What follows is a brief explanation of Dr. Bob Utley’s hermeneutical philosophy and the procedures used in his commentaries.

Can we know truth? Where is it found? Can we logically verify it? Is there an ultimate authority? Are there absolutes which can guide our lives, our world? Is there meaning to life? Why are we here? Where are we going? These questions—questions that all rational people contemplate—have haunted the human intellect since the beginning of time (Eccl. 1:13-18; 3:9-11). I can remember my personal search for an integrating center for my life. I became a believer in Christ at a young age, based primarily on the witness of significant others in my family. As I grew to adulthood, questions about myself and my world also grew. Simple cultural and religious clichés did not bring meaning to the experiences I read about or encountered. It was a time of confusion, searching, longing, and often a feeling of hopelessness in the face of the insensitive, hard world in which I lived.

Many claimed to have answers to these ultimate questions, but after research and reflection I found that their answers were based upon (1) personal philosophies, (2) ancient myths, (3) personal experiences, or (4) psychological projections. I needed some degree of verification, some evidence, some rationality on which to base my worldview, my integrating center, my reason to live.
I found these in my study of the Bible. I began to search for evidence of its trustworthiness, which I found in (1) the historical reliability of the Bible as confirmed by archaeology, (2) the accuracy of the prophecies of the Old Testament, (3) the unity of the Bible message over the sixteen hundred years of its production, and (4) the personal testimonies of people whose lives had been permanently changed by contact with the Bible. Christianity, as a unified system of faith and belief, has the ability to deal with complex questions of human life. Not only did this provide a rational framework, but the experiential aspect of biblical faith brought me emotional joy and stability.

I thought that I had found the integrating center for my life—Christ, as understood through the Scriptures. It was a heady experience, an emotional release. However, I can still remember the shock and pain when it began to dawn on me how many different interpretations of this book were advocated, sometimes even within the same churches and schools of thought. Affirming the inspiration and trustworthiness of the Bible was not the end, but only the beginning. How do I verify or reject the varied and conflicting interpretations of the many difficult passages in Scripture by those who were claiming its authority and trustworthiness?
This task became my life’s goal and pilgrimage of faith. I knew that my faith in Christ had brought me great peace and joy. My mind longed for some absolutes in the midst of the relativity of my culture and the dogmatism of conflicting religious systems and denominational arrogance. In my search for valid approaches to the interpretation of ancient literature, I was surprised to discover my own historical, cultural, denominational and experiential biases. I had often read the Bible simply to reinforce my own views. I used it as a source of dogma to attack others while reaffirming my own insecurities and inadequacies. How painful this realization was to me!

Although I can never be totally objective, I can become a better reader of the Bible. I can limit my biases by identifying them and acknowledging their presence. I am not yet free of them, but I have confronted my own weaknesses. The interpreter is often the worst enemy of good Bible reading! Let me list some of the presuppositions I bring to my study of the Bible so that you, the reader, may examine them along with me:

I. Presuppositions

1. I believe the Bible is the sole inspired self-revelation of the one true God. Therefore, it must be interpreted in light of the intent of the original divine author through a human writer in a specific historical setting.
2. I believe the Bible was written for the common person—for all people! God accommodated Himself to speak to us clearly within a historical and cultural context. God does not hide truth—He wants us to understand! Therefore, it must be interpreted in light of its day, not ours. The Bible should not mean to us what it never meant to those who first read or heard it. It is understandable by the average human mind and uses normal human communication forms and techniques.
3. I believe the Bible has a unified message and purpose. It does not contradict itself, though it does contain difficult and paradoxical passages. Thus, the best interpreter of the Bible is the Bible itself.
4. I believe that every passage (excluding prophesies) has one and only one meaning based on the intent of the original, inspired author. Although we can never be absolutely certain we know the original author’s intent, many indicators point in its direction:
   1. the genre (literary type) chosen to express the message
   2. the historical setting and/or specific occasion that elicited the writing
   3. the literary context of the entire book as well as each literary unit
   4. the textual design (outline) of the literary units as they relate to the whole message
   5. the specific grammatical features employed to communicate the message
   6. the words chosen to present the message

The study of each of these areas becomes the object of our study of a passage. Before I explain my methodology for good Bible reading, let me delineate some of the inappropriate methods being used today that have caused so much diversity of interpretation, and that consequently should be avoided:

II. Inappropriate Methods

1. Ignoring the literary context of the books of the Bible and using every sentence, clause, or even individual words as statements of truth unrelated to the author’s intent or the larger context. This is often called "proof-texting.”
2. Ignoring the historical setting of the books by substituting a supposed historical setting that has little or no support from the text itself.
3. Ignoring the historical setting of the books and reading it as the morning hometown newspaper written primarily to modern individual Christians.
4. Ignoring the historical setting of the books by allegorizing the text into a philosophical/theological message totally unrelated to the first hearers and the original author’s intent.
5. Ignoring the original message by substituting one’s own system of theology, pet doctrine, or contemporary issue unrelated to the original author’s purpose and stated message. This phenomenon often follows the initial reading of the Bible as a means of establishing a speaker’s authority. This is often referred to as "reader response” ("what-the-text-means-to-me” interpretation).

   At least three related components may be found in all written human communication:

In the past, different reading techniques have focused on one of the three components. But to truly affirm the unique inspiration of the Bible, a modified diagram is more appropriate:

In truth all three components must be included in the interpretive process. For the purpose of verification, my interpretation focuses on the first two components: the original author and the text. I am probably reacting to the abuses I have observed (1) allegorizing or spiritualizing texts and (2) "reader response” interpretation (what-it-means-to-me). Abuse may occur at each stage. We must always check our motives, biases, techniques, and applications. But how do we check them if there are no boundaries to interpretations, no limits, no criteria? This is where authorial intent and textual structure provide me with some criteria for limiting the scope of possible valid interpretations.
In light of these inappropriate reading techniques, what are some possible approaches to good Bible reading and interpretation which offer a degree of verification and consistency?

III. Possible Approaches to Good Bible Reading

At this point I am not discussing the unique techniques of interpreting specific genres but general hermeneutical principles valid for all types of biblical texts. A good book for genre-specific approaches is How To Read The Bible For All Its Worth, by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart, published by Zondervan.

My methodology focuses initially on the reader allowing the HolySpirit to illumine the Bible through four personal reading cycles. This makes the Spirit, the text and the reader primary, not secondary. This also protects the reader from being unduly influenced by commentators. I have heard it said: "The Bible throws a lot of light on commentaries.” This is not meant to be a depreciating comment about study aids, but rather a plea for an appropriate timing for their use.
We must be able to support our interpretations from the text itself. Five areas provide at least limited verification:

1. historical setting
2. literary context
3. grammatical structures (syntax)
4. contemporary word usage
5. relevant parallel passages
6. genre

   We need to be able to provide the reasons and logic behind our interpretations. The Bible is our only source for faith and practice. Sadly, Christians often disagree about what it teaches or affirms. The four reading cycles are designed to provide the following interpretive insights:

   1. The first reading cycle
      1. Read the book in a single sitting. Read it again in a different translation, hopefully from a different translation theory
         (1) word-for-word (NKJV, NASB, NRSV)
         (2) dynamic equivalent (TEV, JB)
         (3) paraphrase (Living Bible, Amplified Bible)
      2. Look for the central purpose of the entire writing. Identify its theme.
      3. Isolate (if possible) a literary unit, a chapter, a paragraph or a sentence which clearly expresses this central purpose or theme.
      4. Identify the predominant literary genre
         (1) Old Testament
                 a) Hebrew narrative
                 b) Hebrew poetry (wisdom literature, psalm)
                 c) Hebrew prophecy (prose, poetry)
                 d) Law codes
         (2) New Testament
                 a) Narratives (Gospels, Acts)
                 b) Parables (Gospels)
                 c) Letters/epistles
                 d) Apocalyptic literature
          
   2. The second reading cycle
      1. Read the entire book again, seeking to identify major topics or subjects.
      2. Outline the major topics and briefly state their contents in a simple statement.
      3. Check your purpose statement and broad outline with study aids.
          
   3. The third reading cycle
      1. Read the entire book again, seeking to identify the historical setting and specific occasion for the writing from the Bible book itself.
      2. List the historical items that are mentioned in the Bible book
         (1) the author
         (2) the date
         (3) the recipients
         (4) the specific reason for writing
         (5) aspects of the cultural setting that relate to the purpose of the writing
         (6) references to historical people and events
      3. Expand your outline to paragraph level for that part of the biblical book you are interpreting. Always identify and outline the literary unit. This may be several chapters or paragraphs. This enables you to follow the original author’s logic and textual design.
      4. Check your historical setting by using study aids.
          
