Bible Commentators

[Rico]

Call volume has been fairly high this week, so I don't know how much I will be able to participate in this thread today (until later this afternoon). Anyway, on another thread, someone made a point about commentators and I told him that I don't really pay much attention to what commentators have to say about the Word of God. He thought it was arrogant to think that way. So, I thought I would ask the forum how much stock y'all place in commentators. Do you refer to commentators such as Matthew Henry? How much stock do you place in commentators in the first place?

[LUKE2447]

Rico I agree with you in part. I rarely look at commentaries. I do from time to time on passages for references or something but I really don't rely on them per se. They are about like preachers they are pretty much just personal opinion.

[Ron]

Call volume has been fairly high this week, so I don't know how much I will be able to participate in this thread today (until later this afternoon). Anyway, on another thread, someone made a point about commentators and I told him that I don't really pay much attention to what commentators have to say about the Word of God. He thought it was arrogant to think that way. So, I thought I would ask the forum how much stock y'all place in commentators. Do you refer to commentators such as Matthew Henry? How much stock do you place in commentators in the first place?

I use them not as Gospel, or on par with the Word, nut just for another opinion-cuz that is what it is.

Rico, to a certain extant we are all "Bible Commentators" but that doesn't make us or them right.

[Baron1710]

Call volume has been fairly high this week, so I don't know how much I will be able to participate in this thread today (until later this afternoon). Anyway, on another thread, someone made a point about commentators and I told him that I don't really pay much attention to what commentators have to say about the Word of God. He thought it was arrogant to think that way. So, I thought I would ask the forum how much stock y'all place in commentators. Do you refer to commentators such as Matthew Henry? How much stock do you place in commentators in the first place?

You know I disagree with you. MH??? C'mon you can do better than that. How can you discount those with an understanding of the language and the grammar? No it is not on par with Scripture but it can be a great aid to interpreting Scripture.

[LUKE2447]

I use them not as Gospel, or on par with the Word, nut just for another opinion-cuz that is what it is.

Rico, to a certain extant we are all "Bible Commentators" but that doesn't make us or them right.

I agree on this. I use them as mentioned before but I don't grasp them as you mentioned and put them equal to scripture. I love listening to preaching which in reality is nothing but a subject commentary for the most part.

[A_PoMo]

Call volume has been fairly high this week, so I don't know how much I will be able to participate in this thread today (until later this afternoon). Anyway, on another thread, someone made a point about commentators and I told him that I don't really pay much attention to what commentators have to say about the Word of God. He thought it was arrogant to think that way. So, I thought I would ask the forum how much stock y'all place in commentators. Do you refer to commentators such as Matthew Henry? How much stock do you place in commentators in the first place?

I'm not sure why anybody wouldn't consult the opinion of some of the most intelligent, articulate, and educated minds of church history when studying Scripture. Especially if the student is someone who teaches/preaches the Word. Would you go to a doctor who refused to consult medical journals and such to confirm your diagnosis? I sure wouldn't.

Granted, you can't be stupid and turn your brain off when you read commentaries. They're opinions, nothing more. But they're helpful in stimulating your thought as you read and consider their opinion. It's similar to coming on this forum and asking everyone's opinon about at topic. Especially those who disagree with your position because they may cause you to consider something you'd overlooked. You assimilate the opinions and form your own.

[Aquila]

Commentators are valuable when it comes to cultural customs and practices we are unfamiliair with, in addition to handling nuance of ancient language mere cross referencing is incapable of delivering. But again...it will always be an opinion based on known information. I have a few commentators that I trust to know the language, culture, customs, geography, etc....their opinions do have an impact on my opinion but sometimes the Holy Ghost will hold me closer to just what the text says...even when considering Apostolic commenators.

Adam Clarke and Matthew Henry are personal faves of mine.

[Aquila]

Some things we'd be total lost on...here's a great example...the parable of the lost coin...what is it's meaning? (Based soley on the text and no additional commentary of course!)

Luke 15:8-10
{15:8} Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if
she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the
house, and seek diligently till she find [it? ]{15:9} And
when she hath found [it,] she calleth [her] friends and [her]
neighbours together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I have
found the piece which I had lost. {15:10} Likewise, I say
unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God
over one sinner that repenteth.

From my understanding it wouldn’t have been difficult for this woman to replace a piece of silver. So the question is; without commentary...why was she so intent on finding it and why did she rejoice so much when she found it?

