14<\/strong>. Simon<\/em> ] Lists of the twelve Apostles are given in four passages of Scripture in the following order:<\/p>\n Mat 10:2-4<\/strong><\/span> Mar 3:16-19<\/strong><\/span> Luk 6:14-16<\/strong><\/span> Act 1:13<\/strong><\/span> Simon Simon Simon Peter Andrew James Andrew James James John James John John Andrew John Andrew Philip Philip Philip Philip Bartholomew Bartholomew Bartholomew Thomas Thomas Matthew Matthew Bartholomew Matthew Thomas Thomas Matthew James of Alphaeus James of Alphaeus James of Alphaeus James of Alphaeus Lebbaeus Thaddaeus Simon Zelotes Simon Zelotes Simon the Ka- Simon the Ka- Jude of James Jude of James nanite nanite Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot In reading these four independent lists several facts are remarkable.<\/p>\n i. Each list falls into three tetrads, and the last two tetrads are arranged in slightly varying pairs. “The Apostolic College was formed of three concentric circles each less closely intimate with Jesus than the last.” Godet.<\/p>\n ii. In each tetrad the names refer to the same persons though the order<\/em> is different.<\/p>\n iii. In each list the first<\/em> of each tetrad is the same viz. Simon, Philip, and James son of Alphaeus; not as ‘supreme among inferior, but as first among equals.’<\/p>\n iv. In each list Simon stands first; and Judas Iscariot last, as the ‘son of perdition.’<\/p>\n v. Not only do the Apostles seem to be named in the order of their eminence and nearness to Christ, but the first four seem to stand alone (in the Acts the first four are separated by “and;” the rest are ranged in pairs). The first four were the eklekton eklektoteroi<\/em> the chosen of the chosen; the ecclesiola in ecclesia.<\/em> Andrew, who is named last in St Mark and the Acts, though belonging to the inmost band of Apostles (Mar 13:3<\/span>) and though the earliest of them all (Joh 1:40<\/span>), was yet less highly honoured than the other three (who are the at the healing of Jairus’s daughter, Mar 5:37<\/span>; at the Transfiguration, Mat 17:1<\/span>; and in Gethsemane, Mat 26:37<\/span>). He seems to have been a link of communication between the first and second tetrads (Joh 12:22<\/span>; Joh 6:8<\/span>).<\/p>\n vi. The first five Apostles were of Bethsaida; and all the others seem to have been Galilaeans with the single exception of Judas Iscariot, who belonged to a Jewish town (see Luk 6:16<\/span>). The only Greek names are those of Philip and Andrew (see Joh 12:21-22<\/span>). At this time however many Jews bore Greek names.<\/p>\n vii. In the second<\/em> tetrad it may be regarded as certain that Bartholomew (the son of Tolmai) is the disciple whom St John calls Nathanael. He may possibly have been Philip’s brother. St Matthew puts his own name last, and adds the title of reproach the tax-gatherer.<\/em> In the two other Evangelists he precedes St Thomas. The name Thomas merely means ‘a twin’ (Didymus), and one tradition says that he was a twin-brother of Matthew, and that his<\/em> name too was Jude (Euseb. H. E.<\/em> i. 13).<\/p>\n viii. In the third<\/em> tetrad we find one Apostle with three names. His real name was Jude, but as there was already one Jude among the Apostles, and as it was the commonest of Jewish names, and as there was also a Jude who was one of the ‘brethren of the Lord,’ he seems to have two surnames Lebbaeus<\/em>, from lebh<\/em>, ‘heart,’ and Thaddaeus<\/em> (another form of Theudas, Act 5:36<\/span>), from Thad,<\/em> ‘bosom’ possibly, as some have conjectured, from the warmth and tenderness of his disposition. (Very few follow Clemens of Alexandria and Ewald in trying to identify Lebbaeus and Levi.) This disciple is called by St Luke (viz. here and in Acts i 13) “Jude of James,” or “James’s Jude,” and the English Version supplies the word “brother” (see Winer, p. 238). There is however no more decisive reason to supply “brother” (which is at any rate a very unusual ellipse) than in the former verse, where James is called “James of Alphaeus” (Chalpai, Klpa, Joh 19:25<\/span>, perhaps also Kleopas (Luk 24:18<\/span>), since Jews often Graecised the form of their names). The word ‘brother,’ where needed, is expressed, as in Luk 6:14<\/span>. This three-named disciple was probably a son of James (compare Nonnus Joh 14:22<\/span> ), and therefore a grandson of Alphaeus, and a nephew of Matthew and Thomas. James the son of Alphaeus is sometimes called “the Less;” but this seems to be a mistaken rendering of (Mar 15:40<\/span>), which means ‘the short of stature.’ The other James is never called ‘the Great.’<\/p>\n ix. Simon Zelotes is called by St Matthew ‘the Kananite’ ( ), or according to the better readings ‘the Kananean.’ The word does not mean “Canaanite,” as our Version incorrectly gives it, nor yet ‘inhabitant of Kana in Galilee,’ but means the same thing as ‘the Zealot,’ from Kineh, ‘zeal.’ He had therefore once belonged to the sect of terrible fanatics the Carbonari of Palestine who thought any deed of violence justifiable for the recovery of national freedom. He may have been one of the wild followers of Judas the Gaulonite. (Jos. B. J. IV. 3, 9, and passim.) The name ‘Zealot’ was derived from 1Ma 2:50 , where the dying Mattathias, father of Judas Maccabaeus, says to the Assidaeans (Chasidim, i.e. ‘all such as were voluntarily devoted to the law’) “Be ye zealous for the Law, and give your lives for the covenant of your fathers” (comp. 2Ma 4:2<\/span>). It shews our Lord’s divine wisdom and fearless universality of love that He should choose for Apostles two persons who had once been at such deadly opposition as a tax-gatherer and a zealot.<\/p>\n x. For “Judas Iscariot who also betrayed him” St Luke uses the milder description, , ‘who became a traitor.’ The name Iscariot has nothing to do with askara, ‘strangulation,’ or sheker, ‘lie,’ but is in all probability Eesh Kerioth, ‘man of Kerioth,’ just as Istbos stands in Josephus (Antt. VII. 6, 1) for ‘man of Tb.’ Kerioth (Jos 15:25<\/span>) is perhaps Kuryetein, ten miles from Hebron, in the southern border of Judah. If the reading “Iscariot” is right in Joh 6:71<\/span>; Joh 13:26<\/span> ( , B, C, G, L), as applied also to Simon Zelotes, then, since Judas is called “son of Simon” (Joh 6:71<\/span>), the last pair of Apostles were father and son. If Judas Iscariot had ever shared the wild Messianic patriotism of his father it would partly account for the recoil of disgust and disappointment which helped to ruin his earthly mind when he saw that he had staked all in the cause of one who was rejected and despised. Yet even Judas was a witness, and a very important one, to the perfect innocence of his Lord (Mat 27:4<\/span>).<\/p>\n xi. It is a deeply interesting fact, if it be a fact (and although it cannot be made out with certainty because it depends on data which are conjectural, and on tradition which is liable to error it is still far from improbable) that so many of the Apostles were related to each other. Simon and Andrew were brothers; James and John were brothers, and, if Salome was a sister of the Virgin (comp. Mar 15:40<\/span>; Joh 19:25<\/span>), they were first cousins of our Lord; Philip and Bartholomew may have been brothers; Thomas, Matthew, and James were perhaps brothers and first cousins of our Lord; Lebbaeus, or ‘Jude of James,’ was His second cousin; Simon Zelotes and Judas Iscariot were father and son. Thus no less than half of the Apostles would have been actually related to our Lord, although His brethren<\/em> did not believe on Him (Joh 7:5<\/span>). The difficulty however of being sure<\/em> of these combinations rises in part from the paucity of Jewish names, and therefore the extreme commonness of Simon, Jude, James, &c.<\/p>\n xii. The separate incidents in which individual Apostles are mentioned are as follows:<\/p>\n Peter: Prominent throughout; Luk 12:41<\/span>, Luk 22:31<\/span>; Mat 16:16<\/span>; Mat 17:24<\/span>; Mat 19:27<\/span>, &c.<\/p>\n James and John, Both prominent throughout. Boanerges; calling down fire; petition for precedence, &c.<\/p>\n James was the first Apostolic martyr; John the last survivor (Act 12:2<\/span>; Joh 21:22<\/span>).<\/p>\n Andrew: the first disciple, Joh 1:40<\/span>; with Jesus on Olivet, Mar 13:3<\/span>.