercy spare us?”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(10) Which came up.The original is one of those forcible idioms impossible to reproduce, which son of a night was, and son of a night perished.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10, 11. By his answer Jonah unwittingly offers Jehovah the opportunity to put him to shame. The prophet’s attitude is absurd. He grieves over the destruction of an insignificant plant, in which he could have no vital interest; he had expended no labor upon it, nor had he caused its growth. How absurd to find fault with Jehovah for sparing Nineveh with its thousands of inhabitants! The two verses are full of marked contrasts.
Thou I The pronouns are emphatic in Hebrew.
Gourd Nineveh The former small and insignificant, the latter great and magnificent. The superiority of the latter’s claim upon the divine mercy is further indicated:
That cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand Children of the tenderest age. They have as yet done no wrong; surely for their sake alone God would be justified in saving the city. The age limit to which this expression may be applied is variously estimated. Some think of three years, others of seven. The latter is favored by the fact that among Orientals seven years seems to be a favorite period by which to reckon childhood. Since, as commonly estimated, children under seven years of age constitute about one fifth of the entire population, the number given here would make the population of Nineveh about six hundred thousand. If the other estimate is accepted the number would be considerably increased. Nineveh proper cannot have contained such a large population; the city in its widest extent must be in the mind of the author (see on Jon 3:3).
Much cattle The animals also were guiltless. Besides, as Calvin remarks, “Oxen were certainly superior to shrubs. If Jonah was right in grieving over one withered shrub, it would surely be a harder and more cruel thing for so many innocent animals to perish.” An additional reason for the divine mercy is at least implied. Jonah had expended no labor upon the plant, but how much effort and care had Jehovah bestowed upon the population of Nineveh! The fact that he sent a prophet to preach there (Jon 1:2; Jon 3:2) was evidence of his interest in the city. Could he cast off the inhabitants when they turned to him?
What an insight these words give into the divine love and mercy, into the very heart of God! Jonah had condemned himself; “he was obliged to keep silent, defeated, as it were, by his own sentence.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And YHWH said, “You have had regard for the gourd, for which you have not laboured, nor made it grow, which came up in a night, and perished in a night, and should not I have regard for Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand, and also much cattle?”
YHWH then applies the object lesson that He has been building up to. He pointed out to Jonah that he had become so grateful for the helpless gourd and what it had done for him, that he had become greatly concerned for it, even though it was only a weak, natural object and one which Jonah had not even laboured over or caused to grow. Its destruction had moved him to compassion. (It is often strange what human beings can become over-fond of). Was it not then reasonable that He, YHWH, Who had created the weak Assyrians and their animals, and had caused them to grow, should be equally concerned for them, especially when he considered how much they depended on Him. For if Jonah would but consider the situation he would recognise that Nineveh contained over one hundred and twenty thousand people who could not discern their right hand from their left, in other words who were rather ignorant and helpless people, at least religiously speaking, (or possibly children under a certain age), on whom he should have pity because of their helplessness and need, as well as being a city which had a large number of helpless cattle. The mention of the cattle emphasises the weakness of what He is referring to. And they were ‘natural’ things like the gourd which Jonah had had compassion on. And it was these who were benefiting by God’s mercy and compassion. Was that then so wrong? Thus His rebuke of Jonah was because he had no concern for the weak and needy. He who had had compassion on a mere gourd, was lacking in compassion and mercy when it came to men and women (even if they were Assyrians).
Thus the central message of the prophecy of Jonah is precisely this, that God is of such a nature that He has mercy on all who are weak and admit their weakness, (whoever they are), when they truly turn from sin and seek Him in repentance and faith, a situation which all should be concerned to bring about. This was a vitally important message in 8th century BC Israel for in that land were many Canaanites and followers of false religions (such as Baalism) who needed to know that God had a welcome for them if only they would repent, turn from sin and seek His face.
Indeed the fact is often overlooked that the existence of a prophet like Jonah (and Elijah and Elisha) was proof positive that in the northern kingdom true worship was being continued apart from the Temple at altars presumably set up by the prophets. That was why Elijah had been able to ‘repair the altar of YHWH that had fallen down’ (1Ki 18:30) and had spoken of other altars wrongly destroyed by the Baalists (1Ki 19:10). We may assume that they were altars set up under the provisions of Exo 20:24-26. It was partly in order to win adherents to the worship at these altars that the prophecy of Jonah was written, with a promise that anyone of any nation could come and find acceptance if they came in repentance and faith, in the same way as the mariners and the Assyrians had.
