27<\/strong>. And<\/em> as for the two<\/strong> kings, their heart<\/em> (shall be) for<\/strong> mischief; and<\/em> at one table they shall speak lies<\/strong> ] Antiochus and Philometor, after the latter had fallen into his uncle’s hands, were outwardly on friendly terms with one another; but their friendship was insincere, as is expressively shewn by the picture which the writer’s words suggest: sitting and eating at one table<\/em>, they both in fact spoke lies<\/em>, Antiochus, in professing disinterestedness, as though his only object were to gain Egypt for his nephew’s benefit, ( cui regnum quaeri suis viribus simulabat<\/em>, Livy xlv.11), and Philometor in feigning that he believed his uncle’s assurances, and cherished for him gratitude and regard.<\/p>\n but it shall not prosper<\/em> ] The common plan, on which they were supposed to be agreed, the conquest of Egypt, ostensibly for Philometor, in reality for Antiochus.<\/p>\n for the end<\/em> (remaineth) yet<\/em> for<\/strong> the time appointed<\/em> ] matters will not yet be settled in Egypt: the end of Antiochus’ doings there belongs still to a time fixed in the future.<\/p>\n It must be admitted that some of the references in Dan 11:25-27<\/em><\/span> (esp. in Dan 11:27<\/em><\/span>) would be more pointed and significant, if they could be supposed to allude to events in the second<\/em> Egyptian campaign of Antiochus, as well as to events in the first<\/em>. Upon the chronology adopted above (which is that of most modern historians), this can only be, if the author, neglecting the strict chronological sequence, throws the first two Egyptian campaigns together, and then ( Dan 11:28<\/em><\/span>) proceeds to describe the attack upon Jerusalem. We do not, however, possess any continuous narrative of the events of Antiochus’ reign; nor does there seem to be any express statement that Antiochus returned<\/em> to Syria, or even that he left Egypt, at the close of what is described above as his ‘first’ Egyptian expedition; hence it is possible that Mahaffy [380] is right in his contention that Antiochus’ first two campaigns (as they are commonly called) were in reality only two stages in one campaign the first stage ending at Pelusium, and the second embracing the conquest of Egypt, and both belonging to the year b.c. 170. If this view be adopted, the attack upon Jerusalem ( Dan 11:28<\/em><\/span>; 1Ma 1:20-24 ) will come at the end of what is called above the ‘second’ Egyptian expedition (but thrown back now to b.c. 170) [381] , and both that and the ‘first’ Egyptian expedition will be summarized in Dan 11:25-28<\/em><\/span> and 1Ma 1:16-19 .<\/p>\n [380] Empire of the Ptolemies<\/em>, p. 494 f., cf. pp. 333 337, 340. So Wellhausen, Isr. und Jd. Gesch.<\/em> (1894), p. 203 n.<\/em> (ed. 3, 1897, p. 246 n.<\/em>).<\/p>\n [381] An interval of two years between this attack upon Jerusalem, and the persecuting edict of b.c. 168 is required by the dates in 1Ma 1:20 and 1Ma 1:29 ; 1Ma 1:54 .<\/p>\n And both these kings hearts shall be to do mischief – <\/B>Margin, their hearts. The meaning is, that their hearts were set on some evil or unjust purpose. The reference here is, evidently, to Antiochus and Ptolemy Philometor, and the time alluded to is when Ptolemy was in the possession of Antiochus, and when they were together forming their plans. Antiochus invaded the country under pretenee of aiding Ptolemy and establishing him in the government, and for the same reason, under pretence of protecting him, he had him now in his possession. At first. also, it would seem that Ptolemy coincided with his plans, or was so far deceived by the acts of Antiochus as to believe in his friendship, and to unite with him in his schemes, for it is expressly said by the historians, as quoted above, that when Antiochus left Egypt, leaving Ptolemy at Memphis, and a strong garrison in Pelusium, Ptolemy began to see through his crafty designs, and to act accordingly. Until that time, however, he seems to have re garded the professions of Antiochus as sincere, and to have entered fully into his plans. To that fact there is allusion here; and the meaning is, that they were forming united schemes of evil – of conquests, and robbery, and oppression. The guiding spirit in this was undoubtedly Antiochus, but Ptolemy seems to have concurred in it.