   4. The fourth reading cycle
      1. Read the specific literary unit again in several translations
         (1) word-for-word (NKJV, NASB, NRSV)
         (2) dynamic equivalent (TEV, JB)
         (3) paraphrase (Living Bible, Amplified Bible)
      2. Look for literary or grammatical structures
         (1) repeated phrases, Eph. 1:6,12,14
         (2) repeated grammatical structures, Rom. 8:31
         (3) contrasting concepts
      3. List the following items
         (1) significant terms
         (2) unusual terms
         (3) important grammatical structures
         (4) particularly difficult words, clauses, and sentences
      4. Look for relevant parallel passages
         (1) look for the clearest teaching passage on your subject using a) "systematic theology” books b) reference Bibles c) concordances
         (2) look for a possible paradoxical pair within your subject. Many biblical truths are presented in dialectical pairs; many denominational conflicts come from proof-texting half of a biblical tension. All of the Bible is inspired, and we must seek out its complete message in order to provide a Scriptural balance to our interpretation.
         (3) look for parallels within the same book, same author or same genre; the Bible is its own best interpreter because it has one author, the Spirit.
      5. Use study aids to check your observations of historical setting and occasion
         (1) study Bibles
         (2) Bible encyclopedias, handbooks and dictionaries
         (3) Bible introductions
         (4) Bible commentaries (at this point in your study, allow the believing community, past and present, to aid and correct your personal study.)

IV. Application of Bible Interpretation

At this point we turn to application. You have taken the time to understand the text in its original setting; now you must apply it to your life, your culture. I define biblical authority as "understanding what the original biblical author was saying to his day and applying that truth to our day.”

Application must follow interpretation of the original author’s intent both in time and logic. We cannot apply a Bible passage to our own day until we know what it was saying to its day! A Bible passage should not mean what it never meant!
Your detailed outline, to paragraph level (reading cycle #3), will be your guide. Application should be made at paragraph level, not word level. Words have meaning only in context; clauses have meaning only in context; sentences have meaning only in context. The only inspired person involved in the interpretive process is the original author. We only follow his lead by the illumination of the Holy Spirit. But illumination is not inspiration. To say "thus saith the Lord,” we must abide by the original author’s intent. Application must relate specifically to the general intent of the whole writing, the specific literary unit and paragraph level thought development.

Do not let the issues of our day interpret the Bible; let the Bible speak! This may require us to draw principles from the text. This is valid if the text supports a principle. Unfortunately, many times our principles are just that, "our” principles—not the text’s principles.

In applying the Bible, it is important to remember that (except in prophecy) one and only one meaning is valid for a particular Bible text. That meaning is related to the intent of the original author as he addressed a crisis or need in his day. Many possible applications may be derived from this one meaning. The application will be based on the recipients’ needs but must be related to the original author’s meaning.

V. The Spiritual Aspect of Interpretation

So far I have discussed the logical process involved in interpretation and application. Now let me discuss briefly the spiritual aspect of interpretation. The following checklist has been helpful for me:

1. Pray for the Spirit’s help (cf. I Cor. 1:26-2:16).
2. Pray for personal forgiveness and cleansing from known sin (cf. I John 1:9).
3. Pray for a greater desire to know God (cf. Ps. 19:7-14; 42:1ff.; 119:1ff).
4. Apply any new insight immediately to your own life.
5. Remain humble and teachable.

It is so hard to keep the balance between the logical process and the spiritual leadership of the Holy Spirit. The following quotes have helped me balance the two:

1. from James W. Sire, Scripture Twisting, pp. 17-18:
   "The illumination comes to the minds of God’s people—not just to the spiritual elite. There is no guru class in biblical Christianity, no illuminati, no people through whom all proper interpretation must come. And so, while the Holy Spirit gives special gifts of wisdom, knowledge and spiritual discernment, He does not assign these gifted Christians to be the only authoritative interpreters of His Word. It is up to each of His people to learn, to judge and to discern by reference to the Bible which stands as the authority even to those to whom God has given special abilities. To summarize, the assumption I am making throughout the entire book is that the Bible is God’s true revelation to all humanity, that it is our ultimate authority on all matters about which it speaks, that it is not a total mystery but can be adequately understood by ordinary people in every culture.”
    
2. on Kierkegaard, found in Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation, p. 75:
   According to Kierkegaard the grammatical, lexical, and historical study of the Bible was necessary but preliminary to the true reading of the Bible. "To read the Bible as God’s word one must read it with his heart in his mouth, on tip-toe, with eager expectancy, in conversation with God. To read the Bible thoughtlessly or carelessly or academically or professionally is not to read the Bible as God’s Word. As one reads it as a love letter is read, then one reads it as the Word of God.”
    
3. H. H. Rowley in The Relevance of the Bible, p. 19:
   "No merely intellectual understanding of the Bible, however complete, can possess all its treasures. It does not despise such understanding, for it is essential to a complete understanding. But it must lead to a spiritual understanding of the spiritual treasures of this book if it is to be complete. And for that spiritual understanding something more than intellectual alertness is necessary. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned, and the Bible student needs an attitude of spiritual receptivity, an eagerness to find God that he may yield himself to Him, if he is to pass beyond his scientific study unto the richer inheritance of this greatest of all books.”

VI. This Commentary’s Method

The Study Guide Commentary is designed to aid your interpretive procedures in the following ways:

1. A brief historical outline introduces each book. After you have done "reading cycle #3" check this information.
2. Contextual insights are found at the beginning of each chapter. This will help you see how the literary unit is structured.
3. At the beginning of each chapter or major literary unit the paragraph divisions and their descriptive captions are provided from several modern translations:

   a. The United Bible Society Greek text, fourth edition revised (UBS4)
   b. The New American Standard Bible, 1995 Update (NASB)
   c. The New King James Version (NKJV)
   d. The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
   e. Today’s English Version (TEV)
   f. The New Jerusalem Bible (NJB)

Paragraph divisions are not inspired. They must be ascertained from the context. By comparing several modern translations from differing translation theories and theological perspectives, we are able to analyze the supposed structure of the original author’s thought. Each paragraph has one major truth. This has been called "the topic sentence” or "the central idea of the text.” This unifying thought is the key to proper historical, grammatical interpretation. One should never interpret, preach or teach on less than a paragraph! Also remember that each paragraph is related to its surrounding paragraphs. This is why a paragraph level outline of the entire book is so important. We must be able to follow the logical flow of the subject being addressed by the original inspired author.

4. Bob’s notes follow a verse-by-verse approach to interpretation. This forces us to follow the original author’s thought. The notes provide information from several areas:
   1. literary context
   2. historical, cultural insights
   3. grammatical information
   4. word studies
   5. relevant parallel passages
5. At certain points in the commentary, the printed text of the New American Standard Version (1995 update) will be supplemented by the translations of several other modern versions:
   1. The New King James Version (NKJV), which follows the textual manuscripts of the "Textus Receptus.”
   2. The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), which is a word-for-word revision from the National Council of Churches of the Revised Standard Version.
   3. The Today’s English Version (TEV), which is a dynamic equivalent translation from the American Bible Society.
   4. The Jerusalem Bible (JB), which is an English translation based on a French Catholic dynamic equivalent translation.
6. For those who do not read Greek, comparing English translations can help in identifying problems in the text:
   1. manuscript variations
   2. alternate word meanings
   3. grammatically difficult texts and structure
   4. ambiguous texts Although the English translations cannot solve these problems, they do target them as places for deeper and more thorough study.
   5. At the close of each chapter relevant discussion questions are provided which attempt to target the major interpretive issues of that chapter.

   Copyright © 2013 Bible Lessons International

This subject will be dealt with in such a way as to explain the textual notes found in this commentary. The following outline will be utilized

I. The textual sources of our English Bible

A. Old Testament

B. New Testament

II. Brief explanation of the problems and theories of "lower criticism" also called "textual criticism."

III. Suggested sources for further reading

I. The textual sources of our English Bible

A. Old Testament

1. Masoretic text (MT) - The Hebrew consonantal text was set by Rabbi Aquiba in a.d. 100. The vowel points, accents, marginal notes, punctuation and apparatus points started being added in the sixth century a.d. and were finished in the ninth century a.d. It was done by a family of Jewish scholars known as the Masoretes. The textual form they used was the same as the one in the Mishnah, Talmud, Targums, Peshitta, and Vulgate.

