Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Verse 36<\/span>. A hanging for the door of the tent<\/B><\/I>] This may be called the first<\/I> veil, as it occupied the door or entrance to the tabernacle; the veil that separated the holy place from the holy of holies is called the second<\/I> veil, Heb 9:3<\/span>. These two veils and the inner covering of the tabernacle were all of the same materials, and of the same workmanship. See Ex 27:16<\/span>.<\/P> <\/P> 1. FOR the meaning and design of the tabernacle See Clarke on <\/span>Ex 25:40<\/span><\/span>: and while the reader is struck with the curious and costly nature of this building, as described by Moses, let him consider how pure and holy that Church should be of which it was a very expressive type; and what manner of person he<\/I> should be in all holy conversation and godliness, who professes to be a member of that Church for which, it is written, Christ has given himself, that he might sanctify and cleanse it; that he might present it unto himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. See Eph 5:25-27<\/span>.<\/P> <\/P> 2. In the Jewish tabernacle almost every thing was placed out of<\/I> the sight of the people<\/I>. The holy of holies was inaccessible<\/I>, the testimony was comparatively hidden<\/I>, as were also the mercy-seat<\/I> and the Divine glory<\/I>. Under the Gospel all these things are laid open, the way to the holiest is made manifest, the veil<\/I> is rent<\/I>, and we have an entrance to the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a<\/I> new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the<\/I> veil, that is to say, his flesh<\/I>; Heb 10:19-20<\/span>. How abundantly has God brought life and immortality to light by the Gospel! The awful distance is abolished, the ministry of reconciliation is proclaimed, the kingdom of heaven is opened to all believers, and the Lord is in his holy temple. Sinner, weary of thyself and thy transgressions, fainting under the load of thy iniquities, look to Jesus; he died for thee, and will save thee. Believer, stand fast in the liberty wherewith God has made thee free, and be not entangled again in the yoke of bondage.<\/P> <\/p>\n For the door of the tent<\/B>, i.e. of the holy place, where it was divided from the court of the people. <\/P> <\/p>\n 36. an hanging for the door of thetent<\/B>Curtains of rich and elaborate embroidery, made by thewomen, are suspended over the doors or entrances of the tentsoccupied by Eastern chiefs and princes. In a similar style ofelegance was the hanging finished which was to cover the door of thistabernaclethe chosen habitation of the God and King of Israel. Itappears from Exo 26:12<\/span>; Exo 26:22<\/span>;Exo 26:23<\/span>, that the ark and mercyseat were placed in the west end of the tabernacle, and consequentlythe door or entrance fronted the east, so that the Israelites inworshipping Jehovah, turned their faces towards the west; that theymight be thus figuratively taught to turn from the worship of thatluminary which was the great idol of the nations, and to adore theGod who made it and them [HEWLETT].<\/P><\/p>\n And thou shalt make an hanging for the door of the tent<\/strong>,…. At the east end of the tabernacle, which lay open and exposed, and for which as yet there was no provision; the west end of it, where stood the holy of holies, was enclosed with six boards, and two corner ones, Ex 26:22<\/span> and the linen curtains hung down there to the silver bases, and so did the curtains of goats’ hair, even to the ground, and half a curtain to spare, see Ex 26:12<\/span> but for the east end, or entrance into the tabernacle, there was nothing till now ordered, only the sixth curtain of the goats’ hair curtains was there turned up double, Ex 26:9<\/span>, but now here an “hanging” is ordered, or rather a “covering” z, as the word signifies; Jarchi calls it a vail; and this was instead of a door to the tabernacle, and divided the holy place, into which only the priests might enter, from the place where the people stood and worshipped: and this also was made<\/p>\n of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen<\/strong>; as was the vail between the holy and the holy of holies; only with this difference, this was<\/p>\n wrought with needle work<\/strong>, and that was of “cunning work”: the difference between these two, “Rokem” and “Chosheb”, was, as Ben Melech from the Misnah relates, that “Rokem” is the work of a needle, and therefore but one face or figure is seen, that is, it is only seen on one side; but “Chosheb” is the work of a weaver, and therefore two faces or figures are seen, that is, they are seen on both sides; and with this account Maimonides agrees, [See comments on Ex 26:1]<\/span>, besides this hanging, Josephus a tells us there was another of linen, of the same size with this, and which covered it, and preserved it from the weather, and which on festival days was turned back, that the people might have a prospect of the other; just as there were curtains of goats’ hair to preserve the linen ones.<\/p>\n z “operimentum”, Montanus; “tegumentum”, Junius Tremellius, Piscator “velum”, Tigurine version, Drusius. a Antiqu. l. 3. c. 6. sect. 4.