<\/P> And they shall speak lies at one table – <\/B>At the same table. Ptolemy was a captive, and was entirely in the possession of Antiochus, but it was a matter of policy with the latter to hide from him as far as poossible the fact that he was a prisoner, and to treat him as a king. It is to be presumed, therefore, that he would do so, and that they would be seated at the same table; that is, that Ptolemy would be treated outwardly with the respect due to a king. In this familiar condition – in this state of apparently respectful and confidential intercourse – they would form their plans. Yet the devices of both would be false – or would be, in fact, speak ing lies. Antiochus would be acting perfidiously throughout, endeavoring to impose on Ptolemy, and making promises, and giving assurances, which he knew to be false; and Ptolemy would be equally acting a deceitful part – entering into engagements which, perhaps, he did not intend to keep, and which would, at any rate, be soon violated. It is impossible now to know how he came into the hands of Antiochus – whether he surrendered himself in war; or whether he was persuaded to do it by the arts of his courtiers; or whether he was really deceived by Antiochus and supposed that he was his friend, and that his protection was necessary. On any of these suppositions it cannot be supposed that he would be very likely to be sincere in his transactions with Antiochus.<\/P> But it shall not prosper – <\/B>The scheme con cocted, whatever it was, would not be successful. The plan of Antiochus was to obtain possession of the whole of Egypt, but in this he failed; and so far as Ptolemy entered into the scheme proposed by Antiochus, on pretence for the good of his country, it also failed. Whatever the purpose was, it was soon broken up by the fact that Antiochus left Egypt, and made war on Jerusalem.<\/P> For yet the end shall be at the time appointed – <\/B>See Dan 11:29<\/span>. The end – the result – shall not be now, and in the manner contemplated by these two kings. It shall be at the time appointed, to wit, by God, and in another manner. The whole case shall issue differently from what they design, and at the time which an over ruling Providence has designated. The reason implied here why they could not carry out their design was, that there was an appointed time when these affairs were to be determined, and that no purposes of theirs could be allowed to frustrate the higher counsels of the Most High.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 27. And both these kings’ hearts<\/B><\/I> shall be <\/B>to do mischief<\/B><\/I>] That is, Antiochus<\/I>, and Ptolemy Philometer<\/I>, who was nephew to the former, and whose interest he now pretended to have much at heart, since the Alexandrians had renounced their allegiance to him, and set his younger brother Euergetes<\/I> upon the throne. When Antiochus came to Memphis, he and Philometer had frequent conferences at the same table<\/I>; and at these times they spoke lies<\/I> to each other, Antiochus professing great friendship to his nephew and concern for his interests, yet in his heart designing to ruin the kingdom by fomenting the discords which already subsisted between the two brothers. On the other hand, Philometer professed much gratitude to his uncle for the interest he took in his affairs, and laid the blame of the war upon his minister Eulaeus; while at the same time he spoke lies<\/I>, determining as soon as possible to accommodate matters with his brother, and join all their strength against their deceitful uncle.<\/P> <\/P> But it shall not prosper<\/B><\/I>] Neither succeeded in his object; for the end<\/I> of the appointed time<\/I> was not yet come.<\/P> <\/p>\n They shall speak lies at one table; they shall meet under pretence of peace, but with treacherous intents on both sides; they both played the gipsies with each other at Memphis, where Ptolemy invited Antiochus to a feast. These interviews of neighbour kings jealous one of another have ever proved fatal, though under the smoothest pro. raises. <\/P> But it shall not prosper; for neither shall Antiochus gain Egypt by all his artifice, nor Ptolemy Syria. <\/P> At the time appointed, viz. by the Lord, whose purpose and counsel shall stand, whatever the devices of mens hearts are. <\/P> <\/p>\n 27. both . . . to do mischief<\/B>eachto the other. <\/P> speak lies at one table<\/B>Theyshall, under the semblance of intimacy, at Memphis try to deceive oneanother (see on Da 11:3<\/span>; Da11:25<\/span>). <\/P> it shall not prosper<\/B>Neitherof them shall carry his point at this time. <\/P> yet the end shall be<\/B>“theend” of the contest between them is reserved for “the timeappointed” (Dan 11:29<\/span>;Dan 11:30<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief<\/strong>,…. Antiochus Epiphanes, king of Syria, and Ptolemy Philometor, king of Egypt, the latter being now in the hands of the former; whether he was taken by him, or