38<\/strong>. the beasts of the field<\/em> ] i.e. wild animals (cf. in Heb. e.g. Exo 23:11<\/span>; Exo 23:29<\/span>). These and the birds are mentioned in order to represent Nebuchadnezzar’s rule as being as absolute as possible; the former are borrowed, no doubt, from Jer 27:6<\/span>; Jer 28:14<\/span>.<\/p>\n art this<\/em> ] art<\/em> the<\/strong>. The pronoun in the Aramaic has here no demonstrative force; see Kautzsch, Gramm. des Bibl. Aram.<\/em>, 87. 3. The four parts of the image symbolize four kingdoms; but Nebuchadnezzar, both in reality and in the memory of posterity, so eclipsed all other rulers of the first monarchy, that he is identified with it as a whole.<\/p>\n And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field, and the fowls of the heavens, hath he given into thy hand – <\/B>This is evidently general language, and is not to be pressed literally. It is designed to say that he ruled over the whole world; that is, the world as then known. This is common language applied in the Scriptures to the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman kingdoms. Thus in Dan 2:39<\/span>, the third of these kingdoms, the Grecian, was to bear rule over all the earth. Compare Dan 8:5<\/span> : And, as I was considering, behold, an he-goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth. So of the Roman empire, in Dan 7:23<\/span> : The fourth beast shall devour the whole earth. The declaration that his kingdom embraced the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air is a strong expression, meaning that he reigned over the whole world. A somewhat similar description of the extent of the empire of the king of Babylon occurs in Jer 27:4-8<\/span> : And command them to say unto their masters, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Thus shall ye say unto your masters; I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power, and by my outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me. And now I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, my servant; and the beasts of the field I have given him also to serve him. And all nations shall serve him, and his son, and his sons son, until the very time of his land come: and then many nations and great kings shall serve themselves of him. And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the Lord, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand.<\/P> At the time referred to by Daniel, the scepter of Nebuchadnezzar a extended over all these realms, and the world was, in fact, placed substantially under one head. All the ancient Eastern histories, says Bishop Newton, almost are lost; but there are some fragments even of pagan historians yet preserved, which speak of this mighty conqueror and his extended empire. Berosus, in Josephus (Contra Apion, c. i. Section 19), says that he held in subjection Egypt, Syria, Phoenicia, Arabia, and by his exploits surpassed all the Chaldeans and Babylonians who reigned before him. Strabo asserts that this king among the Chaldeans was more celebrated than Hercules; that he proceeded as far as to the pillars of Hercules, and led his army out of Spain into Thrace and Pontus. But his empire, though of great extent, was not of long duration, for it ended in his grandson Belshazzar, not seventy years after the delivery of this prophecy, nor above twenty-three years after the death of Nebuchadnezzar. – Newton on the Prophecies, pp. 186, 187.<\/P> Thou art this head of gold – <\/B>The head of gold seen in the image represents thee as the sovereign of a vast empire. Compared with the other monarchs who are to succeed thee, thou art like gold compared with silver, and brass, and iron; or, compared with thy kingdom, theirs shall be as silver, brass, and iron compared with gold. It was common, at an early period, to speak of different ages of the world as resembling different metals. Compare the notes at Dan 2:31<\/span>. In reference to the expression before us, Thou art this head of gold, it should be observed, that it is not probably to be confined to the monarch himself, but is rather spoken of him as the head of the empire; as representing the state; as an impersonation of that dynasty. The meaning is, that the Babylonian empire, as it existed under him, in its relation to the kingdoms which should succeed, was like the head of gold seen in the image as compared with the inferior metals that made up the remaining portions of the image. Daniel, as an interpreter, did not state in what the resemblance consisted, nor in what respects his empire could be likened to gold as compared with those which should follow. In the scanty details which we now have of the life of that monarch, and of the events of his reign, it may not be possible to see as clearly as would be desirable in what that resemblance consisted, or the full propriety of the appellation given to him. So far as may now be seen, the resemblance appears to have been in the following things:<\/P> (I) In respect to the empire itself of which he was the sovereign, as standing at the head of the others – the first in the line. This was not indeed the first kingdom, but the design here was not to give an account of all the empires on earth, but to take the world as it was then, and to trace the successive changes which would occur preparatory to the establishment of the kingdom which should finally spread over the earth. Viewed in reference to this design, it was undoubtedly proper to designate the empire of Babylon as the head. It not only stood before them in