<\/p>\n For the entrance to the tent they were also to make a curtain ( , lit., a covering, from to cover) of the same material as the inner curtain, but of work in mixed colours, i.e., not woven with figures upon it, but simply in stripes or checks. does not mean coloured needlework, with figures or flowers embroidered with the needle upon the woven fabric (as I asserted in my Archologie<\/em>, in common with the Rabbins, Gesenius<\/em>, Bhr, and others); for in the only other passage in which occurs, viz., Psa 139:15<\/span>, it does not mean to embroider, but to weave, and in the Arabic it signifies to make points, stripes, or lines, to work in mixed colours (see Hartmann die Hebrerinn am Putztisch<\/em> iii. 138ff.). This curtain was to hang on five gilded pillars of acacia-wood with golden hooks, and for these they were to cast sockets of brass. In the account of the execution of this work in Exo 36:38<\/span>, it is still further stated, that the architect covered the heads (capitals) of the pillars and their girders ( , see Exo 27:10<\/span>) with gold. From this it follows, that the pillars were not entirely gilded, but only the capitals, and that they were fastened together with gilded girders. These girders were either placed upon the hooks that were fastened to the tops of the pillars, or, what I think more probable, formed a kind of architrave above the pillars, in which case the covering as well as the inner curtain merely hung upon the hooks of the columns. But if the pillars were not gilded all over, we must necessarily imagine that curtain as hung upon that side of the pillars which was turned towards the holy place, so that none of the white wood was to be seen inside the holy place; and the gilding of the capitals and architrave merely served to impress upon the forefront of the tabernacle the glory of a house of God.<\/p>\n If we endeavour to understand the reason for building the dwelling in this manner, there can be no doubt that the design of the wooden walls was simply to give stability to the tabernacle. Acacia-wood was chosen, because the acacia was the only tree to be found in the desert of Arabia from which planks and beams could be cut, whilst the lightness an durability of this wood rendered it peculiarly suitable for a portable temple. The wooden framework was covered both within and without with hangings of drapery and other coverings, to give it the character of a tent, which is the term really applied to it in Exo 27:21<\/span>, and in most instances afterwards. The sanctuary of Jehovah in the midst of His people was to be a tent, because, so long as the people were wandering about and dwelt in tents, the dwelling of their God in the midst of them must be a tent also. The division of the dwelling into two parts corresponded to the design of the tabernacle, where Jehovah desired not to dwell alone by Himself, but to come and meet with His people (Exo 25:22<\/span>). The most holy place was the true dwelling of Jehovah, where He was enthroned in a cloud, the visible symbol of His presence, above the cherubim, upon the capporeth of the ark of the covenant. The holy place, on the other hand, was the place where His people were to appear before Him, and draw near to Him with their gifts, the fruits of their earthly vocation, and their prayers, and to rejoice before His face in the blessings of His covenant grace. By the establishment of the covenant of Jehovah with the people of Israel, the separation of man from God, of which the fall of the progenitors of our race had been the cause, was to be brought to an end; an institution was to be set up, pointing to the reunion of man and God, to true and full vital communion with Him; and by this the kingdom of God was to be founded on earth in a local and temporal form. This kingdom of God, which was founded in Israel, was to be embodied in the tabernacle, and shadowed forth in its earthly and visible form as confined within the limits of time and space. This meaning was indicated not only in the instructions to set up the dwelling according to the four quarters of the globe and heavens, with the entrance towards sunrise and the holy of holies towards the west, but also in the quadrangular form of the building, the dwelling as a whole assuming the form of an oblong of thirty cubits in length, and ten in breadth and height, whilst the most holy place was a cube of ten cubits in every direction. In the symbolism of antiquity, the square was a symbol of the universe or cosmos; and thus, too, in the symbolism of the Scriptures it is a type of the world as the scene of divine revelation, the sphere of the kingdom of God, for which the world from the very first had been intended by God, and to which, notwithstanding the fall of man, who was created lord of the earth, it was to be once more renewed and glorified. Hence the seal of the kingdom of God was impressed upon the sanctuary of God in Israel through the quadrangular form that was given to its separate rooms. And whilst the direction in which it was set up, towards the four quarters of the heavens, showed that the kingdom of God that was planted in Israel was intended to embrace the entire world, the oblong shape given to the whole building set forth the idea of the present incompleteness of the kingdom, and the cubic form of the most holy place its ideal and ultimate perfection.