11<\/strong>. Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment<\/em> ] The same two participles are again combined in Deu 28:33<\/span>, and, as here, in connexion with invasion, ‘thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed alway’ (so Auth. Vers.). The judgment meant is God’s. The idea was so familiar that a more distinct form of expression was unnecessary. The Hebrews and the other Semitic peoples regarded war as a kind of pleading before a judge; comp. for the latter, the Syriac khayeb<\/em> ‘damnavit, vicit’, and for the former Isa 54:17<\/span>, where ‘weapon’ is parallel to ‘tongue that riseth against thee’). Compare Schiller’s Die Weltgeschichte ist das Weltgericht<\/em>. Somewhat less probable is the rendering ‘crushed as to (his) right’, i.e. his right of national independence.<\/p>\n he willingly walked after the commandment<\/em> ] ‘The commandment’ (or, ‘ordinance’) is generally explained of the arbitrary calf-worship (rather bull-worship) set up by Jeroboam I., but as the word only occurs once again in the stammering speech of the drunkards (Isa 28:10<\/span>), it seems more than probable that we should adopt the reading of Septuagint and Peshito, and render the whole clause, he would go after vanity<\/strong> (i.e. after idols, as Jer 18:15<\/span>; Psa 31:6<\/span>). With this reading, too, we can account for the fact that the noun has no article. Archbishop Seeker well points out that the two initial letters of the next word in the Hebrew are such as help to account for the scribe’s supposed error.<\/p>\n Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment – <\/B>Literally, crushed in judgment. Holy Scripture, elsewhere also, combines these same two words, rendered oppressed and crushed, in speaking of mans oppression by man. Ephraim preferred mans commands and laws to Gods; they obeyed man and set God at nought; therefore they should suffer at mans hands, who, while he equally neglected Gods will, enforced his own. The commandment, which Ephraim willingly went after, was doubtless that of Jeroboam; It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem; behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought you out of the land of Egypt; and Jeroboam ordained a feast unto the children of Israel 1Ki 12:28<\/span>, 1Ki 12:32-33<\/span>. Through this commandment, Jeroboam earned the dreadful title, who made Israel to sin. And Israel went willingly after it, for it is said; This thing became a sin; and the people went to worship before the one, even unto Dan: i. e., while they readily accepted Jeroboams plea. It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem, they went willingly to the Northernmost point of Palestine, even to Dan. For this sin, God judged them justly, even through the unjust judgment of man. God mostly punishes, through their own choice, those who choose against His. The Jews said, we have no king but Caesar, and Caesar destroyed them.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 11<\/span>. Walked after the commandment.<\/B><\/I>] Jeroboam’s commandment to worship his calves at Dan and Beth-el. Many of them were not forced<\/I> to do this, they did it willingly<\/I>.<\/P> <\/p>\n Ephraim; the subjects of the kingdom of Israel, the ten tribes; the prophet resumeth his threat against them. <\/P> Is oppressed; supposing, as well we may, that this prophecy respecteth Ahazs time, it will appear that the reigns of Zachariah, Shallum, Menahem, Pekahiah, and Pekah were past, which were unjust, seditious, bloody, and tyrannical times, in which oppressions abounded, and of which our prophet now speaketh. The ten tribes are by sedition, civil wars, and bloody conspiracies eaten up already almost. But to those God will add his displeasure, and the Assyrians shall be the executioners, and shall oppress Ephraim. <\/P> Broken in judgment, i.e. through fear of the partiality of the judge; though his cause be equal and just, yet money, or moneys worth, is extorted, to prevent an unjust, or to procure a just sentence; a known course in such days as those the prophet lived in, or as the days of Marius and Sylla. <\/P> Because he, Ephraim, spoken of as if one person, perhaps to intimate the universal defection, <\/P> willingly walked; it was not forced upon them, they did it willingly. Though there was a law commanding, yet there was in the people a forwardness, and too great a readiness, to comply and obey that law which made idolatry the establishment in the ten tribes. <\/P> After the commandment; to forbear going to the temple, and to worship the calves at Dan and Beth-el, as Jeroboam son of Nebat required. <\/P> <\/p>\n 11. broken in judgment<\/B>namely,the “judgment” of God on him (Ho5:1<\/span>). <\/P> walked after thecommandment<\/B>Jeroboam’s, to worship the calves (2Ki10:28-33<\/span>). Compare Mic 6:16<\/span>,”the statutes<\/I> of Omri,” namely, idolatrous statutes.We ought to obey God rather than men (Ac5:29<\/span>). JEROME reads”filthiness.” The Septuagint<\/I> gives the sense, notthe literal translation: “after vanities.