the order of time, but in such a relation that the others might be regarded as in some sort its successors; that is, they would succeed it in swaying a general scepter over the world. In this respect they would resemble also the Babylonian. At the time here referred to, the dominion over which Nebuchadnezzar swayed his scepter was at the head of the nations; was the central power of the Pagan world; was the only empire that could claim to be universal. For a long period the kingdom of Babylon had been dependent on that of Assyria; and while Nineveh was the capital of the Assyrian empire, Babylon was the head of a kingdom, in general subordinate to that of Assyria, until Nabopolassar, the immediate predecessor of Nebuchadnezzar, rendered the kingdom of Babylon independent of the Assyrians, and transferred the seat of empire to Babylon. This was about the year 626 before the Christian era. See Universal History, vol. iii. pp. 412-415. Nebuchadnezzar, receiving this mighty kingdom, had carried his own arms to distant lands; had conquered India, Tyre, and Egypt; and, as would appear, all Northern Africa, as far as the pillars of Hercules, and, with quite unimportant exceptions, all the known world was subject to him.<\/P> (II) The appellation head of gold may have been given him on account of the splendor of his capital, and the magnificence of his court. In Isa 14:4<\/span>, Babylon is called the golden city. See the note at that place. In Isa 13:19<\/span>, it is called the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees excellency. In Isa 47:5<\/span>, it is called the lady of kingdoms. In Jer 51:13<\/span>, it is spoken of as abundant in treasures, and in Jer 51:41<\/span>, as the praise of the whole earth. So in profane writers, Babylon has similar appellations. Thus, in Aesch. Per. 51, mention is made of <\/SPAN><\/span> Babulon<\/I> he<\/I> poluchrusos<\/I> – Babylon abounding in gold. The conquests of Nebuchadnezzar enabled him to bring to his capital the spoils of nations, and to enrich his capital above any other city on the earth. Accordingly, he gave himself to the work of adorning a city that should be worthy to be the head of universal empire, and succeeded in making it so splendid as to be regarded as one of the wonders of the world. His great work in adorning and strengthening his capital consisted, first, of the building of the immense walls of the city; second, of the tower of Belus; and third, of the hanging gardens. For a full description of these, see Prideauxs Connections, vol. i. p. 232, following.<\/P> (III) The appellation may have been given him by comparison with the kingdoms which were to succeed him. In some respects – in extent and power – some one or more of them, as the Roman, might surpass his; but the appellation which was appropriate to them was not gold, but they would be best denoted by the inferior metals. Thus the Medo-Persian kingdom was less splendid than that of Babylon, and would be better represented by silver; the Macedonian, though more distinguished by its conquests, was less magnificent, and would be better represented by brass; and the Roman, though ultimately still more extensive in its conquests, and still more mighty in power, was less remarkable for splendor than strength, and would be better represented by iron. In magnificence, if not in power, the Babylonian surpassed them all; and hence, the propriety of the appellation, head of gold.<\/P> (IV) It is possible that in this appellation there then may have been some reference to the character of the monarch himself. In Jer 27:6<\/span>, he is spoken of as the servant of God, and it is clear that it was designed that a splendid mission was to be accomplished by him as under the Divine control, and in the preparation of the world for the coming of the Messiah. Though he was proud and haughty as a monarch, yet his own personal character would compare favorably with that of many who succeeded him in these advancing kingdoms. Though his conquests were numerous, yet his career as a conqueror was not marked with cruelty, like that of many other warriors. He was not a mere conqueror. He loved also the arts of peace. He sought to embellish his capital, and to make it in outward magnificence and in the talent which he concentrated there, truly the capital of the world. Even Jerusalem he did not utterly destroy; but having secured a conquest over it, and removed from it what he desired should embellish his own capital, he still intended that it should be the subordinate head of an important province of his dominions, and placed on the throne one who was closely allied to the king who reigned there when he took the city.<\/P> But the appellation here, and the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, are to be contemplated chiefly, like the kingdoms that succeeded, in their relation to redemption. It is in this aspect that the study of history becomes most interesting to a mind that regards all events as embraced in the eternal counsels of God, and it is undoubtedly with reference to this that the history of these kingdoms becomes in any way introduced into the inspired writings. All history may be contemplated under two aspects: in its secular bearing; and in its relation to the redemption of the world. In the former aspect, it has great and important uses. As furnishing lessons to statesmen; as showing the progress of society; as illustrating the effects of vice and immorality, and the evils of anarchy, ambition, and war; as recording and preserving the inventions in the arts, and as showing what are the best methods of civil government, and what conduces most to the happiness of a people, its value cannot well be overestimated.