[LUKE2447]

I will say this when studying opposing opinions and I am writing a paper on a subject in the sense of debate etc... I use commentaries quite a bit! As you can go right to that scripture and get opinions per that authors pursuasion etc.. vs a book. They are very helpful.

[Praxeas]

Call volume has been fairly high this week, so I don't know how much I will be able to participate in this thread today (until later this afternoon). Anyway, on another thread, someone made a point about commentators and I told him that I don't really pay much attention to what commentators have to say about the Word of God. He thought it was arrogant to think that way. So, I thought I would ask the forum how much stock y'all place in commentators. Do you refer to commentators such as Matthew Henry? How much stock do you place in commentators in the first place?
Commentators can offer valuable information on certain texts in the area of the historic context, sometimes the greek language and other areas. You do have to be careful though as not all commentaries will agree so obviously some may be biased towards their own doctrinal preference or theology

[Rico]

Commentators can offer valuable information on certain texts in the area of the historic context, sometimes the greek language and other areas. You do have to be careful though as not all commentaries will agree so obviously some may be biased towards their own doctrinal preference or theology

That's one of the main reasons why I avoid using or relying on commentaries.

[Aquila]

Luke 15:8-10
{15:8} Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if
she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the
house, and seek diligently till she find [it? ]{15:9} And
when she hath found [it,] she calleth [her] friends and [her]
neighbours together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I have
found the piece which I had lost. {15:10} Likewise, I say
unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God
over one sinner that repenteth.

From my understanding it wouldn’t have been difficult for this woman to replace a piece of silver. So the question is; why was she so intent on finding it and why did she rejoice so much when she found it?

Some insight from various commentators I’ve read….

In New Testament times women were typically provided a dowry by the groom. Often this included ten silver coins. The bride to be would take the coins and make a head dress out of it to wear on her wedding day. To loose part of her dowry or to present herself on her wedding day with a head dress missing a coin with humiliate her father and make her appear wreckless and undesirable to her groom…it could cost her marriage to the groom. A woman in Christ’s day couldn’t imagine the horror of such a mistake. Any woman would frantically search the house using whatever means necessary no matter what time of day or night. Upon finding it she would rejoice in tears calling all her friends and neighbors to rejoice with her because she found the coin. The thing at stake wasn’t so much the coin…but the woman’s relationship with the groom. She was doing all she could to ensure she didn’t loose her relationship with the groom.

Some commentators I’ve read indicate that each piece of sliver in the wedding head dress represented a commandment of the Decalogue, the Ten Commandments. Symbolically this represented the covenant relationship between God and his people. Having lost a single coin could indicate that a single commandment was broken…placing one’s whole relationship with God at risk. The sinner realizing that they are guilty of breaking a single commandment will do all they can to restore their relationship by virtue of repentance, regardless of personal cost. This brings rejoicing in heaven because a relationship between the sinner and the eternal God is restored.

The parable isn’t about a coin at all…nor is it about the woman. It’s about one’s relationship with God.

To compare this with self derived conclusions….

I once heard it preached that the coin was “lost in the house” and how a saint can be lost in God’s house either by hiding sin or by being consumed with the work of the Lord until they are just performance driven. The church was challenged to love one another and to find that lost saint and restore them to relationship.

While that was a moving and powerful message…it’s totally out of biblical context. Instead of teaching “surface reflection” from the Scripture the preacher could have preached a powerful message about our love for the groom, the necessity of ensuring we are ready for our wedding day, and the necessity of keeping all of God’s Commandments.

How’s your head dress beloved? Are you missing a coin? What is that one thing that could cost you your relationship with the groom. Find time to search your heart and life by the illuminating light of the Word and make your calling and election sure.

Commentators can be very valuable as shown above. But like was mentioned in another post there will be doctrinal issues on occasion. At that point you have to pray and follow the leading of the Spirit regarding what you will specifically choose to believe. Take heart though, no one knows all things or will know all things. You have to follow the Holy Ghost…sometimes…against the flow of modern tradition.

[Dr. Vaughn]

Only ignorance would refuse to consult with intelligence.

[Baron1710]

Only ignorance would refuse to consult with intelligence.

Shhhhhh. Now everyone will be calling me.

[Sassy]

:ohplease You are guys are kidding right....your really not that full of yourselves are you?

[Dr. Vaughn]

:ohplease You are guys are kidding right....your really not that full of yourselves are you?

What I meant sassy was the those who have spent lifetimes of word studies and studies of custom would only be ignored by ignorance.... people who think outside of ignorance would not think they can interpret on their own,.,.. they would understand their lack of knowledge in many areas and as such seek some form of Commentary.... keeping the good and discarding the bad

[Rico]

Shhhhhh. Now everyone will be calling me.