<\/p>\n (Note: The significant character of these different quadrangular forms is placed beyond all doubt, when we compare the tabernacle and Solomon’s temple, which was built according to the same proportions, with the prophetic description of the temple and holy city in Ezek. 40-48, and that of the heavenly Jerusalem in Rev 21 and 22. Just as in both the tabernacle and Solomon’s temple the most holy place was in the form of a perfect cube (of 10 and 20 cubits respectively), so John saw the city of God, which came down from God out of heaven, in the form of a perfect cube. “The length, and the breadth, and the height of it were equal,” viz., 12,000 furlongs on every side (Rev 21:16<\/span>), a symbolical representation of the idea, that the holy of holies in the temple will be seen in its perfected form in the heavenly Jerusalem, and God will dwell in it for ever, along with the just made perfect. This city of God is “the tabernacle of God with men;” it has no longer a temple, but the Lord God of Hosts and the Lamb are the temple of it (Rev 21:22<\/span>), and those who dwell therein see the face of God and the Lamb (Exo 22:4<\/span>). The square comes next to the cube, and the regular oblong next to this. The tabernacle was in the form of an oblong: the dwelling was 30 cubits long and 10 broad, and the court 100 cubits long and 50 bread. Solomon’s temple, when regarded as a whole, was in the same form; it was 60 cubits long and 20 cubits broad, apart from the porch and side buildings. In Ezekiel’s vision not only is the sanctuary a square of 500 reeds (Eze 42:15-20<\/span>; Eze 45:2<\/span>), but the inner court (Eze 40:23<\/span>, Eze 40:27<\/span>, Eze 40:47<\/span>), the paved space in the outer court (Eze 40:19<\/span>), and other parts also, are all in the form of squares. The city opposite to the temple was a square of 4500 reeds (Eze 48:16<\/span>), and the suburbs a square of 250 reeds on every side (Eze 48:17<\/span>). The idea thus symbolically expressed is, that the temple and city, and in fact the whole of the holy ground, already approximate to the form of the most holy place. Both the city and temple are still distinct from one another, although they both stand upon holy ground in the midst of the land (ch. 47 and 48); and in the temple itself the distinction between the holy place and the most holy is still maintained, although the most holy place is no longer separated by a curtain from the holy place; and in the same manner the distinction is still maintained between the temple-building and the courts, though the latter have acquired much greater importance than in Solomon’s temple, and are very minutely described, whereas they are only very briefly referred to in the case of Solomon’s temple. The sanctuary which Ezekiel saw, however, was only a symbol of the renewed and glorified kingdom of God, not of the perfected kingdom. This was first shown to the holy seer in Patmos, in the vision of the heavenly Jerusalem, as it appeared in a perfect cubical form.)<\/p>\n Yet even in its temporal form, it was perfect of its kind, and therefore the component parts of the quadrangular building were regulated by the number ten, the stamp of completeness.<\/p>\n The splendour of the building, as the earthly reflection of the glory of the kingdom of God, was also in harmony with this explanation of its meaning. In the dwelling itself everything was either overlaid with gold or made of pure gold, with the exception of the foundations or sockets of the boards and inner pillars, for which silver was used. In the gold, with its glorious, yea, godlike splendour (Job 37:22<\/span>), the glory of the dwelling-place of God was reflected; whilst the silver, as the symbol of moral purity, shadowed forth the holiness of the foundation of the house or kingdom of God. The four colours, and the figures upon the drapery and curtains of the temple, were equally significant. Whilst the four<\/em> colours, like the same number of coverings, showed their general purpose as connected with the building of the kingdom of God, the brilliant white of the byssus stands prominently out among the rest of the colours as the ground of the woven fabrics, and the colour which is invariably mentioned first. The splendid white byssus represented the holiness of the building; the hyacinth, a dark blue approaching black rather than bright blue, but the true colour of the sky in southern countries, its heavenly origin and character; the purple, a dark rich red, its royal glory; whilst the crimson, a light brilliant red, the colour of blood and vigorous life, set forth the strength of imperishable life in the abode and kingdom of the holy and glorious God-King. Lastly, through the figures of cherubim woven into these fabrics the dwelling became a symbolical representation of the kingdom of glory, in which the heavenly spirits surround the throne of God, the heavenly Jerusalem with its myriads of angels, the city of the living God, to which the people of God will come when their heavenly calling is fulfilled (Heb 12:22-23<\/span>).<\/p>\n 7. THE HANGING FOR THE DOOR.