<\/I>“<\/P><\/p>\n Ephraim [is] oppressed, [and] broken in judgment<\/strong>,…. Here the prophet again returns to the ten tribes, who were oppressed and broken, either by their own judgments, as the Targum; by the tyranny of their kings, and the injustice of their judges, who looked only for the mammon of unrighteousness; or by the judgment of their enemies, the Assyrians, the taxes they laid upon them, the devastations they made among them, and by whom, at last, they were carried captive; or by the judgments of God upon them; for all the enemy did was by his permission, and according to his will:<\/p>\n because he willingly walked after the commandment<\/strong>; not after the commandment of God, but after the commandment of men, as Aben Ezra; or after the commandment of the prophets of Baal, as Jarchi; or after the commandment of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, as Kimchi, by worshipping the calves at Dan and Bethel he set up there.<\/p>\n From these judgments Israel and Judah will not be set free, until in their distress they seek their God. This thought is expanded in the next strophe (Hos 5:11-15<\/span>). Hos 5:11<\/span>. “Ephraim is oppressed, broken in pieces by the judgment; for it has wished, has gone according to statute.” <\/em> By the participles ashuq <\/em> and ratsuts <\/em>, the calamity is represented as a lasting condition, which the prophet saw in the spirit as having already begun. The two words are connected together even in Deu 28:33<\/span>, to indicate the complete subjection of Israel to the power and oppression of its foes, as a punishment for falling away from the Lord. R e tsuts mishpat <\/em> does not mean “of broken right,” or “injured in its right” (Ewald and Hitzig), but “broken in pieces by the judgment” (of God), with a genitivum efficientis <\/em>, like mukkeh Elohm <\/em> in Isa 53:4<\/span>. For it liked to walk according to statute. For compare Jer 2:5<\/span> and 2Ki 18:15<\/span>. Tsav <\/em> is a human statute; it stands both here and in Isa 28:10<\/span>, Isa 28:13<\/span>, the only other passages in which it occurs, as an antithesis to the word or commandment of God. The statute intended is the one which the kingdom of Israel upheld from beginning to end, viz., the worship of the calves, that root of all the sins, which brought about the dissolution and ruin of the kingdom.<\/p>\n Here again the Prophet shows that the vengeance of God would be just against Israel, because they willingly followed the impious edicts of their king. The people might indeed have appeared to be excusable, since religion had not been changed by their voice, or by public consent, or by any contrivance of the many, but by the tyrannical will of the king alone: Jeroboam was not induced by superstition, but by subtile wickedness, to erect altars elsewhere, and not at Jerusalem. The people then might have appeared to be without blame; for the king alone devised this artifices to secure himself from danger. But the Prophet shows that all were implicated in the same guilt before God, because the people adopted with alacrity the impious forms of worship which the king had commanded. He therefore says, that Ephraim is exposed to plunder, that he is broken by judgment, (or, “shall be broken,” for the words may be rendered in the future tense.) That the people then were thus torn, and were also to bear in future far more grievous things, was not, as he says, because they had to suffer all these things undeservedly, for they were not innocent. — How so? Because they willingly followed the commands of their king; for the king did not force them to forsake the doctrine of the law, but every one went voluntarily after impious superstitions. Since then they willingly obeyed their king, they could not now excuse themselves, they could not object that this was done by one man, and that they were not admitted to consult with him. Their promptitude proved them to be perfidious. <\/p>\n Some render הואיל, evail, to begin,” and יאל, ial, is often taken in this sense: but as it oftener signifies, “to be willing,” the Prophet no doubt means here, that the Israelites had not been compelled by force and fear to go astray after superstitions; but that they were prompt and ready to obey, for there was in them no fear of God, no religion. If any one should now ask, whether they are excusable, who are tyrannically drawn away into superstitions, as we see to be done under the Papacy, the answer is ready, that those are not here absolved who regarded men more than God: nor is terror, as we know, a sufficient excuse, when we prefer our own life to the glory of God, and when, anxious to provide for ourselves and to avoid the cross, we deny God, or turn aside from making a confession of the right and pure faith: but the fault is rendered double, when men easily comply with any thing commanded by tyrants; for they show, that they were already fully inclined to despise God and to deny true religion. Hence the impiety of Jeroboam discovered the common ungodliness and wickedness of the whole