:lol Dude, you take every opportunity offered to ya, don'tcha? I love it! :lol

[Sassy]

What I meant sassy was the those who have spent lifetimes of word studies and studies of custom would only be ignored by ignorance.... people who think outside of ignorance would not think they can interpret on their own,.,.. they would understand their lack of knowledge in many areas and as such seek some form of Commentary.... keeping the good and discarding the bad

whew....ya'll had me worried!

I appreciate all the opinions on here.....but the deeper you talk...the more I turn you off. I relate better with the people that are being real. I can apply it better to my life. :winkgrin

[Baron1710]

:lol Dude, you take every opportunity offered to ya, don'tcha? I love it! :lol

Every once in awhile I have to do something to keep the arrogant lawyer appearance.

[Dr. Vaughn]

whew....ya'll had me worried!

I appreciate all the opinions on here.....but the deeper you talk...the more I turn you off. I relate better with the people that are being real. I can apply it better to my life. :winkgrin

I love it... those who desire to stand with the Word of God as purely as possible are not being real...

[Pro31:28]

My only problem with MH is tat is that we have a set and every time I write a paper and have to cite sources MH is a bear to cite! I actually had to call the writing the writing department at school and ask them how to do it, they had to consult someone else!

[Sassy]

I love it... those who desire to stand with the Word of God as purely as possible are not being real...

oh my....don't misunderstand me.....I believe it straight......and I like it "real" and pure from the bible. I guess what I really meant is....Be real and not a theologian....I like it when they explain it layman terms so we can understand it and apply it to our lives. I hope I am making more sense. :largehalo

[Rico]

Every once in awhile I have to do something to keep the arrogant lawyer appearance.

Dat's what I like about you, Bro. No shortage of guts on your part to go at it with yer fellow brethren! :D

[Baron1710]

Dat's what I like about you, Bro. No shortage of guts on your part to go at it with yer fellow brethren! :D

Just keepin' them sharp.

[Aquila]

I love it... those who desire to stand with the Word of God as purely as possible are not being real...

People today like "bumper sticker theology", a "sound bite gospel". It's a symptom of our dumbing down, historical/cultural illiteracy, and self absorption.

[Esther]

I used to use them more than I do now. But I'm getting ready to do some deep studying so all my reference material will be dusted off and brought back out. :)

[ReformedDave]

That's one of the main reasons why I avoid using or relying on commentaries.

Everyone is biased. No one is neutral. To not use commentaries is a possible loss of great insight. We are limited and isn't preaching after all verbal commentary?

[Rico]

I just bought a book called The Hebrew Prophets. It isn't a commentary so much as a book that gives the time frames of when the different prophets were doing their thing. Does that count? Will that make y'all happy? :D

[Esther]

Luke 15:8-10
{15:8} Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if
she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the
house, and seek diligently till she find [it? ]{15:9} And
when she hath found [it,] she calleth [her] friends and [her]
neighbours together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I have
found the piece which I had lost. {15:10} Likewise, I say
unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God
over one sinner that repenteth.

From my understanding it wouldn’t have been difficult for this woman to replace a piece of silver. So the question is; why was she so intent on finding it and why did she rejoice so much when she found it?

Some insight from various commentators I’ve read….

In New Testament times women were typically provided a dowry by the groom. Often this included ten silver coins. The bride to be would take the coins and make a head dress out of it to wear on her wedding day. To loose part of her dowry or to present herself on her wedding day with a head dress missing a coin with humiliate her father and make her appear wreckless and undesirable to her groom…it could cost her marriage to the groom. A woman in Christ’s day couldn’t imagine the horror of such a mistake. Any woman would frantically search the house using whatever means necessary no matter what time of day or night. Upon finding it she would rejoice in tears calling all her friends and neighbors to rejoice with her because she found the coin. The thing at stake wasn’t so much the coin…but the woman’s relationship with the groom. She was doing all she could to ensure she didn’t loose her relationship with the groom.

Some commentators I’ve read indicate that each piece of sliver in the wedding head dress represented a commandment of the Decalogue, the Ten Commandments. Symbolically this represented the covenant relationship between God and his people. Having lost a single coin could indicate that a single commandment was broken…placing one’s whole relationship with God at risk. The sinner realizing that they are guilty of breaking a single commandment will do all they can to restore their relationship by virtue of repentance, regardless of personal cost. This brings rejoicing in heaven because a relationship between the sinner and the eternal God is restored.