2. Septuagint (LXX) - Tradition says the Septuagint was produced by 70 Jewish scholars in 70 days for the Alexandria library under the sponsorship of King Ptolemy II (285-246 b.c.) The translation was supposedly requested by a Jewish leader living in Alexandria. This tradition comes from "Letter of Aristeas." The LXX frequently was based on a differing Hebrew textual tradition from the text of Rabbi Aquiba (MT).

3. Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) - The Dead Sea Scrolls were written in the Roman b.c. period (200 b.c. to a.d. 70) by a sect of Jewish separatists called the "Essenes." The Hebrew manuscripts, found in several sites around the Dead Sea, show a somewhat different Hebrew textual family behind both the MT and the LXX.

4. Some specific examples of how the comparison of these texts have helped interpreters understand the Old Testament

a. The LXX has helped translators and scholars understand the MT

(1) the LXX of Isa. 52:14, "As many shall be amazed at him."

(2) the MT of Isa. 52:14, "Just as many were astonished over you."

(3) in Isa. 52:15 the pronoun distinction of the LXX is confirmed

(a)  LXX, "so will many nations marvel at him"

(b)  MT, "so he sprinkles many nations"

b. The DSS have helped translators and scholars understand the MT

(1) the DSS of Isa. 21:8, "then the seer cried, Upon a watchtower I stand. . ."

(2) the MT of Isa. 21:8, "and I cried a lion! My Lord, I always stand on the watch tower by day. . ."

c. Both the LXX and DSS have helped clarify Isa. 53:11

(1) LXX & DSS, "after the travail of his soul he will see light, he will be satisfied"

(2) MT, "he shall see. . .of the travail of his soul, He shall be satisfied"

B. New Testament

1. Over 5,300 manuscripts of all or parts of the Greek New Testament are extant. About 85 are written on papyri and 268 are manuscripts written in all capital letters (uncials). Later, about the ninth century a.d., a running script (minuscule) was developed. The Greek manuscripts in written form number about 2,700. We also have about 2,100 copies of lists of Scripture texts used in worship that we call lectionaries.

2. About 85 Greek manuscripts containing parts of the New Testament written on papyrus are housed in museums. Some are dated from the second century a.d., but most are from the third and fourth centuries a.d. None of these MSS contain the whole New Testament. Just because these are the oldest copies of the New Testament does not automatically mean they have fewer variants. Many of these were copied rapidly for a local use. Care was not exercised in the process. Therefore, they contain many variants.

3. Codex Sinaiticus, known by the Hebrew letter א (aleph) or (01), found at St. Catherine's monastery on Mt. Sinai by Tischendorf. It dates from the fourth century a.d. and contains both the LXX of the OT and the Greek NT. It is of "the Alexandrian Text" type.

4. Codex Alexandrinus, known as "A" or (02), a fifth century Greek manuscript which was found in Alexandria, Egypt.

5. Codex Vaticanus, known as "B" or (03), found in the Vatican's library in Rome and dates from the middle of the fourth century a.d. It contains both LXX of the Old Testament and Greek New Testament. It is of "the Alexandrian Text" type.

6. Codex Ephraemi, known as "C" or (04), a fifth century Greek manuscript which was partially destroyed.

7. Codex Bezae, known as "D" or (05), a fifth or sixth century Greek manuscript. It is the chief representative of what is called "The Western Text." It contains many additions and was the main Greek witness for the King James translation.

8. The NT MSS can be grouped into three, possibly four, families that share certain characteristics.

a. Alexandrian text from Egypt

(1) P ⁷⁵, P⁶⁶ (about a.d. 200), which record the Gospels

(2) P ⁴⁶ (about a.d. 225), which records Paul's letters

(3) P ⁷² (about a.d. 225-250), which records Peter and Jude

(4) Codex B, called Vaticanus (about a.d. 325), which includes the whole OT and NT

(5) Origen quotes from this text type

(6) other MSS which show this text type are א, C, L, W, 33

b. Western text from North Africa

(1) quotes from North African church fathers, Tertullian, Cyprian, and the Old Latin translation

(2) quotes from Irenaeus

(3) quotes from Tatian and Old Syriac translation

(4) Codex D "Bezae" follow this text type

c. Eastern Byzantine text from Constantinople

(1) this text type is reflected in over 80% of the 5,300 MSS

(2) quoted by Antioch of Syria's church fathers, Cappadoceans, Chrysostom, and Therodoret

(3) Codex A, in the Gospels only

(4) Codex E (eighth century) for full NT

d. the fourth possible type is "Caesarean" from Palestine

(1) it is primarily seen only in Mark

(2) some witnesses to it are P⁴⁵ and W

II. The problems and theories of "lower criticism" or "textual criticism."

A. How the variants occurred

1. inadvertent or accidental (vast majority of occurrences)

a. slip of the eye in hand copying which reads the second instance of two similar words and thereby omits all of the words in between (homoioteleuton)

(1) slip of the eye in omitting a double letter word or phrase (haplography)

(2) slip of the mind in repeating a phrase or line of a Greek text (dittography)

b. slip of the ear in copying by oral dictation where a misspelling occurs (itacism). Often the misspelling implies or spells a similar-sounding Greek word.

c. the earliest Greek texts had no chapter or verse divisions, little or no punctuation and no division between words. It is possible to divide the letters in different places forming different words.

2. intentional

a. changes were made to improve the grammatical form of the text copied

b. changes were made to bring the text into conformity with other biblical texts (harmonization of parallels)

c. changes were made by combining two or more variant readings into one long combined text (conflation)

d. changes were made to correct a perceived problem in the text (cf. I Cor. 11:27 and I John 5:7-8)

e. some additional information as to the historical setting or proper interpretation of the text was placed in the margin by one scribe but placed into the text by a second scribe (cf. John 5:4)

B. The basic tenets of textual criticism (logical guidelines for determining the original reading of a text when variants exist)

1. the most awkward or grammatically unusual text is probably the original

2. the shortest text is probably the original

3. the older text is given more weight because of its historical proximity to the original, everything else being equal

4. MSS that are geographically diverse usually have the original reading

5. doctrinally weaker texts, especially those relating to major theological discussions of the period of manuscript changes, like the Trinity in I John 5:7-8, are to be preferred.

6. the text that can best explain the origin of the other variants

7. two quotes that help show the balance in these troubling variants

a. J. Harold Greenlee's book, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism, p. 68:

"No Christian doctrine hangs upon a debatable text; and the student of the NT must beware of wanting his text to be more orthodox or doctrinally stronger than is the inspired original."

b. W. A. Criswell told Greg Garrison of The Birmingham News that he (Criswell) doesn't believe every word in the Bible is inspired, "at least not every word that has been given to the modern public by centuries of translators." Criswell said: "I very much am a believer in the textual criticism. As such, I think, the last half of the 16th chapter of Mark is heresy: it's not inspired, it's just concocted. . .When you compare those manuscripts way back yonder, there was no such thing as that conclusion of the Book of Mark. Somebody added it..."

The patriarch of the SBC inerrantists also claimed that "interpolation" is also evident in John 5, the account of Jesus at the pool of Bethesda. And he discusses the two different accounts of the suicide of Judas (cf. Matt. 27 and Acts 1): "It's just a different view of the suicide," Criswell said. "If it is in the Bible, there is an explanation for it. And the two accounts of the suicide of Judas are in the Bible." Criswell added, "Textual criticism is a wonderful science in itself. It is not ephemeral, it's not impertinent. It's dynamic and central..."

III. Manuscript problems (textual criticism)

A. Suggested sources for further reading

1. Biblical Criticism: Historical, Literary and Textual, by R.H. Harrison

2. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration by Bruce M. Metzger

3. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism, by J. H Greenlee

Copyright © 2013 Bible Lessons International

PARAGRAPH DIVISIONS OF MODERN TRANSLATIONS *

* Although they are not inspired, paragraph divisions are the key to understanding and following the original author's intent. Each modern translation has divided and summarized the paragraphs. Every paragraph has one central topic, truth, or thought. Each version encapsulates that topic in its own distinct way. As you read the text, ask yourself which translation fits your understanding of the subject and verse divisions.
 In every chapter we must read the Bible first and try to identify its subjects (paragraphs), then compare our understanding with the modern versions. Only when we understand the original author's intent by following his logic and presentation can we truly understand the Bible. Only the original author is inspired—readers have no right to change or modify the message. Bible readers do have the responsibility of applying the inspired truth to their day and their lives.
  Note that all technical terms and abbreviations are explained fully in the following documents: Brief Definitions of Greek Grammatical Structure, Textual Criticism, and Glossary.