<\/strong><\/p>\n (36, 37) It is essential in the East to shut out light and heat, whence tents have always doors. These are usually made of a piece of cloth, which is raised for a man to enter, and falls behind him. But for a tent of the size described, which seems to have been above twenty-two feet high in the centre, something more was required. The hanging spoken of appears to have been a beautifully embroidered curtain, which could be either drawn up or let down, and which was attached by golden hooks to five pillars plated with gold, thus dividing the entrance into four equal spaces.<\/p>\n 36, 37<\/strong>. <\/strong> Hanging for the door <\/strong> A pendent curtain, or covering, of the same material as the vail (31) and the tabernacle-cloth, (Exo 26:1<\/span>,) but wrought with needlework<\/strong>. So this was the work of an embroiderer, <\/em> ( ,) that of a weaver, <\/em> ( . ) This was to hang on five pillars<\/strong>, while that within hung upon four, but as this was to be for the door of the tent<\/strong>, not of the mishcan, <\/em> or board structure, it may have been larger than the other . Its hooks<\/strong>, like those of Exo 26:32<\/span>, were of gold<\/strong>, but the sockets <\/strong> were to be of brass<\/strong>; those within, of silver .<\/p>\n The plan of the tabernacle as above described, and the adjustment of curtains and coverings, have long been a perplexing problem for interpreters. Perhaps it is too much to expect that now, after the lapse of so many centuries, every detail of its construction can be restored so as to clear up all the statements of this narrative.<\/p>\n Taking first the structure of boards, as it has been described in Exo 26:15-25<\/span>, there can be little doubt as to its main features. Its general appearance must have been such as is exhibited in the cut at Exo 26:26-29<\/span>.<\/p>\n The next difficulty is concerning the place and purpose of the tabernacle curtains described in Exo 26:1-6<\/span>. According to some writers they were spread over the board structure like a pall over a coffin. Supposing the breadth of this structure to have been ten cubits, (see note on Exo 26:23-25<\/span>,) this covering, being twenty-eight cubits long, (Exo 26:2<\/span>,) would have reached over the two outer sides unto about one cubit from the base, for the boards stood ten cubits high. Exo 26:16<\/span>. The goats’ hair covering, being two cubits longer, (Exo 26:8<\/span>,) would, when spread over this, have reached completely to the base. This certainly makes a very simple and natural arrangement, but is open to several serious objections. (1.) The ornamental curtains would have been concealed from view, except, at most, the one third which would be visible as a ceiling over the interior. This objection, however, may be offset by saying that, like the most holy place, they were not designed to be seen, and the “cunning work” upon them was but a fitting indication for the interior and symbolical purpose which they served. (2.) The coverings spread flat over the top must, especially by reason of the great weight of the skins, have become soon depressed and so sunken in as to hold pools of water rather than prove a protection against the rain.<\/p>\n Another theory is, that this ornamental curtain was arranged to hang down on the inside of the boards, and so form an ornamental tapestry for the walls as well as for the ceiling. But (1.) a purpose so special would seem to have required more particular definition in the narrative. (2.) This would have entirely concealed the golden-plated boards. (3.) It would also, like the theory just stated, have exposed the roof to the depression and dampness necessarily consequent upon such a flat surface of curtains.<\/p>\n Mr. T.O. Paine represents the two sets of five curtains as coupled together at the ends, (Exo 26:3<\/span>,) and hanging double and in festoons on the inside of the boards, at about the height of a man’s head, four cubits, above the floor. His view is in the main adopted by Dr. James Strong in his recent (1888) work on the Tabernacle. But (1.) there is no more ground for making these curtains run in festoons around the interior walls than there is for making the goats’ hair curtains hang in the like form, for both sets are spoken of in the same general way. Such a totally different purpose of the two sets of curtains would certainly have demanded more notice than we can find in the text of the sacred writer. (2.) Such an arrangement, moreover, would not only have concealed a large portion of the boards, but also, hanging in folds, the colours and “cherubim of cunning work” must have been so hidden from view that no one could distinguish or trace their outlines. Strong’s adjustment of the curtains, however, largely obviates this last objection.<\/p>\n A theory proposed by Fergusson, in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, <\/em> (article “Temple”) assumes that the tabernacle must have had, “as all tents have had from the days of Moses down to the present day,” a ridge and a ridge pole, and he supposes that the angle formed by the two sides of the roof was a right angle. The ornamented tabernacle curtain, being the first thrown over the ridge pole, and fastened at the sides, would have served as a lining to the rest, and have formed with its colours and cunning work a visible roof, or ceiling, over the entire structure. Over this as a protecting covering were thrown the other curtains described above. He thinks, however, that the seal skins were used only “for a coping or ridge piece to protect the junction of the two curtains of rams’ skins, which were laid on each slope of the roof, and probably only laced together at the top.” This view is not without objections, but it helps to solve some of the difficulties of the problem. The cuts show the plans of Paine and Fergusson in their main outlines. On the symbolism of the tabernacle, see at the end of chapter 40.