The parable isn’t about a coin at all…nor is it about the woman. It’s about one’s relationship with God.

To compare this with self derived conclusions….

I once heard it preached that the coin was “lost in the house” and how a saint can be lost in God’s house either by hiding sin or by being consumed with the work of the Lord until they are just performance driven. The church was challenged to love one another and to find that lost saint and restore them to relationship.

While that was a moving and powerful message…it’s totally out of biblical context. Instead of teaching “surface reflection” from the Scripture the preacher could have preached a powerful message about our love for the groom, the necessity of ensuring we are ready for our wedding day, and the necessity of keeping all of God’s Commandments.

How’s your head dress beloved? Are you missing a coin? What is that one thing that could cost you your relationship with the groom. Find time to search your heart and life by the illuminating light of the Word and make your calling and election sure.

Commentators can be very valuable as shown above. But like was mentioned in another post there will be doctrinal issues on occasion. At that point you have to pray and follow the leading of the Spirit regarding what you will specifically choose to believe. Take heart though, no one knows all things or will know all things. You have to follow the Holy Ghost…sometimes…against the flow of modern tradition.

I enjoyed your little commentary here accept for the bolded part. I have found the Word to be alive and not limited to just one little thought. JMO

[ReformedDave]

I have found the Word to be alive and not limited to just one little thought. JMO

Then one can apply any interpretation to it? Isn't that the problem we've been having? One must read the Bible using the principals of hermanutics that are sound and most of all not arbitrary. The 3 most important rules are context, context, context. We must not use Scripture as a pretext. It is important to understand the type of literature that we are reading and to apply the correct principals of interpretation.

[Aquila]

Then one can apply any interpretation to it? Isn't that the problem we've been having? One must read the Bible using the principals of hermanutics that are sound and most of all not arbitrary. The 3 most important rules are context, context, context. We must not use Scripture as a pretext. It is important to understand the type of literature that we are reading and to apply the correct principals of interpretation.

Amen. If one ignores language and context they can make the Word say whatever they like. For example,

John 6:10
{6:10} And Jesus said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand.

Hmmmm....Jesus took them where there was "much grass". See...maybe there's no issue with smokin' just a little Marry Jane. lol

[Praxeas]

That's one of the main reasons why I avoid using or relying on commentaries.
That is the very reason I use several commentaries and use my wits.

You have the same possibility with translations too

[Esther]

Then one can apply any interpretation to it? Isn't that the problem we've been having? One must read the Bible using the principals of hermanutics that are sound and most of all not arbitrary. The 3 most important rules are context, context, context. We must not use Scripture as a pretext. It is important to understand the type of literature that we are reading and to apply the correct principals of interpretation.

Dave I think this is where the Holy Ghost comes in and gives you deeper understanding of the Word.

As good as our forefathers were in reading and understanding scripture I believe God has opened our understanding to a deeper knowledge. I don't think any of us have reached the full understanding of the Bible.

I heard Sis Nona Freeman preach and tell of the time she was preaching a revival and every night she preached from the same verse with a different thought. I believe only God can give you that kind of dept.

For example, the parable of the Good Samaritian. As I was fasting and praying before teaching my SS class years ago the Lord showed me something about that parable. The next week I had a different lesson, but the Lord again showed me something about that parable. The third week, again I had another lesson, but the Lord showed me again, something about that parable to that lesson. But in my ignorance and not wanting the class think that is the only parable I knew in the Bible I didn't share it and the Lord stopped showing me anything else about that parable. I regret that til this day, but I was young and foolish and too proud!

[Rico]

Dave I think this is where the Holy Ghost comes in and gives you deeper understanding of the Word.

As good as our forefathers were in reading and understanding scripture I believe God has opened our understanding to a deeper knowledge. I don't think any of us have reached the full understanding of the Bible.

I heard Sis Nona Freeman preach and tell of the time she was preaching a revival and every night she preached from the same verse with a different thought. I believe only God can give you that kind of dept.

For example, the parable of the Good Samaritian. As I was fasting and praying before teaching my SS class years ago the Lord showed me something about that parable. The next week I had a different lesson, but the Lord again showed me something about that parable. The third week, again I had another lesson, but the Lord showed me again, something about that parable to that lesson. But in my ignorance and not wanting the class think that is the only parable I knew in the Bible I didn't share it and the Lord stopped showing me anything else about that parable. I regret that til this day, but I was young and foolish and too proud!

Thank you. God forbid we depend on the Holy Ghost to help us understand His Word.