<\/P> But it is in its relations to the work of redeeming man that it acquires its chief value, and hence, the sacred volume is so much occupied with the histories of early nations. The rise and fall of every nation; the conquests and defeats which have occurred in past times, may all have had, and perhaps may yet be seen to have had, an important connection with the redemption of man – as being designed to put the world in a proper position for the coming of the Prince of Peace, or in some way to prepare the way for the final triumph of the gospel. This view gives a new and important aspect to history. It becomes an object in which all on earth who love the race and desire its redemption, and all in heaven, feel a deep concern. Every monarch; every warrior; every statesman; every man who, by his eloquence, bravery, or virtue, has contributed anything to the progress of the race, or who has in any way played an important part in the progress of the worlds affairs, becomes a being on whom we can look with intense emotion; and in reference to every man of this character, it would be an interesting inquiry what he has done that has contributed to prepare the way for the introduction of the Mediatorial scheme, or to facilitate its progress through the world. In reference to this point, the monarch whose character is now before us seems to have been raised up, under an overruling Providence, to accomplish the following things:<\/P> (1) To inflict punishment on the revolted people of God for their numerous idolatries. See the book of Jeremiah, passim. Hence, he led his armies to the land of Palestine; he swept away the people, and bore them into captivity; he burned the temple, destroyed the capital, and laid the land waste.<\/P> (2) He was the instrument, in the hand of God, of effectually purifying the Jewish nation from the sin of idolatry. It was for that sin eminently that they were carried away; and never in this world have the ends of punishment been better secured than in this instance. The chastisement was effectual. The Jewish nation has never since sunk into idolatry. If there have been individuals of that nation – of which, however, there is no certain evidence – who have become idolaters, yet as a people they have been preserved from it. More than two thousand five hundred years have since passed away; they have been wanderers and exiles in all lands; they have been persecuted, ridiculed, and oppressed on account of their religion; they have been placed under every possible inducement to conform to the religion around them, and yet, as professed worshippers of Jehovah, the God of their fathers, they have maintained their integrity, and neither promises nor threatenings, neither hopes nor fears, neither life nor death, have been sufficient to constrain the Hebrew people to bow the knee to an idol god.<\/P> (3) Another object that seems to have been designed to be accomplished by Nebuchadnezzar in relation to Redemption was to gather the nations under one head preparatory to the coming of the Messiah. It will be seen in the remarks which will be made on the relation of the Roman empire to this work (see the notes at Dan 2:40-43<\/span>), that there were important reasons why this should be done. Preparatory to that, a succession of such kingdoms each swayed the scepter over the whole world, and when the Messiah came, the way was prepared for the easy and rapid propagation of the new religion to the remotest parts of the earth.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 38. Thou<\/B><\/I> art <\/B>this head of gold<\/B><\/I>] See on Da 2:31-34<\/span>, and at the end. See Clarke on Da 2:49<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n Hath made thee ruler over them all, <\/B>i.e. hath given thee absolute dominion of all creatures, men and beasts, within the bounds of thy vast kingdom, to hunt, catch, or kill far thy use and pleasure. God as Lord paramount allows thee, his vassal and tenant at will, all this. This was not universal over all the world, but only within his large territories, which yet were bounded. <\/P> Thou art this head of gold.<\/B> <\/P> 1. Why head? Because he was first in order, as the head is before the other parts, and the vision began in him, and descended downwards to the other three monarchies. <\/P> 2. Why head of gold? Because of the vast riches wherein it abounded, and which the Chaldeans most coveted, and scraped from the spoils and tributes of all countries, Isa 10:13<\/span>,14<\/span>; Jer 51:41<\/span>,44<\/span>. Also this is called the golden head, because it stood longest, five hundred years, and was fortunate and flourishing to the last. <\/P> <\/p>\n 38. men . . . beasts . . . fowls<\/B>thedominion originally designed for man (Gen 1:28<\/span>;Gen 2:19<\/span>; Gen 2:20<\/span>),forfeited by sin; temporarily delegated to Nebuchadnezzar and theworld powers; but, as they abuse the trust for self, instead of forGod, to be taken from them by the Son of man, who will exercise itfor God, restoring in His person to man the lost inheritance (Ps8:4-6<\/span>). <\/P> Thou art . . . head ofgold<\/B>alluding to the riches of Babylon, hence called “thegolden city” (Isa 14:4<\/span>;Jer 51:7<\/span>; Rev 18:16<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n And wheresoever the children of men dwell<\/strong>,…. Not in every part of the