<\/p>\n Doth not this remind us of the ever-blessed Jesus, who is both the ark, and the mercy-seat, and the door and the temple! Heb 8:2<\/span> ; Psa 80:1<\/span> ; Joh 2:19-21<\/span>Joh 2:19-21<\/span> .<\/p>\n Exo 26:36 And thou shalt make an hanging for the door of the tent, [of] blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, wrought with needlework.<\/p>\n Ver. 36. A hanging for the door.<\/strong> ] This shadowed him that said of himself, “I am the door.” Joh 10:9 The ceremonial law was the Jews’ gospel, for it was Christ in figure; and to him it led them.<\/p>\n hanging. Hebrew. misak, a covering to hide (Compare Exo 26:31) not the paroketh of Exo 26:31. No cherubim woven on this; and sockets of pillars of brass, instead of gold or silver. See note on Exo 26:17. <\/p>\n door = entrance. <\/p>\n hanging: This may be termed the first vail, as it occupied the door or entrance to the tabernacle; the vail that separated the Holy of Holies is called the second vail, Heb 9:3. Mr. Morier – Second Journey Through Persia, p. 251 describing the tent of a chief of the Eelauts, says, “It was composed of a wooden frame of circular laths, which were fixed on the ground, and then covered over with large felts, that were fastened down by a cord, ornamented by tassels of various colours. A curtain, curiously worked by the women, with coarse needle-work of various colours, was suspended over the door. In the king of Persia’s tents, magnificent perdahs, or hangings of needle-work, are suspended, as well as on the doors of the great mosques in Turkey; and these circumstances combined, will, perhaps, illustrate Exo 26:36.” Exo 36:37, Exo 40:28, Joh 10:9, Joh 14:6 <\/p>\n the tent: Exo 35:11, Exo 39:33, Exo 40:29, Num 3:25, Num 9:15, 2Sa 7:6, Psa 78:60 <\/p>\n of blue: Exo 26:31 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Exo 26:1 – fine twined linen Exo 27:14 – hangings of one side Exo 27:16 – of blue Exo 29:4 – unto the door Exo 35:6 – blue Exo 35:15 – the hanging Exo 39:30 – the plate Exo 40:4 – the table Exo 40:5 – put Est 1:6 – white Eze 41:2 – the door<\/p>\n Exo 26:36. Make a hanging for the door of the tent It is plain from the former part of this description, (Exo 26:12-23,) that the ark and mercy-seat were in the west end of the tabernacle, that is, the door or entrance fronted the east: so that the Israelites, in worshipping Jehovah, turned their faces toward the west, where the ark was; it being thus contrived, says Theodoret, that the sun might pay a kind of symbolical adoration to Jehovah, by darting his first rays into the sanctuary, and that the Israelites might be thus figuratively, taught to turn from the worship of that luminary, the great idol of the nations, and to adore the God who made him. Before the entrance then of the first tabernacle, or the holy place, was the curtain here spoken of to be hung, which may be called the first veil, as that mentioned Exo 26:31, which divided the holy place from the most holy, is called the second veil, Heb 9:2-3.<\/p>\n 26:36 And thou shalt make an {n} hanging for the door of the tent, [of] blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, wrought with needlework.<\/p>\n (n) This hanging or veil was between the holy place, and there where the people were.<\/p>\n The screen 26:36-37<\/span><\/p>\n This was a drapery, as were the veil and curtains, that served as the front doorway to the tabernacle.<\/p>\n "The techniques used for the Tabernacle-gilded frames and beams, with coverings-were those used for ’prefab’ structures (religious and otherwise) in Egypt for up to fifteen centuries before Moses." [Note: Kitchen, The Bible. . ., pp. 85-86.] <\/span><\/p>\n And thou shalt make a hanging for the door of the tent, [of] blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, wrought with needlework. Exodus 36-7 (Exo 26:36-37). The screen, to cover the entrance to the Dwelling. This was of the same materials as the veil ( v. 31), but, as it was further … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 26:36”<\/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-2280","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2280","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=2280"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2280\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2280"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2280"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2280"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}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: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/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: 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":"