<\/p>\n Philip: “Follow me,” Joh 1:43<\/span>; his frankness, Joh 6:7<\/span>; the Greeks, Joh 12:22<\/span> ;<\/em> “shew us the Father,” Joh 14:8<\/span>.<\/p>\n Bartholomew: “an Israelite indeed,” Joh 1:47<\/span>; of Cana, Joh 21:2<\/span> .<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Matthew: his call, Luk 5:27-28<\/span>.<\/p>\n Thomas: despondent yet faithful, Joh 11:16<\/span>; Joh 14:5<\/span>; Joh 20:25<\/span>; Joh 21:2<\/span>.<\/p>\n James son of Alphaeus: no incident.<\/p>\n Jude son of James: his perplexed question, Joh 14:22<\/span>.<\/p>\n Simon Zelotes: no incident.<\/p>\n Judas Iscariot: the betrayal and ultimate suicide.<\/p>\n Simon, whom he also named Peter<\/strong>,…. Which signifies a rock, or stone, as Cephas also does, see Joh 1:42<\/span> from his constancy, steadfastness, and solidity:<\/p>\n and Andrew his brother<\/strong>; who was called at the same time with him, and were brethren, both in nature and grace:<\/p>\n James and John<\/strong>: the two sons of Zebedee, who were called next:<\/p>\n Philip and Bartholomew<\/strong>; the latter of these is by some thought to be Nathanael.<\/p>\n On the order of the names, see on Mr 3:17<\/span>. <\/P> Andrew. See on Mr 3:18<\/span>. <\/P> James and John. See on Mr 3:17<\/span>. <\/P> Philip and Bartholomew. See on Mr 3:18<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “Simon, (whom he also named Peter)” <\/strong>(Simona, hon kai onomasen Petron) “Simon, whom he also named Peter;” Peter is Greek, meaning a pebble-rock; He is also called Cephas, an Aramaic word also meaning a small rock, and Simon son of Jonas, Joh 21:15<\/span>; Joh 1:42<\/span>; Mar 3:16<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2)” And Andrew his brother,” <\/strong>(kai Andrean ton adelphon autou) “And Andrew his fraternal brother,” his family brother. His name means, “manly”, or he-man.<\/p>\n 3) “James and John,” <\/strong>(kai lakobon kai loannen) “And James and John,” who were also fraternal (family) brothers. The name James is the same as Jacob. He is usually called James the elder, the first of the apostles to suffer as a martyr, Act 12:2<\/span>. John was the last survivor of the twelve apostles. His name means “God is gracious.” Jesus called him and his brother, James, Boanerges, “Sons of thunder,” Mar 3:17<\/span>; His father was Zebedee and mother Salome, believed to be a sister of the mother of Jesus, making them His cousins, Joh 19:25<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “Philip and Bartholomew,” <\/strong>(kai Philippon kai Barthalomaion) “And Philip and Bartholomew;” The Greek name Philip means “a lover of horses;” He was the first of the twelve called, Joh 1:43<\/span>. These first five, of the twelve, were all from the town of Bethsaida, which means, “house of fish”, a commercial fishing center, Mar 6:45<\/span>; Joh 1:44<\/span>.<\/p>\n Batholomew, son of Tolmai, is believed to be the same person as Nathaniel, which means, “a gift from God,” Joh 21:2<\/span>, and one of the twelve apostles, brought to the Lord by Philip, Joh 1:45-49<\/span>.<\/p>\n (14-16) Simon, (whom he also named Peter).<\/strong>For the list of the Twelve Apostles see Notes on Mat. 10:2<\/span>.<\/p>\n The only special points in St. Lukes list are (1) that he gives Simon Zelotes, obviously as a translation, for Simon the Cananite, or Cananan, of the other two lists, and gives Jamess Judas,<\/em> leaving it uncertain whether he means that the latter was son or brother of the former. His use of the same formula in the genealogy of Luke 3<\/span> is in favour of the former relationship.<\/p>\n ‘Simon, whom he also named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip and Bartholomew,’<\/p>\n The list of the twelve is also found in Act 1:13<\/span>; Matthew 10-2-4; Mar 3:16-19<\/span>, with slight variations. Many people in those days had two names, and Jesus may have given each a new name as He did Peter. Peter always comes first in every list and Judas last. Thus there may be a deliberate contrast in Luke, ‘Simon who is called a Rock, — and Judas who became a traitor.’ But ‘became’ makes clear that at first he was genuinely committed to following Jesus, even if it might have been for the wrong reasons.<\/p>\n Simon’s new name of ‘Peter’ was first given to him when he met Jesus after being introduced to Him by Andrew in Joh 1:42<\/span>. We must thus read it here as indicating ‘Simon, to whom He had given the new name Peter’. The name given was actually the Aramaic Cephas (kepha) which meant a rock (Joh 1:42<\/span>), but when translated into Greek it became petros (masculine – which means small rock) and not petra (feminine – a large foundation rock, rocky ground). This was, of course, because Simon was male. However the distinction was maintained in Mat 16:18<\/span>, where petros could have been used both times as a translation of kepha if Jesus had there been speaking in Aramaic. But there the switch is not to petros but to petra. This was in order to signify that the rock in mind there was either Peter’s statement. Out of 76 of the early church fathers only 18 thought that the reference was to Peter, and that at a time when Peter was seen as prominent. Over forty applied it to the statement that he made.<\/p>\n Jesus chose Peter not only to be one of the twelve, but also to be one of the inner three, Peter, James and John (Luk 5:37<\/span>; Luk 9:2<\/span>; Luk 14:33<\/span>). He clearly saw in him one who, once he had conquered his impetuosity and occasional unreliability (Mar 8:32-33<\/span>; Mar 14:37<\/span>; Mar 14:68<\/span>; Mar 14:70-71<\/span>; Gal 2:11<\/span> following), would in the end prove to be a rock. Perhaps the giving of the name was intended to make him consider his need to do exactly this. He is always named first and became a natural leading figure among the twelve (Luk 8:40<\/span>; Luk 9:20<\/span>; Luk 9:32-33<\/span>; Luk 12:41<\/span>; Luk 18:28<\/span>; Mat 17:24<\/span>; Joh 21:3<\/span>; Act 1:15<\/span>; Act 2:14<\/span>; Act 8:14<\/span> (with John)), but not officially so, or in such a way that he could not be challenged. See Act 11:2-3<\/span> – where he had to back up his position with reason, not by claiming special personal God-given authority – see also Gal 2:11<\/span>.<\/p>\n With Peter He chose Andrew his brother and James and John. Along with James and John, Peter formed the inner three (see above). They have already been introduced to us previously in 5\/1-11. It is likely that Jesus gave new names to all His disciples but the others tend to be ignored here, probably because they were not so prominent later on.<\/p>\n Philip was the first that we know of who was called to ‘follow Me’ (Joh 1:43<\/span>). Bartholomew may be ‘son of Ptolemy’ or ‘Talmai’ and by his association here with Philip may quite likely be Nathanael (Bartholomew is not a first name). Nathanael may in fact not have been one of the Twelve, although Joh 21:2<\/span> may suggest that he was. It partly depends on what John meant there by ‘disciple’. .<\/p>\n Luk 6:14-16<\/span> . Comp. on Mat 10:2-4<\/span> ; Mar 3:16-19<\/span> .<\/p>\n ] Comp. Act 1:13<\/span> . See on Mat 10:4<\/span> .<\/p>\n ] Usually (including even Ebrard and Lange): Judas the brother<\/em> of James, and therefore the son of Alphaeus; but without any foundation in exegesis. At least Jud 1:1<\/span> might be appealed to, where both Jude<\/em> and James<\/em> are natural brothers of the Lord<\/em> . In opposition to supplying , however, we have to point out in general, that to justify the supplying of the word a special reference must have preceded (as Alciphr. Ep<\/em> . ii. 2), otherwise we must abide by the usual , as at Luk 6:15<\/span> ; further, that Mat 10:2<\/span> mentions the pairs of brothers among the apostles most precisely as such<\/em> , but not among them James and Lebbaeus (who is to be regarded as identical with our Judas; see on Mat 10:2<\/span> [102] ). Hence (so also Ewald), here and at Act 1:13<\/span> , we must read Judas son of James<\/em> , of which James nothing further is known. [103]<\/p>\n <\/em><\/strong> ] Traitor<\/em> ( 2Ma 5:15 ; 2Ma 10:13 ; 2Ma 10:22 ; 2Ti 3:4<\/span> ); only here in the New Testament is Judas thus<\/em> designated. Matthew has , comp. Mark. Yet comp. Act 7:52<\/span> .