READING CYCLE THREE (from "A Guide to Good Bible Reading")

FOLLOWING THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR'S INTENT AT THE PARAGRAPH LEVEL

This is a study guide commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.

Read the chapter in one sitting. Identify the subjects. Compare your subject divisions with the five translations above. Paragraphing is not inspired, but it is the key to following the original author's intent, which is the heart of interpretation. Every paragraph has one and only one subject.

1. First paragraph

2. Second paragraph

3. Third paragraph

4. Etc.

CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS TO VERSES 1-25

A. The lists of ancestors found in Matt. 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38 do not agree. There are two major theories for the discrepancies:

1. Matthew wrote primarily to a Jewish audience and recorded Joseph's lineage to satisfy Jewish legal practices, while Luke wrote to Gentiles and recorded Mary's lineage (Luther). Both trace Jesus back to David, but Luke goes further, all the way back to Adam (probably because he was writing for Gentiles).

2. Matthew recorded the lineage of the kings of Judah succeeding David (or after the Exile, those who would have succeeded), while Luke recorded the actual ancestors.

B. This lineage would serve the purpose of proving Jesus' tribal identity and showing the fulfillment of prophecy (cf. Gen. 49:8-12 and 2 Samuel 7). Fulfilled prophecy (cf. Matt. 1:22; 2:15,17,23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4; 27:9,35) is strong evidence for a supernatural Bible and for God's control of history and time.

C. Verse 17 gives the key to understanding why some ancestors are not listed. The author was using a numerically structured, three-tiered "fourteen generation" approach to Jesus' lineage.

D. In these opening birth narratives there are four OT quotes (cf. Matt. 1:23; 2:6,15,18) which involve different types of prophesy.

1. Matt. 1:23 ― Isa. 7:14 is a multiple fulfillment prophecy. A child was born in Isaiah's day, cf. Matt. 1:15-16; however the Hebrew word in Matt. 1:14 is not "virgin" (bethoolah, cf. BDB 143), but "young woman of marriageable age" (almah, cf. BDB 761 II). I believe in only one virgin birth-Jesus!

2. Matt. 2:6 ― Micah 5:2 is a marvelous, very specific prophecy written 750 years before the event it describes. The place of Jesus' birth was not something He could alter or effect. This kind of predictive prophecy confirms (a) God's knowledge (and His control) of history and (b) the inspiration and uniqueness of the Bible. No other world religion's holy book has predictive prophecy!

3. Matt. 2:15 ― Hosea 11:1 and Matt. 2:18 ― Jeremiah 31:15 are both typological prophecies. Something that happened in the life of Israel reoccurs in the life of Jesus and the NT author understands it as a prophetic sign.

E. Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (p. 175), makes a great comment about how Matthew's genealogy is structured.

1. the Patriarchs - first fourteen names

2. Israelite kings - second fourteen names

3. unknown ancestors - third fourteen names

This genealogy is highly structured and selective. It is uncertain why.

1. literary technique (mnemonic)

2. numerical symbolism

a. 7 x 2; Luke lists 77 ancestors

b. the letters of David's Hebrew name add up to 14

3. well known or godly ancestors only

4. women/men; Gentiles/Jews (purposeful inclusion)

WORD AND PHRASE STUDY

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 1:1
 ¹The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham:

1:1

NASB"The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah,"
NKJV"The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ"
NRSV"an account of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah"
TEV"This is the family record of Jesus Christ"
NJB"roll of the genealogy of Jesus Christ"

The genealogy (cf. Gen. 5:1 or "account," cf. Gen. 2:4) is illustrative of God's hand in history fulfilling His promises to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and David. The NT is the fulfillment of the OT. In some cultures the use of genealogy is evidence for a trustworthy history.

▣ "the son of David" This was a title for the promised Messiah that emphasized His Jewish royal line from the tribe of Judah (cf. Gen. 49:8-12). He was of the seed of woman, Gen. 3:15; the seed of Abraham, Gen. 22:18; the seed of Judah, Gen. 49:10 and the seed of David, 2 Sam. 7:12-14, 16. This phrase was a common Messianic designation in Matthew (cf. Matt. 9:27; 12:33; 15:22; 20:30-31; 21:9,15; 22:42).

▣ "the son of Abraham" Luke's genealogy takes the line back to Adam. Luke was written for Gentiles, so it emphasizes the common human ancestry (cf. Gen. 12:3; 22:18). Matthew was written for Jews, so it focuses on the beginning of the Jewish family, Abram. In Matthew's genealogy "Abraham" and " David" are highlighted by its numerical design (i.e., three groups of 14).

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 1:2-6a
 ²Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers. ³ Judah was the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, Perez was the father of Hezron the father of Ram. ⁴ Ram was the father of Amminadab, Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon. ⁵ Salmon was the father of Boaz by Rahab, Boaz was the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse. ⁶Jesse was the father of David the king.

1:2 "Judah" Judah was one of Jacob's children (cf. Gen. 49:10; Deut. 33:7). Verses 2-6 follow the genealogy of 1 Chr. 1-3 in a limited sense.

1:3 "Perez and Zerah" Perez and Zerah were twins (cf. Gen. 38:27-30). The Messianic line came through Perez. This section of the genealogy (Matt. 1:3-5) follows Ruth 4:18-22.

▣ "Tamar" Tamar was Judah's daughter-in-law who became pregnant by him (cf. Gen. 38:12ff). It was very unusual to include women in Jewish genealogical lists. Several are included here in Matthew to emphasize that the lineage of the Messiah was not based on nationality or meritorious effort. Three of the women listed-Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth-were Gentiles and the fourth, Bathsheba, was married to a Hittite. The Gentiles, even women, are included for an inclusive theological impact!

1:5 "Rahab" Rahab was the Canaanite prostitute who helped the spies (cf. Jos. 2:13; 6:17,23,25). In Jewish and Christian tradition Rahab was an example of the power of repentance (cf. Heb. 11:31; James 2:25).

▣ "Ruth" Ruth was a Moabitess (cf. Ruth 1). Moabites were forbidden from entering the congregation of Israel (cf. Deut. 23:3).

She exemplified the faith of Gentiles and women and God's inclusive love. She was the grandmother of King David.

1:6 "who had been the wife of Uriah" This referred to Bathsheba, the mother of Solomon (cf. 2 Samuel 11 and 12), who, like Rahab and Ruth, was not Jewish.

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 1:6b-11
 ^6bDavid was the father of Solomon by Bathsheba who had been the wife of Uriah. ⁷Solomon was the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asa. ⁸Asa was the father of Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah. ⁹Uzziah was the father of Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah. ¹⁰Hezekiah was the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of Amon, and Amon the father of Josiah. ¹¹ Josiah was the father of Jeconiah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.

1:7-11 This section (with some differences) follows 1 Chr. 3:10-15.

1:7

NASB, NKJV,
TEV, NJB"Asa"
NRSV"Asaph"

This Judean king was named Asa in 1 Kgs. 15:9 and 1 Chr. 3:10. "Asa" is found in MSS L and W and fits the context. The early uncial Greek manuscripts א, B, and C surprisingly have "Asaph." This was the name of a choir director of David (cf. Psalm 50,73,83). Most textual critics assume that this is an ancient copyist error, or just a variant spelling of the name of the king.

1:8 Three Judean kings between Joram and Uzziah are omitted (1) Ahaziah (cf. 2 Kgs. 8,9; 2 Chr. 22); (2) Joash (cf. 2 Kgs. 11:2; 12:19-21; 2 Chr. 24); and (3) Amaziah (cf. 2 Kgs. 14; 2 Chr. 25).

 The reason for their omission is uncertain. Two theories are: (1) Joram was married to and influenced by his wife, Athaliah, the daughter of Jezebel and, therefore, his sin of idolatry was transmitted to the third generation (cf. Deut. 5:9) or (2) Matthew is structuring the genealogy into three sections of 14 ancestors each (Matt. 1:17). This would be the middle section.

1:9 "Uzziah was born to Jotham" In 2 Kgs. 15:1-7 and 1 Chr. 3:12 Uzziah is called Azariah. He was a godly king who was struck with leprosy because he offered a sacrifice in a wrong manner.

1:10 "Hezekiah" Hezekiah was one of the five godly kings of Judah (Asa, Jehoshaphat, Uzziah, Hezekiah, and Josiah). His life is recorded in 2 Kgs. 18-20, 2 Chr. 29-32, and Isa. 36-39.

▣ "Manasseh" He was the son of Hezekiah. Manasseh was reputed to be the most evil king in Judah's history (cf. 2 Kgs. 21:2-7). He also reigned the longest, fifty-five years (cf. 2 Kgs. 21; 2 Chr. 33).