habitable world, but in every part of his large dominion inhabited by men:<\/p>\n the beasts of the field, and the fowls of the heaven, hath he given into thine hand<\/strong>; all parks, chases, and forests (so that none might hunt or hawk without his permission), as well as the persons and habitations of men, were at his dispose; showing the despotic power and sovereign sway he had over his subjects:<\/p>\n and hath made thee ruler over all<\/strong>: men, beasts, and fowl: he not only conquered the Egyptians, Tyrians, and Jews, and other nations about them; but, according to Megasthenes l he exceeded Hercules in strength, and conquered Lybia and Iberia, and carried colonies of them into Pontus; and, as Strabo m says, carried his arms as far as the pillars of Hercules:<\/p>\n thou art this head of gold<\/strong>; or who was represented by the golden head of the image he had seen in his dream; not he personally only, but his successors Evilmerodach and Belshazzar, and the Babylonish monarchy, as possessed by them; for this refers not back to the Assyrian monarchy, from the time of Nimrod, but to its more flourishing condition in Nebuchadnezzar and his sons; called a “head”, because the first of the monarchies; and golden, in comparison of other kingdoms then in being, and because of the riches of it, which the Babylonians were covetous of; hence Babylon is called the golden city, Isa 14:4<\/span> and it may be, because not so wicked and cruel to the Jews as the later monarchies were: from hence the poets have been thought by some to have taken their notion of the golden, silver, and iron ages, as growing worse and worse; but this distinction is observed by Hesiod, who lived many years before this vision was seen.<\/p>\n l Apud Euseb. Prepar. Evangel. l. 9. c. 41. p. 456. m Geograp. I. 15. p. 472.<\/p>\n Daniel here declares “ the golden head of the image “ to be the Babylonian kingdom. We know that the Assyrians were subdued before the monarchy was transferred to Babylon; but since they did not prevail sufficiently to be considered as supreme rulers in that eastern territory, the Babylonian empire is here mentioned first. It is also worthwhile to remark, that God was unwilling to refer here to what had already occurred, but he rather proposed that the people should in future depend on this prophecy and rest upon it. Here it would have been superfluous to say anything about the Assyrians, since that empire had already passed away. But the Chaldeans were still to reign for some time — say seventy or at least sixty years. Hence God wished to hold the minds of his own servants in suspense till the end of that monarchy, and then to arouse them by fresh hopes, until the second monarchy should pass away, so that afterwards they might rest in patience under the third and fourth monarchies, and might perceive at length the time of Christ’s advent to be at hand. This is the reason why Daniel places the Chaldean monarchy here in the first rank and order. And in this matter there is no difficulty, because he states King Nebuchadnezzar to be the golden head of the image. We may gather the reason of his being called the golden head from the context, namely, because its integrity was then greater than under the empire of the Medes and Persians. It is very true that the Chaldeans were the most cruel robbers, and we know how Babylon was then detested by all the pious and sincere worshippers of God. Still, since things usually become worse by process of time, the state of the world was; as yet tolerable under that sovereignty. This is the reason why Nebuchadnezzar is called “the head of gold;” but this ought not to be referred to him personally, but rather extended to his whole kingdom, and all his successors, among whom Belshazzar was the most hateful despiser of God; and by comprehension he is said to form part of this head of gold. But Daniel shews that he did not flatter the king, since he assigns this reason for Nebuchadnezzar being the golden head — God had set him up above all the earth. But this seems to be common to all kings, since none of them reign without God’s permission — a sentiment which is partially true, but the Prophet implies that Nebuchadnezzar was raised up in an especial manner, because he excelled all other sovereigns. It now follows — <\/p>\n Dan 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou [art] this head of gold.<\/p>\n Ver. 38. Thou art this head of gold.<\/strong> ] A “head” the Babylonian monarchy is called, because it was the first of the four; and “of gold,” because administered with great wisdom, fortitude, justice, and other heroic virtues, because of the glory also and greatness of it in all manner of magnificence. See Isa 13:19<\/span> ; Isa 14:11 Jer 27:6<\/span> . Megasthenes and Strabo a<\/em> say, that Nebuchadnezzar was the mightiest of all kings, and held of the Chaldeans to have exceeded Hercules in courage. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Lib. xv., Geog.<\/p>\n children = sons. <\/p>\n hath He given. According to His word (Jer 27:6, Jer 27:7; Jer 28:14, &c. Compare Dan 1:2 and Eze 26:7. <\/p>\n Thou. Nebuchadnezzar. <\/p>\n art = art represented by. Figure of speech Metaphor. App-6. <\/p>\n head: i.e. the first of these five kingdoms, not the first king of Babylon. See note on Dan 2:37. <\/p>\n of. Genitive of Material. App-17. <\/p>\n Dan 2:38<\/p>\n Dan 2:38 And wheresoeverH3606 H1768 the childrenH1123 of menH606 dwell,H1753 the beastsH2423 of the fieldH1251 and the fowlsH5776 of the heavenH8065 hath he givenH3052 into thine hand,H3028 and hath made thee rulerH7981 over them all.H3606 ThouH607 art thisH1932 headH7217 ofH1768 gold.H1722 <\/p>\n Dan 2:38<\/p>\n “And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.”