<\/p>\n Observe, moreover, that Luke here enumerates the four first-named apostles in pairs<\/em> , as does Matthew; whereas in Act 1:13<\/span> he places first the three most confidential ones<\/em> , as does Mark. We see from this simply that in Act 1:13<\/span> he followed a source containing the latter order, by which he held impartially and without any mechanical reconciliation with the order of the passage before us. The conclusion is much too hasty, which argues that Mark was not before him till Act 1:13<\/span> , and that when he wrote the Gospel he had not yet become acquainted with Mark’s work (Weizscker).<\/p>\n [102] Ewald takes a different view, that even during the lifetime of Jesus had taken the place of the Thaddaeus (Lebbaeus), who had probably been cut off by death. See his Gesch. Chr<\/em> . p. 323. In this way, indeed, the narrative of Luke in the passage before us, where the choice<\/em> of the Twelve is related, would be incorrect. That hypothesis would only be capable of reconciliation with Act 1:13<\/span> . According to Schleiermacher also, L. J<\/em> . p. 369, the persons of the apostolic band were not always the same, and the different catalogues belong to different periods. But when the evangelists wrote, the Twelve were too well known in Christendom, nay, too world-historical, to have allowed the enumeration of different individual members.<\/p>\n [103] Comp. Nonnus, Paraphrase of Joh 14:22<\/span> : .<\/p>\n 14 Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 14. See Trapp on “<\/em> Mat 10:2 “<\/em> See Trapp on “<\/em> Mat 10:3 “<\/em> See Trapp on “<\/em> Mat 10:4 “<\/em> See Trapp on “<\/em> Mar 3:14 “<\/em> See Trapp on “<\/em> Mar 6:7 “<\/em> <\/p>\n 14.<\/strong> ] On the catalogue, see notes on Mat 10:1<\/span> ff.<\/p>\n Luk 6:14<\/span> . : here follows the list much the same as in Mt. and Mk. Lk., though he has already called Simon, Peter (Luk 5:8<\/span> ), here mentions that Jesus gave him the name. In the third group of four Judas Jacobi takes the place of Thaddaeus in Mk. and Lebbaeus in Mt. and Simon the Kananite is called Simon the Zealot. Of Judas Iscariot it is noted that he became a traitor, “turned traitor” (Field, Ot. Nor.<\/em> ). has no article, and therefore should not be rendered the<\/em> traitor as in A. V [62] and R. V [63] When the verb is used it is always .<\/p>\n [62] Authorised Version.<\/p>\n [63] Revised Version.<\/p>\n also named = named also. See App-141. <\/p>\n Bartholomew. App-94. <\/p>\n 14.] On the catalogue, see notes on Mat 10:1 ff.<\/p>\n Simon: Luk 5:8, Joh 1:40-42, Joh 21:15-20, Act 1:13, 2Pe 1:1 <\/p>\n Andrew: Mat 4:18, Joh 6:8 <\/p>\n James: Luk 5:10, Mat 4:21, Mar 1:19, Mar 1:29, Mar 5:37, Mar 9:2, Mar 14:33, Joh 21:20-24, Act 12:2 <\/p>\n Philip: Mat 10:3, Joh 1:45, Joh 6:5, Joh 14:8, Act 1:13 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Mat 10:2 – Simon Mar 1:16 – Simon Mar 3:18 – Bartholomew Luk 8:1 – and the Luk 8:51 – save Joh 1:42 – A stone Joh 1:44 – Philip 1Co 12:28 – God<\/p>\n 6<\/p>\n See the notes at Mat 10:2-4 in connection with this paragraph.<\/p>\n Luk 6:14-16. THE LIST OF THE APOSTLES as here given presents no difficulties. The E. V. indicates an arrangement in pairs, but the word and must be inserted before nearly all the names, and thus this arrangement loses its support. The twelve are grouped here, as in all the catalogues, with the names of Peter, Philip and James the son of Alpheus, as first, fifth and ninth, and that of Judas Iscariot last. Between these the same names (or names of the same persons) occur: the three fishermen after Peter (here in the order of Matthew); after Philip in the order of Mark; between James the son of Alpheus and Judas Iscariot, we have here Simon who was called the Zealot. Cananaean (Matthew and Mark) probably means Zealot.<\/p>\n Judas the brother, or perhaps son, of James. This must be Lebbeus, or Thaddeus (Matthew; where the reading is doubtful (Thaddeus, Mark), since that is the only person not already identified. He may have been a brother of the James just spoken of, or the son of some other James. We incline to the former view. Whether he was the author of the Epistle of Jude will be discussed there. See on Mat 10:1-4, and against the view that James, Jude, and Simon were brothers of our Lord, see on Mat 13:55.