▣ "Amon" He was the son of Manasseh and father of Josiah (cf. 2 Kgs. 21:18-19,23-25; 1 Chr. 3:14; 2 Chr. 33:20-25). Some early uncial Greek manuscripts, א, B^c, and C, have the name, "Amos." This manuscript problem is much like Matt. 1:7.

▣ "Josiah" Another godly king of Judah, Josiah was eight years old when he became king (cf. 2 Kgs. 22-23; 2 Chr. 34,35). Many scholars believe that the righteous father, the wicked son of the righteous father, and the righteous son of the wicked father in Ezekiel (cf. Ezek. 18:5-9, 10-13, 14-18) were direct references to Hezekiah, Manasseh, and Josiah.

1:11 "Jeconiah" He was also called Coniah (cf. Jer. 22:24) and Jehoiachin (cf. 2 Kings 24-25). The next to last Davidic king before the Babylonian captivity, Jeconiah was either 8 years old when he ascended the throne (cf. 2 Chr. 36:9) or 18 years old (cf. 2 Kgs. 24:8) and reigned only three months (cf. 1 Chr. 3:16-17; Jer. 24:1; 29:2). Ezekiel dates his prophecies from the year of this king's exile by Nebuchadnezzar II in 597 b.c. (cf. Ezek. 1:1,2; 8:1; 20:1; 24:1; 26:1; 29:1; 30:20; 31:1; 32:1,17; 33:21; 40:1).

▣ "deportation to Babylon" This deportation occurred under Nebuchadnezzar II. Jerusalem was captured by the army of Babylon several times-in 605, 597, 586, and 582 b.c. Several different deportations occurred.

1. deportation of Daniel and his three friends in 605 b.c.

2. the deportation of Jehoiachin, Ezekiel, and ten thousand soldiers and craftsmen in 597 b.c. (cf. 1 Kgs. 24:10-17)

3. the deportation of most of the remaining population (the city of Jerusalem was destroyed) in 587/586 b.c., 2 Kings 25

4. the final invasion and deportation of Judah in 582 b.c. in retaliation for the killing of Nebuchadnezzar's appointed governor, Gedeliah, and his Babylonian honor guard

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 1:12-16
 ¹²After the deportation to Babylon, Jeconiah became the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel. ¹³Zerubbabel was the father of Abihud, Abihud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor. ¹⁴Azor was the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud. ¹⁵Eliud was the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob. ¹⁶Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah.

1:12 "and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel" Zerubbabel was the leader of the Jews in the second return from Babylonian exile, the first return being under Sheshbazzar (cf. Ezra 1:8; 5:14). He was of the line of David (cf. Ezra 2-6). In 1 Chr. 3:16-19, his father is listed as Pedaiah and his grandfather as Shealtiel. Hebrew familial terms were fluid and could refer to several different categories of relatives. In this case, Shealtiel was an uncle. This confusion could be explained if Shealtiel adopted Zerubbabel after his father Pedaiah died (cf. Ezra 3:8; 5:2; Neh. 12:1; Hag. 1:1).

These two names also appear in the Lucan genealogy, but in a much later period.

1:13-15 The names from Zerubbabel's son Abihud to Jacob are unknown from OT sources.

1:14 "Zadok" This was not the faithful priest of David's day (cf. 2 Sam. 20:25; 1 Chr. 16:39) because Matthew's Zadok is of the tribe of Judah, not Levi.

1:16 "Joseph the husband of Mary" "Begot," which is so prominent in this listing of the other fathers, is left out! Joseph is named as the legal father and his lineage given because this was what the Jews of the first century legally required and recognized. But he was not the true biological father. Jesus was virgin born of the Spirit of God (cf. Matt. 1:23-25; Luke 1:34-35).

▣ "who is called the Messiah" "Christ" (NKJV) was the Greek translation of the Hebrew term Messiah (BDB 603, cf. 1 Sam. 2:10,35; 2 Sam. 22:51; Ps. 2:2 18:51; 89:38,51; 132:10,17; Dan. 9:24,25), meaning "an anointed one." Jesus was YHWH's special Servant (cf. Isa. 7:14; 9:1-7; 11:1-5; 52:13-53:12), the Coming One, who would establish the new age of righteousness (cf. Isaiah 61, 65-66). See Special Topic at Matt. 8:20.

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 1:17
 ¹⁷So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations.

1:17 "generations" This was not a complete historical genealogy. The Hebrew term "generations" was ambiguous and could have meant grandfather or great-great-grandfather or ancestor.

▣ "from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations" There are three sections of fourteen ancestors listed (1) Abraham to David, ( 2) David to the Exile, and (3) the Exile to Jesus. Only thirteen names are listed in the third section, so possibly Jehoiachin is counted in both the second and third sections. The number pattern implies that some names were left out (cf. 1 Chr. 1-3). Some commentators believe that these structured lists of fourteen are based on the numerical value of the consonants of David's name in Hebrew (daleth, 4 + waw, 6 + daleth, 4 = 14).

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 1:18-25
 ¹⁸Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. ¹⁹And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, wanted to send her away secretly. ²⁰But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. ²¹She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." ²²Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: ²³" Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel," which translated means, "God with us." ²⁴And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife,²⁵ but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.

1:18 "the birth" There is a Greek manuscript variant between "beginning" [genesis] and "birth" [gennasis]. The term genesis was probably original (cf. MSS P¹, א, B, C; UBS⁴ rated it B). While both terms can mean "birth," the first had wider connotations (creation, generation, i.e., "the new Genesis in Jesus as the second Adam, cf. Rom. 5:12-21) and could have meant "begotten." It has been supposed that later scribes changed the first term to "birth" deliberately to counteract later Christological (gnostic) heresies (cf. The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture by Bart P. Ehrman, pp. 75-77).

▣ "betrothed to Joseph" Betrothal was a legally binding Jewish custom, usually lasting about a year before marriage. The parties lived separately but were considered contractually married. Only death or divorce could break the betrothal arrangement.

NASB"she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit"
NKJV"she was found with child of the Holy Spirit"
NRSV"she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit"
TEV"she was going to have a baby by the Holy Spirit"
NJB"she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit"

This refers to the virgin birth, which was not a sexual experience for Mary or the Spirit. This was a prophetic fulfillment of Gen. 3:15 (" And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel"), and in a multiple fulfillment sense, of Isa. 7:14 (" Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel"). Surprisingly, no apostolic sermons in Acts or the Epistles mention this, possibly because it could have been confused with Greco-Roman mythology (the Mount Olympus gods often took human women and bore children by them).

1:19 "being a righteous man" A "righteous man" meant a lawful man by the standards of the Mosaic Law and the oral traditions of his day. It does not imply sinlessness; Noah and Job were righteous in the same sense (cf. Gen. 6:9 and Job 1:1).

▣ "to send her away secretly" Joseph could have accomplished this through two legal procedures: (1) open renunciation in court or (2) the presentation of a written bill of divorce in front of two witnesses (cf. Deuteronomy 24). Mary had not shared the vision concerning her pregnancy with Joseph. OT Law demanded the death penalty for sexual unfaithfulness (cf. Deut. 22:20-21,23-24).

1:20 Joseph was informed about the pregnancy of his betrothed wife by an angelic messenger. In Luke 1:26 the angel is identified as Gabriel (cf. Matt. 1:19; Dan. 8:16; 9:21).

The word "dream" (onar) occurs five times in the first two chapters of Matthew (cf. Matt. 1:20; 2:12,13,19,22), but not again until 27:19 and no where else in the NT.

▣ " an angel of the Lord" This phrase is used two ways in the OT.

1. an angel (cf. Gen. 24:7,40; Exod. 23:20-23; 32:34; Num. 22:22; Jdgs. 5:23; 1 Sam. 24:16; 1 Chr. 21:15ff; Zech. 1:28)

2. as a way of referring to YHWH (cf. Gen. 16:7-13; 22:11-15; 31:11,13; 48:15-16; Exod. 3:2,4; 13:21; 14:19; Jdgs. 2:1; 6:22-24; 13:3-23; Zech. 3:1-2

Matthew uses the phrase often (cf. Matt. 1:20,24; 2:13,19; 28:2), but always in the sense of #1 above. The NT does not use sense #2 except Acts 8:26 and 29, where, "an angel of the Lord" is paralleled to the Holy Spirit.