voluntarily came to him, is not certain; but though they seemed to carry it very friendly to one another, yet at the same time they were contriving in their minds to do as much mischief to each other as they could:<\/p>\n and they shall speak lies at one table<\/strong>: at an entertainment at Memphis, where they met to eat food together, which shows great familiarity; or at the council table, where they pretended to consult each other’s good, and to secure the peace of both kingdoms, but imposed on each other with lies. Antiochus pretended a great respect for Ptolemy, and that he had nothing more at heart than to take care of his affairs, and defend him against his brother Euergetes, whom the Alexandrians had set up for king; when his design was no other than to seize the kingdom of Egypt for himself: on the other hand, Ptolemy seemed greatly satisfied with his uncle’s protection, and to place great confidence in him; when his view was to disappoint his scheme, and come to an agreement with his brother; neither of them meant what they said:<\/p>\n but it shall not prosper<\/strong>; the consultations they held, the schemes they laid, succeeded not; the peace made between them did not last:<\/p>\n for yet the end shall be at the time appointed<\/strong>; by the Lord, by whom all events are predetermined; whose counsel shall stand, notwithstanding all the devices in the hearts of men, and of kings themselves: the end of this peace between these two kings, and the end of the wars between them, yea, the end of the two kingdoms, when they should cease, and come into other hands; all was fixed to a time appointed of God, and should surely come to pass, as he had decreed.<\/p>\n The angel here narrates that the close of this war should be by treaties and a hollow pretense of peace after the slaughter which Ptolemy had sustained. Although Antiochus might have followed up his own good fortune, yet he durst not venture to push his advantage to the extremity, but according to his disposition, he thought it more to his interest to make peace with his enemy. We have already alluded to his craftiness and his want of openness and integrity. The angel predicts the existence of bad faith in both these kings; the uncle and nephew will meet, says he, and sup together, and pretend the greatest friendship, but they shall speak lies, says he, at the same table; meaning, they shall plot against each other, and each shall act fraudulently for his own ends. This prophecy indeed seems to be of little consequence to the faithful; but it was needful to shew that in such a state of confusion they could not hold out without being furnished with all kinds of support. If the angel had only said generally, first there shall be war, and then a temporary peace, this would not have been sufficient to sustain the minds of the pious; but when the details are so clearly pointed out, a remarkable confirmation is afforded them. Thus the faithful have no reason for doubting that God has spoken, when the angel predicts the future so exactly, and so openly narrates it, as if a matter of history. <\/p>\n He next adds, Yet it shall not prosper, because the end is for the time, says he. The angel recalls the faithful to the providence of God, as our minds always naturally rest in the midst of earthly things. We apprehend with our minds only as far as we see with our eyes. We always ask the reasons “why this happens” and “why that course of proceeding has not turned out well,” entirely omitting the will of God. Hence the angel meets this fault and stupidity of men by saying, that whatever these kings were plotting should fail of success, since the end was for the time; meaning, God would hold many occurrences in suspense. While, therefore, we are considering only second causes, we perceive how the supreme power resides with God alone, and he governs by his will the mutual transactions of mankind. No slight advantage would result to the faithful from this instruction, because, while kings are devising many schemes, and using great cunning and all the perverse artifices of diplomacy, God still restrains their minds. He holds events by his secret bridle, and allows nothing to happen without his heavenly decree. Although we may gather this general instruction from this passage, yet the angel doubtless restricts what I have said to the historical events immediately before us. The end had not yet approached, yet the fitting time was fixed beforehand by God’s secret counsel, so that Antiochus conquers at one period and retreats at another, as we shall see. It follows: — <\/p>\n (27) Both these kings.