[pelathais]

Call volume has been fairly high this week, so I don't know how much I will be able to participate in this thread today (until later this afternoon). Anyway, on another thread, someone made a point about commentators and I told him that I don't really pay much attention to what commentators have to say about the Word of God. He thought it was arrogant to think that way. So, I thought I would ask the forum how much stock y'all place in commentators. Do you refer to commentators such as Matthew Henry? How much stock do you place in commentators in the first place?
"Commentators" are people just like you and I, except they have published their thoughts in a Bible Commentary. To say that a person "places stock in a commentator" is like saying they put their confidence in the opinions of a particular preacher or Bible teacher.

So, sure; some are good, some are not as good and many may not even get around to a point of view that you find interesting. Where you can find value in a Bible commentary is in following the pattern of the commentator. This works best with some one you either strongly agree with, or some one you strongly disagree. If you find yourself wondering what they're talking about, you're probably wasting your time.

Matthew Henry was the son of an Anglican minister who was driven from the Church of England along with thousands of others in a "church split." One would expect Henry's commentary to have a polemic or argumentive tone, but instead it is known as one of the great devotional commentaries in the English language. Makes you think that the guy must have had a generous spirit. I, however find it kind of drags throughout. But that's just me.

Most recent Bible commentaries attempt to expound upon the author's view of the Form and Textual Criticism controversy. That can be interesting if you like to strain for every gnat.

Personally, I have found the New Bible Commentary (http://www.amazon.com/New-Bible-Commentary-21st-Century/dp/0830814426/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216334518&sr=8-1) to be great - and they've got a couple of newer editions out that I haven't kept up with. Anything with D.A. Carson as a contributor is great, in my book. But then I find myself strongly agreeing or disagreeing with his opinions. He doesn't offer up a lot of mush.

The Interpreter's Bible (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0687278147) follows the Wesleyan tradition (that's "holiness" as opposed to Evangelicalism like Carson) and I have that and use it a great deal. Also, the Anchor Bible (http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/cms_content?page=782955&sp=1013&kw=anchor_bible_commentary&event=PPCSRC&p=1018818&gclid=CLO9jNyAyJQCFQL8iAodW1mPlA) series is great, if you don't already have a mortgage.

Most of the "free" or public domain Bible commentaries that are available for free or very low cost in electronic form tend to be devotional in nature. From my experience most Apostolics are looking for a bit harder hitting action than that and so I don't usually recommend them. But for introductory reading they're fine.

The New Bible Commentary is great because it's affordable, rather compact and it delves into to the text itself. It offers dates and geographical background information and introduces you to most of the issues of "critical scholarship" along the way- like why or why not there may have been 2 or even 3 "Isaiahs." You are shown the exact verses and can decide for yourself on things like that.

[Praxeas]

Thank you. God forbid we depend on the Holy Ghost to help us understand His Word.
Paul said to study. He praised the Bereans for this too. Clearly the bible does not teach us to be stupid and led by the Spirit. God gave us brains AND the Spirit. Why do we need teachers then?

[Ron]

I do have a great Commentary Set that I bought off of a brother about ten years ago for $200 Bucks.

It is good. & quite exhausting in it's narrative.

1.) What is The Biblical Illustrator? --

The Biblical Illustrator was originally published in 1887, in London, by Joseph Exell (One of the editors for the Pulpit commentary). The Biblical Illustrator is a collection of Anecdotes, Similies, Emblems, Illustrations, Expository, Scientific, Geographical, Historical, and Homiletics gathered from a wide range of home and foreign literature on the verses of the Bible.

2.) What does the Biblical Illustrator consist of? --

There are 34752 pages of information covering the entire Bible. As far as we can tell The Biblical Illustrator is out of print, but it has listed for as high as $1150. It is organized in the same fashion as The Pulpit Commentary and would be a wonderful complement to any student's library.

3.) Who authored The Biblical Illustrator? --

Actually The Biblical Illustrator is a compilation of many of the most classically acclaimed authors and commentators, organized in a verse-by-verse manner. These authors
include: Spurgeon, Augustine, MacLaren, Manton, Godet, Trapp, Lightfoot, Ryle, Hodge, Murray, Donne, Plumptre, Alexander, Owen, Moody, Parker, and hundreds of other
contributors.

Essentially, for every passage of the Bible, you will now have at your fingertips, a collection of writings, and commentary from many of the authors listed above. Because of the large collection of contributors, The Biblical Illustrator, is a must-have for every serious Bible student.