1:21 "you shall call His name Jesus" This name (Hebrew, Joshua) meant "YHWH saves," " YHWH brings salvation," or "YHWH is Savior" (some verb must be supplied, cf. Luke 1:31). See SPECIAL TOPIC: THE NAME OF THE LORD at Matt. 18:20.

The name YHWH means

1. This is the name which reflects deity as the covenant making God; God as savior, redeemer! Humans break covenants, but God is loyal to His word, promise, covenant (cf. Ps. 103).

This name is first mentioned in combination with Elohim in Gen. 2:4. There are not two creation accounts in Genesis 1-2, but two emphases: (1) God as the creator of the universe (the physical) and (2) God as the special creator of humanity. Genesis 2:4 begins the special revelation about the privileged position and purpose of mankind, as well as the problem of sin and rebellion associated with the unique position.

2. In Gen. 4:26 it is said "men began to call upon the name of the Lord" (YHWH). However, Exod. 6:3 implies that early covenant people (the Patriarchs and their families) knew God only as El-Shaddai. The name YHWH is explained only one time in Exod. 3:13-16, esp. Matt. 1:14. However, the writings of Moses often interpret words by popular word plays, not etymologies (cf. Gen. 17:5; 27:36; 29:13-35). There have been several theories as to the meaning of this name (taken from IDB, vol. 2, pp. 409-11).

a. from an Arabic root, "to show fervent love"

b. from an Arabic root "to blow" (YHWH as storm God)

c. from a Ugaritic (Canaanite) root "to speak"

d. following a Phoenician inscription, a causative participle meaning "the One who sustains," or "the One who establishes"

e. from the Hebrew Qal form "the One who is," or "the One who is present" (in future sense, "the One who will be")

f. from the Hebrew Hiphil form "the One who causes to be"

g. from the Hebrew root "to live" (e.g., Gen. 3:20), meaning "the ever-living, only-living One"

h. from the context of Exod. 3:13-16 a play on the imperfect form used in a perfect sense, "I shall continue to be what I used to be" or "I shall continue to be what I have always been" (cf. J. Wash Watts, A Survey of Syntax in the Old Testament, p. 67

The full name YHWH is often expressed in abbreviation or possibly an original form.

(1) Yah (e.g., Hallelu - yah)

(2) Yahu (names, e.g., Isaiah)

(3) Yo (names, e.g., Joel)

3. In later Judaism this covenant name became so holy (the tetragrammaton) that Jews were afraid to say it lest they break the command of Exod. 20:7; Deut. 5:11; 6:13. So they substituted the Hebrew term for "owner," "master," " husband," "lord" -adon or adonai (my lord). When they came to YHWH in their reading of OT texts they pronounced "lord." This is why YHWH is written Lord in English translations.

4. As with El, often YHWH is combined with other terms to emphasize certain characteristics of the Covenant God of Israel. While there are many possible combinations of terms, here are some.

a. YHWH - Yireh (YHWH will provide), Gen. 22:14

b. YHWH - Rophekha (YHWH is your healer), Exod. 15:26

c. YHWH - Nissi (YHWH is my banner), Exod. 17:15

d. YHWH - Meqaddishkem (YHWH the One who sanctifies you), Exod. 31:13

e. YHWH - Shalom (YHWH is Peace), Jdgs. 6:24

 f. YHWH - Sabbaoth (YHWH of hosts), 1 Sam. 1:3,11; 4:4; 15:2; often in the Prophets)

g. YHWH - Ro'I (YHWH is my shepherd), Ps. 23:1

h. YHWH - Sidqenu (YHWH is our righteousness), Jer. 23:6

i. YHWH - Shammah (YHWH is there), Ezek. 48:35

SPECIAL TOPIC: NAMES FOR DEITY

▣ "for He will save His people from their sin" Jesus came for three distinct purposes.

1. to fully reveal the Father

2. to give humans an example to follow

3. to redeem mankind from sin

Genesis 3 affected all life on this planet (cf. Rom. 8:20-23). Jesus came to die in our place (cf. Mark 10:45; John 1:29; 2 Cor. 5:21; Phil. 2:6-11; Isaiah 53). The promise of Gen. 3:15 is fulfilled in Him!

1:23 Matthew uses the fulfillment of OT prophecy as a major evidence for Jewish people to believe in Jesus as the promised Messiah.

1. Matt. 1:22 ― Isa. 7:14

2. Matt. 2:15 ― Hos. 11:1 and Exod. 4:22-23

3. Matt. 2:23 ― possibly Isa. 11:1

4. Matt. 3:15 ― "fulfill all righteousness"

5. Matt. 4:14 ― Isa. 9:1,2

6. Matt. 5:17 ― ". . .but to fulfill"

7. Matt. 8:17 ― Isa. 53:4

8. Matt. 12:17 ― Isa. 42:1,2,3,4

9. Matt. 13:14 ― Isa. 6:9,10

10. Matt. 13:35 ― Ps. 78:2

11. Matt. 21:4 ― Isa. 62:11 or Zech. 9:9

12. Matt. 27:9 ― Zech. 11:12,13

▣ "virgin" This is a quotation of Isa. 7:14 from the Septuagint. In Isaiah the Hebrew word used was almah (BDB 761 II), meaning a "chaste young woman of marriageable age." There was a special birth in Ahaz's day (cf. Isa. 7:15-16). Only one virgin birth has ever occurred, not two; therefore, the historical fulfillment in Isaiah's day was a sign to Ahaz, but not an impregnation by the Holy Spirit. This is an example of a multiple fulfillment of prophecy. The sign to Ahaz was the child's name. See my commentary of Isaiah 1-39 online at www.freebiblecommentary.org.

NASB, NKJV,
NJB"Immanuel"
NRSV, TEV"Emmanuel"
NJB"God-is-with-us"

Immanuel meant "God with us" (BDB 769). This shows that the OT passage pointed beyond its own day. Isaiah 7-12 (the Syro-Ephramitic War) ultimately referred to incarnate Deity, Jesus of Nazareth (cf. John 1:1; 5:18; 10:33; 14:9-10; Phil. 2:6). However, it must be remembered that the Jews did not expect the Messiah to be divine. They would have seen the powerful names from Isa. 9:6 as metaphors. It is not until the NT that the Messiah as God Incarnate was clearly revealed.

1:24-25 These verses reaffirm a truly supernatural virgin birth. They also imply that the couple had a normal married life after the birth of Jesus. The Textus Receptus, following the Greek uncial manuscripts C and D*, K, W add "her firstborn son," implying other children.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

This is a study guide commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.

These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought provoking, not definitive.

1. Why does Matthew have such a lengthy genealogy?

2. Why is Luke's genealogy different from Matthew's?

3. Did Isaiah predict a virgin birth in his own time?

Copyright © 2013 Bible Lessons International

PARAGRAPH DIVISIONS OF MODERN TRANSLATIONS

READING CYCLE THREE (from "A Guide to Good Bible Reading")

FOLLOWING THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR'S INTENT AT THE PARAGRAPH LEVEL

This is a study guide commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.

Read the chapter in one sitting. Identify the subjects. Compare your subject divisions with the five translations above. Paragraphing is not inspired, but it is the key to following the original author's intent, which is the heart of interpretation. Every paragraph has one and only one subject.

1. First paragraph

2. Second paragraph

3. Third paragraph

4. Etc.

CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS TO MATTHEW 3:1-17

A. Between Matthew 2 and 3 are the silent years of Jesus' childhood. Except for one experience at the age of twelve, details about Jesus' childhood are not known. There has been much interest and speculation by believers. Several extra-canonical pseudepigraphic gospels record other specific events, which are supposed to have occurred during His adolescence, but these years are simply unrecorded in the Bible.

B. The parallel passages for Matt. 3:1-12 are Mark 1:3-8, Luke 3:1-17, and John. 1:6-8, 19-28.

C. The parallel passages for Matt. 3:13-17 are Mark 1:9-11, Luke 3:21-22, and John. 1:31-34.

WORD AND PHRASE STUDY

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 3:1-6
 ¹Now in those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying, ²"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." ³For this is the one referred to by Isaiah the prophet when he said,
 "The voice of one crying in the wilderness,
 'Make ready the way of the Lord,
 Make His paths straight!'"
 ⁴Now John himself had a garment of camel's hair and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. ⁵Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; ⁶and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins.

3:1 "in those days" This is a transition idiom. It does not attempt to locate a specific time.

▣ "John" This was the shortened form of the name " Johanan," which meant "YHWH is gracious" or "gift of YHWH." His name was significant because, like all biblical names, it pointed toward God's purpose for his life. John was the last of the Old Testament prophets. There had not been a prophet in Israel since Malachi, around 430 b.c. His very presence caused great spiritual excitement among the people.