<\/p>\n Luk 6:14-16. Simon, whom he also named Peter Matthew, Mark, and Luke have all given us a catalogue of the names of the apostles; and their exactness in this particular is greatly to be praised. For as the apostleship clothed the person on whom it was conferred with the high authority of directing the religious faith of mankind, it was of no small importance to the world to know who they were to whom that dignity belonged. In these catalogues, Simon is first named, not because he was of greater dignity than the rest, but because he was one of the most early followers of Christ, and the first that was called to a stated attendance upon him, and a person whose remarkable zeal and piety rendered him a kind of leader among the others. These reasons are so evidently sufficient for his being named first, that it is strange any should have attempted to prove from that circumstance, that Christ invested him with authority over his brethren; when we never find any such thing declared by Christ, or claimed by Peter, or owned by any of the other apostles, but rather find many scriptures which appear to look a contrary way; Matthew and Luke mention Andrew next to Peter, as being his brother, and one of Christs first disciples. The names of James and John follow, as having been called next, (see Mat 4:21,) and being persons of great eminence for piety and usefulness, and James is placed before John, as being the elder brother. The names of the others seem to be placed nearly, at least, in the order in which they became disciples. Judas Iscariot, however, though, perhaps, not last called, is named last, because he was the traitor. But whatever might be the reason of ranking the apostles in the catalogue in the order in which we find them, we are certain they are not ranged according to their dignity; for, had that been the case, the order of the names would have been exactly the same in all the evangelists, which it is not, Andrew being placed the second in order, as we have observed, by Matthew and Luke, and the fourth by Mark; and Thomas being placed before Matthew by that apostle, and after him by Mark and Luke. To this may be added, on supposition that the apostles are ranked in the catalogues according to their dignity, it would follow, that John and Matthew, whose praise is in all the churches, on account of their writings, were inferior to apostles who are scarce once named, except in the catalogues. With regard to the epithet, or surname, (Zelotes, the Zealous,) added by Luke here to the name of Simon; because there was a particular sect or faction, among the Jews, termed the Zealots, who, in later times, under colour of zeal for God, committed all imaginable disorders, some are of opinion, that Simon the apostle had formerly been one of this faction. But as there is no mention made of that sect till a little before the destruction of Jerusalem, (Josephus, Bell., Luk 4:3,) we may rather suppose that this epithet was added to his name on account of his uncommon zeal in matters of true piety and religion.<\/p>\n Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, 14. Simon ] Lists of the twelve Apostles are given in four passages of Scripture in the following order: Mat 10:2-4 Mar 3:16-19 Luk 6:14-16 Act 1:13 Simon Simon Simon Peter Andrew James Andrew James James John James John … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 6:14”<\/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-25144","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25144","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=25144"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25144\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25144"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25144"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25144"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist 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: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"