people; for as soon as he raised his finger and bid them to worship God corruptly, all joyfully followed the impious edict. There was an occasion then offered to them; but the evil dwelt before in their hearts; for they were not so inclined and prompt to obey God. We now then see what the Prophet had in view. <\/p>\n He says that God would justly punish all the Israelites, yea, even all the common people; for though Jeroboam alone had commanded them to worship God corruptly, yet all of them willingly embraced what he wished to be done: and thus it became manifest that they had in them no fear of God. We now see how vain is the excuse of those who say that they ought to obey kings, and at the same time forsake the word of God: for what does the Prophet reprove here, but that the Israelites had been too submissive to their king? “But this in itself was worthy of praise.” True, when the king commanded nothing contrary to God’s word; but when he perverted God’s worship, when he set up corrupt superstitions, then the people ought to have firmly resisted him: but as they were too pliant, nay, willingly allowed themselves to be drawn away from the true worship of God, the Prophet says here, that they had no reason to complain, that they were too sharply and too severely chastised by the Lord. It follows — <\/p>\n (11) Broken in judgment.<\/strong>The Authorised version is probably right in this rendering, the phrase having reference to rights pertaining to individuals. Interpreters differ as to the rare word tsav,<\/em> translated commandment. It only occurs in one other place (Isa. 28:10<\/span>; Isa. 28:13<\/span>). Ewald regards it as meaning wooden post, i.e.,<\/em> their idol, but this has no basis in Old Testament usage, though etymologically ingenious. The majority of Jewish and modern commentators take it as meaning the evil ordinance of Jeroboam, who demanded the reverence of his subjects for the calf-symbol of Jehovah. The LXX. had another text (shav<\/em> instead of tsav<\/em>),<\/em> which they render vanities, and are followed by the Targum and Syriac version. This is worthy of attention.<\/p>\n Willingly<\/strong>i.e.<\/em>, waywardly.<\/p>\n ‘Ephraim is oppressed,<\/p>\n He is crushed in judgment,<\/p>\n Because he was content to walk,<\/p>\n After man’s command.’<\/p>\n The spotlight turns back on Ephraim (Israel). They are being oppressed, they are being crushed in judgment, and while the mills of God grind slowly, they are grinding exceeding small. Both expressions were often used of how the rulers oppressed and crushed the poor (compare Amo 4:1<\/span>). Thus what they had done to others was now being done to them. And this was because Israel had listened to man rather than to God. They had walked in accordance with the commands (tsaw) and teaching of men, rather than obeying the commands and teaching of YHWH, by engaging in false worship and by setting aside His commandments. We might even translate as, ‘they walked after man’s ‘blah, blah, blah’. (Compare the use of the word in Isa 28:10<\/span>; Isa 28:13<\/span>). Others relate the word tsaw to a verb meaning ‘to stink’ and so translate the word tsaw here as ‘filth’, but with the same connotations. They had followed after what was but filth. And not only had they done so, but they had been satisfied in their hearts while they did so. They had been ‘content’. Others consider that what they were being condemned for were their relations with Aram (Syria) and Assyria.<\/p>\n Hos 5:11<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Ephraim is oppressed<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> Ephraim shall be oppressed, shall be broken in judgment, because it pleased him to walk after vain things. <\/em>Houbigant. <\/p>\n Hos 5:11 Ephraim [is] oppressed [and] broken in judgment, because he willingly walked after the commandment.<\/p>\n Ver. 11. Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment<\/strong> ] Calumniam passus est Ephraim,<\/em> so the Vulgate hath it: Ephraim was falsely accused and slandered; he suffered much by malicious accusers, who depraved his good actions, drew him before the judgment seats, and there oppressed him, as Jas 2:6<\/span> . But the word here used signifieth all manner of injuries and oppressions, whether by vexatious suits, by fraud or by force, virulent tongues or violent hands, wrangling or otherwise wronging a man, to his crushing and utter undoing many times: for a poor man in his house is like a snail in his shell; crush that, and you kill him. Ephraim was crushed in judgment by his countrymen, who would do him no right; but much more by the cruel Assyrians, who soon after this carried him captive, and left him without all remedy of law, without hope of a better condition or place for a worse. And what wonder though men so set against him, when God was pouring out his wrath upon him as water? since all creatures are up in arms against God’s rebels. If the cause go against a man, though he have never so much right on his side (for often times cedit viribus aequum,<\/em> might overcomes right), and he be broken in judgment, let him see whether things be right between God and himself; and if broken in judgment, let him be of a broken spirit, and he shall be relieved. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Because he willingly followed after the commandment<\/strong> ] He was too sequacious and obsequious to Jeroboam and his princes, commanding him to worship the golden calves. Quoniam voluit, iuvat,<\/em> like a tame fool, or at least as a foolish child (so this prophet calleth him), he was soon won over, he came off with litle ado. Jeroboam did but hold up his finger, and he had him straight; a mere crass stupidity carried away to those dumb idols even as he was led, 1Co 12:2<\/span> ; a Melchite, such a generation of heretics there were in the primitive Church, so called because they followed the examples and decrees of the emperors; resolving to be of the king’s religion, whatsoever it were, right or wrong (Nicephorus). The Russians are such at this day. God and their emperor, they say, know best what is truth or falsehood; and it is their part to obey, not to inquire. But all Christ’s sheep are rational; and will try before they trust, look before they leap; the spiritual man judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged by no man, 1Co 2:15<\/span> . Show him a clear text of Scripture for what you would persuade him to, and convince him thereby that it is the mind of God, and you may have what you will of him, Jas 2:1<\/span> . But for these masters of opinions, such as are magistri nostri Parisienses,<\/em> that obtrude their own placets upon people, and require to be believed upon their bare word without further proof, he abhors them. And for the decrees of princes and rulers, if they cross the Scriptures, he will take leave to disobey them, as the apostles did, Act 4:19<\/span> , as the three children in Daniel did, and Daniel himself, Dan 6:10-11<\/span> , and as all the holy confessors and martyrs both ancient and modern did. The Bishop of Norwich asked Roger Coo, martyr, whether he would not obey the king’s laws? he answered, Yes, as far as they agree with the law of God I will obey them. Then said the bishop, Whether they agree with the word or not, we are bound to obey them, if the king were an infidel. Coo answered, If Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego had done so, Nebuchadnezzar had never confessed the living God. True it is that magistrates must be obeyed; those that are good must be obeyed as God, those that are bad, for God ( Y , Basil); but then it must be in licitis,<\/em> in things lawful, and warrantable by the word and herein we must not frame excuse. The blessed Virgin, though inconvienent, went four days’ journey (so far was it from Nazareth to Bethlehem) to obey Augustus’ decree; the challenge was not so peremptory, but the obedience was as exemplary. “Whoso keepeth the commandment,” sc.<\/em> of the king, “shall know no evil thing,” Ecc 8:4-5<\/span> . And whereas some might reply, Why, then, let us do all the king bids us without sciscitation, without further delay or inquiry; Solomon answers in the next words, “And a wise man’s heart discerneth both time and judgment,” that is, he knows both when and how, and how far forth, fitly and lawfully the commands of a king may be despatched, and no farther will he go than he can with a good conscience. The pope writing to Bernard, requiring him to do that which was unlawful, Bernard writes back again this answer, and it was taken; I as a child do not obey, and I obey in disobeying. Antigona in Sophocles saith well, Magis obtemperandum est Diis, &c.:<\/em> We should rather obey God, with whom we must live ever, than men, with whom we have but a while to sojourn. Lo, blind nature saw so much. See Trapp on “<\/em> Act 4:19 “<\/em> It may not be forgotten or slipped over, that the word here rendered the commandment signifies Command thou, ; because he willingly walked after Command thou; he danced after Jeroboam’s pipe, saying to him, as he did once to Julius Caesar, <\/p>\n “ Iussa sequi tam velle mihi quam posse, necesse est<\/em> ”( Lucan<\/em> ).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Or as Tiberius answered Justin (though upon a better ground and end), Si tu volueris, ego sum si tu non vis, ego non sum; <\/em> If you will be willing, so will I, if you are not willing neither am I I am only thy clay, and thy wax, utere me pro rota figulari,<\/em> to use me for the potters wheel. Plaut. Or lastly, as Luther at first submitted to the pope in these words (though afterwards, God gave him more courage in his cause), I prostrate myself at your Holiness’ feet, with all that I am and have. Vivifica, occide, voca, revoca, approba, reproba, vocem tuam vocem Christi in te praesidentis et loquentis agnoscam; <\/em> that is, Quicken me, kill me, call me, recall me, receive me, reject me; I shall acknowledge your voice as the voice of Christ himself ruling and speaking in you (1518 AD. Epist. ad Leon. Pontific.). Jeroboam is not once named here, nor the word (commandment) set down at large, out of detestation (likely) both of it and him, because it was a wicked commandment; and he no better than a usurper (Kimchi). For although he had it cleared to him that God’s will was that he should be king over the ten tribes, yet because it was a will of God’s decree, and not of his command, as of a duty done by him, he goes among divines for an intruder and usurper in and for that fact of his. It is obedience when we follow a divine precept; but not ever when we follow a divine instinct.