▣ "the Baptist" Baptism was a common rite among Jews of the first and second century.

1. preparation for worship a the temple (i.e., cleansing rite)

2. the self baptism of proselytes

If someone from a Gentile background were to become a full child of Israel, he had to accomplish three tasks:

(a) circumcision, if male

(b)  self-baptism by immersion, in the presence of three witnesses

(c) sacrifice in the Temple

In sectarian groups of first century Palestine, such as the Essenes, baptism was apparently a common, repeated experience. However, to mainline Judaism, John's baptism of repentance would have been humiliating for a natural child of Abraham to undergo a Gentile ritual.

Some OT precedents can be cited for ceremonial washing.

1.  as a symbol of spiritual cleansing (cf. Isa. 1:16)

2.  as a regular ritual performed by the priests (cf. Exod. 19:10; Lev. 15)

It should be noted that all other baptisms in first century Jewish culture were self-administered. Only John's called for him to administer this rite. Apparently John made a spiritual evaluation of the spiritual qualifications which denoted a personal repentance (cf. Matt. 3:7-10).

▣ "came preaching in the wilderness of Judea" "Wilderness" was uninhabited pasture land, not an arid desert. John not only dressed like Elijah (cf. 2 Kgs. 1:8), he also lived in the same arid setting. John was claiming a prophetic position (cf. Zech. 13:4). His nomadic life resembled the wilderness wandering of Israel, which was an idealized time of an intimate relationship between YHWH and Israel.

Parallel passages suggest the geographical location of John's preaching was somewhere close to the city of Jericho just north of the Dead Sea, near the Jordan River.

3:2 "Repent," This is a present imperative which is an ongoing command. Without repentance, it is impossible to be saved (cf. Luke 13:3). The Hebrew equivalent meant "to change one's actions," while the Greek word meant "to change one's mind." It implied a willingness to change. Salvation requires faith in Christ and repentance (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16, 19; 20:21). John's ministry was one of spiritual preparation for the coming of Jesus the Messiah and His message.

Jesus also called on His hearers to repent (cf. Matt. 4:17; Mark 1:15).

SPECIAL TOPIC: REPENTANCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

▣ "for the kingdom of heaven" Matthew, writing to Jews, is sensitive to their aversion to using God's name, so he uses a circumlocution, "kingdom of heaven" (cf. Matt. 4:17), whereas the other Synoptic Gospels use "kingdom of God" (Matthew used "kingdom of heaven" 32 times and " kingdom of God" only 4).

The Kingdom of God refers, in an OT sense, to the reign of God, not to a geographical area. God is King of creation! See Special Topic at Matt. 4:17.

NASB, NKJV"is at hand"
NRSV"has come near"
TEV"is near!"
NJB"is close at hand"

This is a perfect tense verb which describes the culmination and continuing results of a process started earlier. The nearness of the kingdom is stressed in the Gospels (cf. Matt. 4:17; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9-11; 11:20; 21:31). "Near" can be understood in one of two ways: (1) near in location or (2) near in time (cf. Matt. 12:28). This is the tension of "the already" and "not yet" of the New Age. It describes the time between the two comings of Christ. It is the overlapping of two Jewish ages.

3:3 "The voice of one crying in the wilderness" This is a quote from Isa. 40:3 in the Septuagint (LXX). The same idea was also reflected in Isa. 57:14 and 62:10, and Mal. 3:1. John saw himself as being the preparer for the coming of the Messiah (cf. John. 1:23). This fulfilled the predictions concerning Elijah found in the Mal. 3:1 and 4:5. All four Gospels record these words of John (cf. Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4; John 1:23).

▣ "Make ready the way of the Lord, Make His paths straight" These phrases are poetic parallels. The second phrase was usually a metaphor for preparing for a royal visit. It is significant to note that in Isa. 40:3 the term "the Lord"referred to YHWH, which in this quote referred to Jesus of Nazareth. The NT authors use several literary ways to assert the Deity of Jesus.

1. OT titles for YHWH applied to Jesus

2. OT actions of YHWH seen in Jesus

3. OT quotes relating to YHWH now used of Jesus

4. both God and Jesus as the grammatical object of one verb or one preposition

"Straight" was often used metaphorically for the character of God (similar to " right," " righteous," " just," " justify"). Most of the Hebrew as well as Greek words for sin reflect a deviation from a standard or "measuring reed." The standard is God Himself (cf. Lev. 11:44; 19:2; Matt. 5:48; 20:7,26; 1 Pet. 1:16).

3:4 Compare this to the clothing and lifestyle of Elijah recorded in 2 Kgs. 1:8 and reflected in Mal. 4:5. Camel-hair clothes were the cheapest available. John was accustomed to living in a desert and eating the diet available there. Locusts were a food allowed by the Mosaic legislation (cf. Lev. 11:22). The term was also used of the beans of the locust, or carob, tree.

3:5 The Jewish people of Judea saw John as a prophet (cf. Matt. 21:26). This verse shows the great hunger for God of the first century Jews. Even the religious leaders came. This verse is obviously a hyperbole, but it communicates the religious fervor which John caused.

3:6 "as they confessed their sins" The Greek term " confess" [homologeo] meant "to say the same thing." It implied both a public confession and a profession of faith (cf. Acts 19:18; James 5:16). The people as a whole recognized the need for spiritual renewal. OT precedents are found in Lev. 5:5 and 26:40. See special topic on confession at Matt. 10:32.

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 3:7-10
 ⁷But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? ⁸Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance; ⁹and do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham for our father'; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham. ¹⁰The axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire."

3:7 "But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them" John's statements to these religious leaders are shocking in their intensity (i.e., "you brood of vipers," cf. Luke 3:7; and used by Jesus in Matt. 12:34; 23:33). Several theories have been advanced about why he reacted so strongly.

1. he saw them as Satanic agents

2. he saw them as spiritually dead to the true faith

3. he saw them as fakes

4. he saw them as being manipulative leaders whose public professions did not match their attitudes and motives

It is significant that these leaders were considering baptism themselves. Possibly they wanted to identify with the multitude and thereby retain their leadership status. John recognized their true motives.

For a full discussion of the origin and theology of the Pharisees see Special Topic at Matt. 22:15 and for Sadducees see Special Topic at Matt. 22:23.

▣ "to flee from the wrath to come" From the parallel of Mal. 3:2-3, it is clear that judgment was coming upon Israel because of her violations of the Mosaic Covenant (cf. Deuteronomy 27-28). Amos called it "the day of YHWH" (i.e., Amos 5:18), which inaugurated the New Age of Righteousness or the Messianic Kingdom. Here John confirms Malachi's judgment motif. Note that John's message was not national or corporate like Malachi's, but individual (cf. Ezek. 18; 33; Jer. 31:31-34).

3:8

NASB"bear fruit in keeping with repentance"
NKJV, NRSV"bear fruit worthy of repentance"
TEV"Do the things that will show that you have turned from sins"
NJB"But if you are repentant, produce the appropriate fruit"

Even in the OT, faith was more than simply ritual or membership in a national group (cf. Deut. 10:12, 16; Matt. 7:15-23; Rom. 2:28-29). Faith was and is both corporate and individual, both faith and works (cf. James 2:14-26)! Their lives must show their new relationship with God (cf. Matt. 7:16-20; 12:33; Luke 6:43-44; Acts 26:20). For "repentance" see full note at Matt. 4:17.

3:9 "and do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham for our father'" This same dependence on national descent can be seen in John. 8:31ff. and the Talmud's "Sanhedrin" 10:1. The Jews believed that the merit of Abraham's faith was applied to them. However, Mal. 3:2ff. and 4:1 show that judgment would come upon the Jews for their violations of the Covenant (also note Matt. 8:11-12). Lifestyle faith, not lineage, is the way to recognize a true child of Abraham (cf. Rom. 2:28-29).

▣ "stones. . .children" This was a word play using the Aramaic words for "stones" ('ebnayya) and "children" (benyya), which sounded similar. See G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of The Bible, p. 48.

3:10 "the axe is already laid at the root of the trees" This judgment motif is similar to Malachi's. A parallel can be seen in Isa. 10:33-34. One reason John the Baptist wondered whether Jesus was really the Messiah was because His message was not one primarily of judgment as John anticipated.

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 3:11-12
 ¹¹"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. ¹²His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."