<\/strong>The two rival kings are here described as living upon terms of outward friendship, while each is inwardly trying to outwit the other. The context is opposed to any reference to the combination of Antiochus and Philometor against Physcon (see Livy, xlv. 11; Polyb. xxix. 8). The object of the paragraph is to show that the southern king was attempting to fight his rival with his own weaponsviz., deceitbut the plots of each king fail.<\/p>\n For yet<\/strong> . . .i.e.,<\/em> the end of each will come only at the time definitely ordained by God for the consummation of His kingdom (Dan. 11:35<\/span>). Man cannot hasten the events decreed by Gods providence. For an interesting commentary, read Isa. 18:4-6<\/span>.<\/p>\n 27<\/strong>. <\/strong> They shall speak lies at one table <\/strong> After the Egyptians who had plotted against Philometer had placed Physton, his brother, on the throne Antiochus changed front with regard to his captive and joined hands with him in a plan to snatch the Egyptian scepter from the usurper. That they both lied to each other in their professions of mutual trust and pledges of future help there can be no doubt. But how vivid is this description! It sounds as if the writer had been sitting at the table with them taking notes. <\/p>\n Yet the end shall be at the time appointed <\/strong> The heavenly powers rule and overrule, notwithstanding the plots of earthly kings. (See note Dan 10:21<\/span>.) No shrewdness on the part of Antiochus can avert the divine decree.<\/p>\n ‘And as for both these kings, their hearts will be to do mischief, and they will speak lies at one table. But it will not prosper, for yet the end will be at the time appointed.’<\/p>\n Ptolemy now turned to Antiochus who offered him assistance against his rival, even though that rivalry was partly fostered by Antiochus, and he met with Antiochus who professed to be willing to help him, although only for his own ends. They met in ‘friendship’, eating food together, a sign of commitment and integrity. But in fact both were equally dishonest, both acting only for their own ends, and with no intention of benefiting the other. (Ptolemy had learned quickly). But whatever their plans were, they would fail. The time of Antiochus’ end was already appointed by God, and nothing could delay it.<\/p>\n Dan 11:27<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Both these kings’ hearts, <\/em><\/strong>&c.<\/strong> After Antiochus was come to Memphis, he and Philometor frequently ate and conversed together at one table; <\/em>but, notwithstanding, their hearts <\/em>were really bent to do mischief, <\/em>and they spoke lies <\/em>the one to the other. Antiochus pretended to take care of his nephew’s interest, and promised to restore him to the crown, at the same time that he was plotting his ruin, and contriving to weaken the two brothers in a war against each other. On the contrary, Philometor laid the blame of the war upon his governor Eulaeus, and professed great obligations to his uncle; at the same time that he resolved, on the first opportunity, to break the league, and be reconciled to his brother. Accordingly, as soon as Antiochus was withdrawn, he made proposals of accommodation; and by the mediation of their sister Cleopatra a peace was made between them, and they agreed to reign jointly in Egypt and Alexandria. But still these artifices did not prosper <\/em>on either side; for neither did Antiochus obtain the kingdom, nor did Philometor utterly exclude him, as each intended; for these wars were not to have an end <\/em>till the time appointed, <\/em>which was not yet come. See Newton. <\/p>\n Dan 11:27 And both these kings’ hearts [shall be] to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end [shall be] at the time appointed.<\/p>\n Ver. 27. And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief.] Philometor being beaten, shall seek agreement, give great gifts to Antiochus, and feast him, sed reconciliatione vulpina,<\/em> but with a fox-like and feigned amity, each of them still retaining their ancient hatreds. “Burning lips and a wicked heart are like a potsherd covered with silver dross.” Pro 26:23 <\/p>\n <\/p>\n And they shall speak lies.<\/strong> ] This is ordinary with the wicked; Psa 62:9 but it is the property of the godly man to “speak the truth from his heart.” Psa 15:2 <\/p>\n <\/p>\n For yet the end shall be at the time appointed,<\/strong> ] i.e., <\/em> The end of those wars shall be at the time when God seeth good, and hath pre-determined it.