<\/p>\n oppressed and broken. Reference to Pentateuch (Deu 28:33). <\/p>\n willingly = willfully. <\/p>\n walked after = followed (perseveringly). <\/p>\n the commandment. Note the Ellipsis: “the [idolatrous] commandment [of Jeroboam]” (1Ki 12:28. 2Ki 10:29-31). Compare Mic 6:16. Aramaean, Septuagint, and Syriac read “falsehood”. Vulgate reads “filthiness”, reading zo in pl, for zav. <\/p>\n oppressed: Deu 28:33, 2Ki 15:16-20, 2Ki 15:29, Amo 5:11, Amo 5:12 <\/p>\n he willingly: 1Ki 12:26-33, Mic 6:16 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Exo 1:17 – feared God 1Sa 22:18 – he fell 2Sa 11:16 – he assigned 1Ki 14:16 – who did sin 1Ki 19:10 – thrown down 1Ki 21:11 – did as Jezebel 2Ki 13:2 – followed 2Ki 16:11 – built an altar 2Ki 17:8 – of the kings of Israel 2Ki 21:9 – seduced 2Ch 12:1 – all Israel 2Ch 21:14 – thy people 2Ch 24:18 – wrath 2Ch 28:19 – because of Ahaz Job 34:30 – General Psa 12:8 – wicked Pro 24:22 – their Pro 28:15 – a roaring Ecc 8:5 – keepeth Dan 3:4 – it is commanded Hos 5:3 – Ephraim Hos 7:3 – General Act 4:19 – to hearken<\/p>\n Hos 5:11. The commandment could not mean that, of the Lord, for that would not have been condemned. We know, therefore, that, it refers to some idolatrous ordinance. It Is the one in 1Ki 12:28-30, where Jereboam made the idols and told the people to worship them, which they did.<\/p>\n Hos 5:11-12. Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment He is delivered over to oppressors by Gods just judgment. Such were Pul and Tiglath-pileser, kings of Assyria. Archbishop Newcome distinguishes between these phrases thus: He is oppressed with a heavy weight of calamity; he is crushed, or broken in his judicial contest with God; because he willingly walked after the commandment Because he willingly submitted to, or complied with Jeroboams command, requiring his subjects to worship the calves which he had placed at Dan and Beth-el, and to conform to all his idolatrous institutions, in opposition to the law of God. Of this kind were the statutes of Omri, mentioned Mic 6:16. The reading of the LXX. here is different, namely, , , He trode judgment under foot, because he began to walk after vain things; that is, after idols. They seem either to have read , shave, (vanity,) for , tzave, (commandment,) or else to have supposed the latter word to be put for the former, there being frequent instances in the Hebrew text of letters being changed, one for another, which have nearly the same sound: see the Arabic, Syriac, Chaldaic, Houbigant and others, in Pooles Synopsis, who read , vanity. Therefore will I be unto Ephraim as a moth My judgment shall consume both Israel and Judah as a moth fretteth a garment, or as rottenness consumes the flesh, from small and unperceived beginnings, working slow, but certain and complete destruction.<\/p>\n 5:11 Ephraim [is] oppressed [and] broken in judgment, because he willingly walked after the {l} commandment.<\/p>\n (l) That is, after King Jeroboam’s commandment, and did not rather follow God.<\/p>\n Ephraim would experience crushing judgment by an enemy invader because he determined to follow false gods rather than divine commands (cf. Deu 4:3; Deu 6:14; Deu 8:19; Deu 28:14; Jer 2:5). The human command in view is probably Jeroboam I’s institution of calf worship at altars in Bethel and Dan (1Ki 12:27-30).<\/p>\n Ephraim [is] oppressed [and] broken in judgment, because he willingly walked after the commandment. 11. Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment ] The same two participles are again combined in Deu 28:33, and, as here, in connexion with invasion, ‘thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed alway’ (so Auth. Vers.). The judgment meant is … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hosea 5:11”<\/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-22174","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22174","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=22174"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22174\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22174"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22174"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22174"}],"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: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/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: 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: 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: 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":"