Jon 4:10. Thou hast had pity on the gourd God confutes the impatient grief of Jonah by a similitude. “You acquiesced in that plant, which afforded you a shade; I acquiesce in the repentance of the Ninevites. Therefore you ought not to grieve because I spare them, unless you prefer your own advantage and reputation to my glory and will.” That Jonah is an allegorical person, our blessed Saviour does not suffer us to doubt; who, when he taught that Jonah was a type of his resurrection, shewed at the same time, when those things would have their completion which were meant by the allegory: for as by the miracles which happened in the mission of Jonah, the miracles of the rising church were presignified; so in the disposition of Jonah was pointed out the future disposition of the Jews, who would seek their own glory, and prefer it to the salvation of the Gentiles; who would glow with envy against the Gentiles, though their salvation or Saviour was to spring from the Jews themselves; whom God would not yet utterly desert as a nation, though separating themselves from those converted to him; as he deserted not Jonah, separating himself from the city of Nineveh; but yet whose envy God would not regard, when they would have him indulge and spare their antiquated law, as a dry and withered stem, because he will not forsake the multitude of the Gentiles returning to him, that the Jews themselves may at length become imitators of the Gentiles. By this allegory, which derived its authority from our Saviour, the extraordinary miracles related in this book will be sufficiently explained. It may not be improper to add, that possibly God might design this call to the Ninevites, as a pledge and assurance of his future admission of the people of all nations into the privileges of the Christian covenant. This certainly he might have under his immediate view, to shew the disparity between his nominal people and heathens; and upon the comparison of their several behaviours, to shame them for living unreclaimed, under the constant preaching of his prophets for so many years; when a people, whom they despised, as being strangers to the covenant of the promise, had by the mighty power of his word, been converted or awakened to repentance in the space of three days. See Houbigant, and Calmet.
Reader! behold the conclusion! and say shall we not in the view of it cry out with the Prophet, Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of thine heritage? Mic 7:18-19 .
Jon 4:10 Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night:
Ver. 10. Then said the Lord ] He did not roar upon Jonah, nor run upon him with a drawn sword, even on his neck, upon the thick bosses of his bucklers, Job 15:26 ; but gently said unto him, that he might the more admire his own impotence and God’s lenity; both which he studiously describeth all along this prophecy; a good sign of his sound repentance.
Thou hast had pity on the gourd
For the which thou hast not laboured
Neither madest it grow
Which came up in a night
And perished in a night hast had pity on: or, wouldst have spared: same word as in Jon 4:11.
came up in a night = was the son of a night.
perished in a night = perished as the son of a night.
had pity on: or, spared
came up in a night: Heb. was the son of the night, 1Sa 20:31, Gen 17:12, *marg.
Reciprocal: Luk 15:32 – was meet
Jon 4:10. The comparative unimportance of the gourd when considered with the importance of a city of people is the thought in this verse. Pity on the gourd means that Jonah would have spared it because of its usefulness to him. And all this in spite of the truth that he had put no time or effort into it to bring it Into existence, while God was the maker of the city and all things therein. If the personal interest of Jonah In the plant would justify his regret, at seeing it destroyed, he should have praised God for sparing a city that was destined in the near future to co-operate with Him in one of the great events concerning Israel .
Jon 4:10. Then said the Lord Jonah having thus showed his love and pity for the gourd, God proceeds to judge him out of his own mouth; Thou hast had pity on the gourd, &c. Thou deplorest the loss of the gourd, and thinkest it a severe misfortune to thee, and hard that thou shouldest be deprived of it, though it was not made by thee, came up without any labour of thine, and was by its nature of a short duration: if this is the case with thee in regard to a mean, short-lived plant, think how unjustly thou judgest, when thou condemnest my mercy toward the Ninevites! How much more severe would it have been to have destroyed a whole city, in the ruin of which many innocent creatures, as children and brute animals, must necessarily have been involved; and, what is still more awful, many immortal beings have been plunged into everlasting misery! If thou supposest I ought to have spared or preserved the gourd, because it shaded thee from the heat; think how much more my essential goodness and kindness toward my creatures, the work of my hands, must incline me to spare them whenever it can be done any way consistently with my justice or the laws of my government.
E. God’s compassion for those under His judgment 4:10-11
The story now reaches its climax. God revealed to Jonah how out of harmony with His own heart the prophet, though obedient, was. He contrasted Jonah’s attitude with His own.
"In these last verses the great missionary lesson of the book is sharply drawn: Are the souls of men not worth as much as a gourd? Like Jonah, God’s people today are often more concerned about the material benefits so freely bestowed upon us by God than about the destiny of a lost world." [Note: The New Scofield . . ., p. 942.]
Compassion (Heb. hus, concern [NIV], be sorry for [NEB], pity [RSV, RV]) is the key attitude. Jonah had become completely indifferent to the fate of the Ninevites. He knew His God well (Jon 4:2). Nevertheless his appreciation for God’s love for Israel had evidently so pervaded his life that it crowded out any compassion for these people who lacked knowledge of and relationship with Yahweh. Furthermore, Jonah had announced that Israel’s borders would expand under King Jeroboam II (2Ki 14:25). To reveal his lack of compassion to him God dealt with him as any ordinary person. He exposed him to the pleasures and discomforts that everyone faces and made him see that his theology made him no more compassionate than anyone else. It should have. Knowledge of a sovereign, compassionate God whom He feared should have made Jonah more submissive to God’s will, more compassionate toward other people, and more respectful of God.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)