3:11

NASB"I am not fit to remove His sandals"
NKJV, NRSV"whose sandals I am not worthy to carry"
TEV"I am not good enough even to carry his sandals"

This term may be translated two ways (1) following the usage in the Egyptian papyri, "to take off and carry a visitor's shoes to the storage place" or (2) to " untie and remove." Both acts were traditionally done by slaves. Not even the students of rabbis were asked to perform this task. This was an idiomatic statement of John's understanding of the superiority of Jesus.

▣ "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire" Only one preposition and one article in the Greek text link the Holy Spirit and fire, implying that they are parallel (note Isa. 4:4). However, as in Luke 3:17, fire may refer to judgment, while the Holy Spirit referred to cleansing or to purity. It is possible both refer to the Pentecostal experience of Acts 2. Some have seen this as a two-fold baptism: one baptism for the righteous and one for the wicked, or Jesus baptizing as Savior or as Judge. Others have related it to conversion before Pentecost and the special endowment at Pentecost. 1 Corinthians 12:13 implies that Jesus is the baptizer "in," " with," or "by" the Spirit (cf. Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John. 1:33; Acts 1:5; 2:33).

3:12 "but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" The metaphor Jesus used to describe the eternal judgment of God (cf. Isa. 66:24) was Gehenna (contraction of "the valley of the sons of Hinnom"), the garbage dump located south of Jerusalem (cf. Mark 9:48; Matt. 18:8; 24:41; Jude 7). A Canaanite fire and fertility god had been worshiped (an activity known as molech) at Gehenna in Israel's past by sacrificing of children (cf. Lev. 18:21; 20:2-5; 1 Kgs. 11:7; 2 Kgs. 21:6; 23:10). This aspect of eternal judgment is shocking to modern readers, but it was evident (rabbinical teaching) and expressive to first century Jews. Jesus did not come as judge, but all who reject Him will be judged (cf. Luke 3:16-17, John. 3:17-21). A possible OT precedent for this metaphor was Isaiah 34 which described God's judgment on Edom.

SPECIAL TOPIC: FIRE

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: MATTHEW 3:13-17
 ¹³Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him. ¹⁴But John tried to prevent Him, saying "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?" ¹⁵But Jesus answering said to him, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he permitted Him. ¹⁶After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, ¹⁷and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased."

3:13 "Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him" The Gospels differ in their early chronologies of Jesus' ministries in Galilee and Judea. It seems that there was an early Judean ministry and a later one, but all four Gospels'chronologies must be harmonized in order to see this early Judean visit (cf. John. 2:13-4:3).

Why Jesus was baptized has always been a concern for believers because John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. Jesus did not need forgiveness for He was sinless (cf. John 8:46; Acts 3:14; Rom. 8:3; 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; 7:26; 1 Pet. 2:22; 1 John 3:5). The theories have been as follows:

1. it was an example for believers to follow

2. it was His identification with believers'need

3. it was His ordination and equipping for ministry

4. it was a symbol of His redemptive task

5. it was His approval of the ministry and message of John the Baptist

6. it was prophetic of His death, burial, and resurrection (cf. Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12).

Whatever the reason, this was a defining moment in Jesus' life. Although it does not imply that Jesus became the Messiah at this point (adoptionism, cf. The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture by Bart D. Ehrman, pp. 47-118), it held great significance for Him.

3:14 "But John tried to prevent Him" This is an imperfect tense verb. Many commentators have struggled with why John tried again and again to prevent Jesus from being baptized. Some theories are:

1. some see this as John having previous knowledge of Jesus, but this conflicts with John 1:31,33

2. some see this as John acknowledging that Jesus was a righteous Jew, but not that He was the Messiah

3. in modern Near Eastern culture one must insist three times to be considered sincere

3:15 "But Jesus answering said to him" Verses 14-15 are found only in the Gospel of Matthew. They do not provide enough information to completely answer the question of verse 14. It is certain, however, that the baptism had meaning both for Jesus and John and that it was God's will for both their lives.

3:16

NASB"Jesus came up immediately from the water"
NKJV"came up immediately from the water"
NRSV"just as he came up from the water"
TEV"Jesus came up out of the water"
NJB"he at once came up from the water"

This verse has been used by those who support immersion as the only biblical mode of baptism to prove that Jesus was immersed. However, it could be understood to mean that He went up on the bank out of the water (see Michael Magill, New Testament TransLine, p. 9, #35 and 36).

▣ "the heavens were opened" This is a metaphorical way of showing God's will (cf. Isa. 22:22; Rev. 3:7). Only God can open heaven (cf. Mal. 3:10; Rev. 4:1). God opens blind eyes (i.e., Matt. 9:27-31; 12:22-23; 20:29-34; note Isa. 29:18; 35:5; 42:7,16) and answers prayer (cf. Matt. 7:7,8).

It is surely possible that this metaphor is from Isa. 64:1.

▣ "and he saw" The Greek text has only the pronoun "he," which could refer to either John or Jesus. Some ancient Greek uncial manuscripts (אi¹, C, D, L, and W), some ancient translations (the Vulgate and Coptic), and the Greek texts used by early church fathers (Irenaeus, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Jerome, and Augustine) imply that only Jesus saw the dove coming, in the phrase "the heavens were opened to Him." However, the dove was also a sign to John to point out the true Messiah (cf. John. 1:32).

▣ "the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him" This is recorded in all four Gospels (Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32). Was it like a dove or was it a real dove? The question cannot be fully answered (cf. Luke 3:22). This is related to Isa. 11:2; 42:1; 48:16; 61:1. The specific form of the Spirit is not as significant as the Spirit Himself coming upon Jesus. This does not imply that before this time Jesus did not have the Holy Spirit, but that this was a special inauguration of His Messianic task.

The symbolism of the dove has been discussed a great deal as to its origin and purpose.

1. it goes back to Genesis 1, where the Spirit brooded over the waters

2. it goes back to Genesis 8, where Noah sent a dove out from the ark

3. the rabbis said that the dove was a symbol of Israel (cf. Ps. 68:13; Hos. 7:11; 11:11; The Talmud San. 95A and Ber. R. 39; II Esdras 5.26)

4. Tasker, in the Tyndale New Testament Commentary Series, says that it refers to gentleness, which is to be contrasted with the fire in verse 11 (cf. Rom 11:22; Matt. 11:29; 25:40).

3:17 "a voice out of the heavens" This phrase is significant for several reasons. During the inter-biblical period, when there was no true prophet, the rabbis said that God confirmed His choice and decisions by means of a bath kol, which was a voice from heaven. Also, this voice was a sign from God in a cultural way these first century Jews could understand (cf. Acts 10:9-16; 11:7-9; Rev. 1:10; 4:1; 10:8; 11:12). It was apparently as meaningful to Jesus as it was to John and possibly to the crowd which observed His baptism.

The combination of the quote "My Son in whom I am delighted" links the royal Messianic, Davidic emphasis of Ps. 2:7 with the Suffering Servant motif of Isa. 42:1. Here, in this quote, the royal Messiah is linked to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah.

This phrase, "My Beloved Son" (also note 17:5) is the possible origin of the phrase "Son of God," which is found in Matt. 4:3, 6. It is significant to note that in Mark 1:11 it was translated "You are My beloved Son," which showed that the Father directed His words to Jesus, while in Matthew 3, it was translated in such a way as to indicate that God spoke to John and the crowd. See Special Topic: Son of God at Matt. 27:54.

Verses 16-17 involve all three persons of the Trinity. The term "trinity" is not in the Bible, but the concept is surely scriptural. The fact that the Bible asserts the oneness of God (monotheism, Deut. 6:4) must be balanced with the deity of Jesus and the personality of the Spirit. There is one divine essence and three eternal personal manifestations. The three divine personalities are often mentioned in the same context (i.e., Matt. 3:16-17; 28:19; Acts 2:33-34; Rom. 8:9-10; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; 2 Cor. 1:21-22; 13:14; Eph. 1:3-14; 4:4-6; Titus 3:4-6; 1 Pet. 1:2).

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE TRINITY

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

This is a study guide commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.

These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought provoking, not definitive.

1. Of which OT prophet does John the Baptist remind you? Why?

2. Define repentance.

3. Why does Matthew use the phrase "kingdom of heaven" and Mark and Luke use " kingdom of God" ?

4. What is the significance of the quote from Isaiah 40 (Matt. 3:3)?

5. Why did the religious leaders want to be baptized? What did baptism symbolize in that day?

6. Why is the emphasis of John the Baptist's message on judgment and not on salvation?

7. Why was Jesus baptized with a baptism of repentance?

8. What is the significance of God speaking out of heaven? Identify the two OT sources of the Father's quote and explain their significance.

Copyright © 2013 Bible Lessons International