<\/p>\n And both these kings hearts, &c. = Now, as to the two kings, their hearts [will be set] to do, &c. <\/p>\n mischief = evil. Hebrew. ra’a’. <\/p>\n yet the end, &c. Intimating that these things belong to the closing scenes. Compare Dan 11:35 and Dan 11:40. <\/p>\n Dan 11:27<\/p>\n Dan 11:27 And bothH8147 these kings’H4428 heartsH3824 shall be to do mischief,H4827 and they shall speakH1696 liesH3577 atH5921 oneH259 table;H7979 but it shall notH3808 prosper:H6743 forH3588 yetH5750 the endH7093 shall be at the time appointed.H4150 <\/p>\n Dan 11:27<\/p>\n “And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed.”<\/p>\n Antiochus IV was a master of deception, speaking one thing and doing another whenever it suited his purpose. Both kings knew they couldn’t trust one another. Antiochus IV set Ptolemy VI up as his vassal sub-king of Egypt against his younger brother Ptolemy VIII who had gained a political following. Antiochus IV intended to entirely subjugate Egypt while Ptolemy VI, being fully well aware of this, was willing to agree to anything at this point to save his own skin and gain the time to maneuver himself into a position in hopes of prevailing against his uncle, Antiochus IV at a later time. <\/p>\n “but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed.”<\/p>\n Each ruler had their own agenda but neither of them succeeded. Although the political ambitions intrigues, deals, concessions and lies were exchanged between these two powers their respective demise and passing were subject to the wishes of almighty God. It is important to note here that Daniel’s vision reveals, as is done in other places, that God is directing these affairs. God has set the appointed time for these things to take place. God is in complete control of these events and using them to bring about the fulfillment of his divine purpose for man on earth. <\/p>\n The Jews are destined for immense suffering at this time and it is on the horizon and fast approaching. God is using Antiochus IV and Ptolemy VI as instruments to enable and facilitate his plans for the Jews. Neither Antiochus IV nor Ptolemy VI had any idea they were but pawns being used in the plans of the Almighty God. Their end and the end of all their plans was already appointed at a certain time and was inevitable.<\/p>\n hearts: Heb. their hearts <\/p>\n shall be to: 2Sa 13:26, Psa 12:2, Psa 52:1, Psa 58:2, Psa 64:6, Pro 12:20, Pro 23:6-8, Pro 26:23 <\/p>\n speak lies: Psa 62:9, Jer 9:3-5, Jer 41:1-3 <\/p>\n but: Pro 19:21, Eze 17:9 <\/p>\n yet: Dan 11:29, Dan 11:35, Dan 11:40, Dan 8:19, Dan 10:1, Hab 2:3, Act 1:7, Act 17:31, 1Th 5:1 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: 1Ki 20:7 – seeketh mischief Neh 6:8 – thou feignest Psa 41:6 – speaketh Pro 23:7 – Eat Dan 7:28 – the end Zec 9:8 – because of him that passeth by Act 17:26 – hath determined Tit 1:3 – in<\/p>\n Dan 11:27. The first sentence of verse 28 should be included in this paragraph, for the historical quotation that will be made includes it. Both these kings means Philometor and Epiphanes. They both put on a show of friendliness, even eating at the same table which was one of the strongest indications of friendship in ancient times. But all the time they were chatting In a goodnatured manner at the table, Epiphanes was plotting the ruin of Phiiometor, The latter actually suspected the treachery of Epiphanes, but pretended not to see anything wrong; thus they did speak lies at one table. Nothing decisive was accomplished and Epiphanes returned to his own land, having only the consolation of obtaining some great possessions of personal property, 1 shall give the reader some history, showing the fulfillment of this prophecy.<\/p>\n The third expedition of Antiochus could scarcely be pointed out more clearly (in Dan 11:27-28). That prince, hearing that the Alexandrians had raised Euergetes to the throne, returned to Egypt upon the specious Pretence of restoring Phiiometor, After having overcome the Alexandrians in a sea fight at Pelusium, he laid siege to Alexandria, But. finding the inhabitants made a strong opposition, he was contented with making himself master of Egypt again, in the name of his nephew, in whose defence he pretended to have drawn the sword. They were then at Memphis, ate at the same table, and behaved towards one another with all the outward marks of a sincere friendship. The uncle seemed to have the nephews interest at heart, and the nephew to repose the highest confidence in his uncle; but all this was mere show, both dissembling (acting hypocritically] their real sentiments. The uncle endeavored to crush his nephew, and the nephew, who saw through his design, strove immediately to be reconciled to his brother. Thus neither succeeded in deceiving the other; nothing was yet determined, and Antiochus returned into Syria.”