<\/p>\n Nebuchadnezzar did not actually rule every part of the globe. However God granted him vast domination in whatever direction his ambition led him, Egypt, Nineveh, Arabia, Syria, Tyre, and its Phoenician colonies. Starting at the head of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, he was represented as the head of gold. The Babylonian Empire did not last long as compared to some of the other empires in history, but it certainly was one of the most glorious and powerful. Nebuchadnezzar was certainly one of the post powerful gentile kings who ever lived. <\/p>\n The designation “Thou art this head of gold”, does not refer to his person, but to the world-kingdom founded by him and represented in his person, having all things placed under his control by God. The kingdoms in view here in this vision are not small nations, rather they are world powers which dominated vast regions of the known world at the time. None of these world kingdoms extended over all of the whole earth, but they did encompass the majority of the historical nations of their time. Babylon, being the head of the figure in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream established the pattern by which the following world kingdoms would be recognized. We should bear in mind here that what Daniel’s explanation of the dream meant to Nebuchadnezzar is what it must mean to us as well. In Nebuchadnezzar’s mind, the kingdoms following after him would be similar to the one he reigned over. They would be an empire of many smaller nations in service and under the authority of one mighty one. <\/p>\n wheresoever the children <\/p>\n This is universal dominion. It was never fully realized, but power was given for it. <\/p>\n the beasts: Dan 4:21, Dan 4:22, Psa 50:10, Psa 50:11, Jer 27:5-7 <\/p>\n Thou art: The Chaldean monarchy, over which Nebuchadnezzar was the only king of note; in whose time it extended over Chaldea, Assyria, Arabia, Syria, Egypt, and Libya: the head of gold represented its immense riches. Dan 2:32 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Deu 2:24 – behold Jos 8:1 – I have 2Ki 18:24 – How then Ezr 1:2 – hath given Son 5:11 – head Isa 13:19 – Babylon Isa 14:4 – golden city Isa 47:5 – for Jer 5:15 – a mighty Jer 27:6 – I given all Jer 28:14 – and I Jer 34:1 – all the kingdoms Jer 51:7 – a golden Jer 51:41 – the praise Eze 17:3 – great wings Eze 28:14 – and I Eze 31:9 – made Dan 1:2 – the Lord Dan 5:18 – the most Dan 11:11 – the multitude Zec 6:1 – four Mat 4:9 – I give Luk 22:19 – is my 1Co 10:4 – that Rock Rev 6:4 – power<\/p>\n Dan 2:38, Wheresoever . . . men dwell is what justifies the term “world power” that has been ascribed to Nebuchadnezzar and his dominions. Beasts . . . fowls . . . into thine )Mnd. It helps to arrive at the meaning of a statement to learn first what it does not mean, especially if some explanation has previously been offered that may be incorrect. A popular theory is that when man sinned, God deprived him o his dominion over the beasts of the field that was given him in Genesis 3: 28, and that it was renewed on behalf of this king. But such a theory is disproved by Gen 9:2 where the same dominion is given to man which was after the “fall of man. Also, Jas 3:7 declares that “every kind of beasts . . . and serpents . . , is tamed of mankind,’ and that was in the days of the writer, many centuries after the sin of Adam. So by the process of elimination, the theory mentioned must be rejected which will require us to look for another explanation. The reasonable conclusion is that while God gave man the right to rule over the beasts and birds, the e.afe of that power was not Specified. Hence our verse means that Nebuchadnezzar was given that dominion to a complete degree. It is an indication of the complete cooperation that this heathen king enjoyed with the many units of his vast domain. Thou art this head of gold Includes Nebuchadnezzar and his kingdom, for when Daniel goes on to the next division of the image he says “another kingdom, which shows that an absolute monarch and his dominions are one unit.<\/p>\n 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou [art] {r} this head of gold.<\/p>\n (r) Daniel leaves out the kingdom of the Assyrians, which was before the Babylonian, both because it was not a monarchy and general empire, and also because he would declare the things that were to come, until the coming of Christ, for the comfort of the elect among these wonderful alterations. And he calls the Babylonian kingdom the golden head, because in respect of the other three, it was the best, and yet it was of itself wicked and cruel.<\/p>\n And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou [art] this head of gold. 38. the beasts of the field ] i.e. wild animals (cf. in Heb. e.g. Exo 23:11; Exo … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 2:38”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-21807","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21807","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21807"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21807\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21807"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21807"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21807"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"