- Rollin, Volume 4, page 239.<\/p>\n “Antiochus, on hearing of this [the raising of Euergetes to the throne of Egypt] laid hold of the occasion for his making a third expedition into Egypt, under pretence of restoring the deposed king, but in reality to subject the whole kingdom to himself. Ptolemy Euergetes and Cleopatra his sister, who were then shut up in the town, being hereby much distressed, Bent ambassadors to the Romans to represent their case, and pray relief. And, a little after there came ambassadors from the Rhodians, to endeavor to make peace between the two kings. But while they were proceeding in long harangues on these topics, Antiochus interrupted them, and in a few words told them that there was no need of long orations as to this matter; that the kingdom belonged to<\/p>\n Phiiometor the elder brother, with whom he had some time since made peace, and was now in perfect friendship vnth Mm; that, if they would recall him from banishmeut, and again restore him to his crown, the war would be at an end. This said he, not that he intended any such thing, but only out of craft farther to embroil the kingdom, for the better obtaining of his own ends upon It, .. , And, with this view having withdrawn from Alexandria, he marched to Memphis, and there seemingly again restored the whole kingdom to Phiiometor, excepting only Pelusium, which he retained in his hands, that, having the key of Egypt still in his keeping, he might thereby again enter Egypt, when matters should there, according to the scheme which he had laid, be ripe for it, and so seise the whole kingdom; and, having thus disposed matters, he returned again to Antioch.”-Frideaux, 169.<\/p>\n Dan 11:27. And both these kings hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table Antiochus and Ptolemy Philometor often met together at Memphis, and frequently ate at the same table as friends, Antiochus pretending to take care of the interests of his nephew Philometor, especially after the Alexandrians had proclaimed his brother Euergetes king; and Philometor seemingly confiding in his uncles protection. But herein they were both insincere, designing to impose upon each other; Antiochuss design being to seize the kingdom of Egypt to himself, and Philometors to disappoint that design, by coming to an agreement with Euergetes and the Alexandrians. But still these artifices did not prosper on either side; for neither did Antiochus obtain the kingdom, nor did Philometor utterly exclude him; but at last the pretended friendship broke out into open wars, which were not to have an end till the time appointed, which was not yet come.<\/p>\n Dan 11:27. they shall speak lies: after the defeat of their king, the Alexandrians raised his brother Ptolemy Physcon to the throne, whereupon Antiochus pretended to take Ptolemy Philometor under his protection.<\/p>\n 11:27 And both these kings’ hearts [shall be] to do {e} mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for {f} yet the end [shall be] at the time appointed.<\/p>\n (e) The uncle and the nephew will make truce, and banquet together, yet in their hearts they will imagine mischief against one another.<\/p>\n (f) Signifying that it depends not on the counsel of men to bring things to pass, but on the providence of God, who rules the kings by a secret bridle, so that they cannot do what they themselves wish.<\/p>\n This battle was successful in part because Antiochus claimed to be fighting for Ptolemy against a usurper within Egypt. When the battle was over, Antiochus and Ptolemy sat down together at a banquet, pretending to want peace. Actually, each king was trying to make the most of the situation for his own advantage.<\/p>\n And both these kings’ hearts [shall be] to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end [shall be] at the time appointed. 27. And as for the two kings, their heart (shall be) for mischief; and at one table they shall speak lies ] … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 11:27”<\/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-22074","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22074","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=22074"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22074\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22074"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22074"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22074"}],"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: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/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: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"