[pelathais]

Paul said to study. He praised the Bereans for this too. Clearly the bible does not teach us to be stupid and led by the Spirit. God gave us brains AND the Spirit. Why do we need teachers then?
The human mind conforms itself to its environment. Fill it with good things and it will grow and produce good things. Fill it with bad things, and you get a predictable result (Luke 6:45)

Fill it with nothing... well, you still get a bad result (Mark 7:21).

[ReformedDave]

Dave I think this is where the Holy Ghost comes in and gives you deeper understanding of the Word.

As good as our forefathers were in reading and understanding scripture I believe God has opened our understanding to a deeper knowledge. I don't think any of us have reached the full understanding of the Bible.

I heard Sis Nona Freeman preach and tell of the time she was preaching a revival and every night she preached from the same verse with a different thought. I believe only God can give you that kind of dept.

For example, the parable of the Good Samaritian. As I was fasting and praying before teaching my SS class years ago the Lord showed me something about that parable. The next week I had a different lesson, but the Lord again showed me something about that parable. The third week, again I had another lesson, but the Lord showed me again, something about that parable to that lesson. But in my ignorance and not wanting the class think that is the only parable I knew in the Bible I didn't share it and the Lord stopped showing me anything else about that parable. I regret that til this day, but I was young and foolish and too proud!


There may be aspects of understanding as one grows in knowledge but there is not a 'hidden' truth only for the spiritual. We may not be able to comprehend it and be milk drinkers instead of steak eaters but the truth is still there. God does not give one meaning to some and another meaning to others. Truth is not an esoteric experience. The gnostics did this. They had 'truth' no one else had access to. Otherwise what is the value of language? 1 plus 1 is always 2.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Commentaries can be good for finding out about cultural and historical aspects of bible passages,one must eat the meat and spit out the bones.

[ReformedDave]

Commentaries can be good for finding out about cultural and historical aspects of bible passages,one must eat the meat and spit out the bones.

Same for listening to preachers.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Yes I agree with you Reformed Dave.Check everything out with the word.

[pelathais]

Commentaries can be good for finding out about cultural and historical aspects of bible passages,one must eat the meat and spit out the bones.
Right there on the couch!?!

[TRFrance]

I don't mind seeing what a commentary says on a particular passage in terms of historical context, background,etc surrounding a particular verse or passage of scripture... but as far as doctrinal interpretation of a verse, I don't pay any attention to what commentaries have to say.

[pelathais]

That's one of the main reasons why I avoid using or relying on commentaries.
You don't have to be a syncophant to "use" a commentary. You can use one as a sort of "foil" as well- especially since there are several available for free.

Use it to bounce an idea around about a particular passage that seems obscure to you. It could be that by expressing the exact opposite of your opinion, the commentator will open up new avenues of study for those times you're suffering from "brain lock."

The idea behind a commentary isn't to have someone force feed a bunch of stuff that you regurgitate later. You're supposed to have a dialogue with the commentary. Interact with the writer as though he's in the room with you. Argue, agree and disagree.

[pelathais]

I don't mind seeing what a commentary says on a particular passage in terms of historical context, background,etc surrounding a particular verse or passage of scripture... but as far as doctrinal interpretation of a verse, I don't pay any attention to what commentaries have to say.
Did you receive all truth through a divine revelation?

The reason I'm asking is, essentially, most of the sermons you've heard preached were "commentaries." The things you picked up from Bible teachers and Sunday School were all "commentaries." If you don't pay attention to "commentaries," how did you ever discover the Bible to begin with?

[Praxeas]

Did you receive all truth through a divine revelation?

The reason I'm asking is, essentially, most of the sermons you've heard preached were "commentaries." The things you picked up from Bible teachers and Sunday School were all "commentaries." If you don't pay attention to "commentaries," how did you ever discove the Bible to begin with?
That's true. Commentaries are useful to help us with doctrine, not that we have to take the doctrinal conclusions of the commentaries but they give useful information we can use to come to a doctrinal conclusion.

Even the UPC when it comes to standards went to "commentaries" to decide that when the bible says "not with braided hair or gold...." it does not mean to braid your hair was a sin. History shows us the context was the Roman women were very prideful of their elaborate braids and they often wove gold and other things into their hair.

[TRFrance]

Did you receive all truth through a divine revelation?

The reason I'm asking is, essentially, most of the sermons you've heard preached were "commentaries." The things you picked up from Bible teachers and Sunday School were all "commentaries." If you don't pay attention to "commentaries," how did you ever discover the Bible to begin with?
My point is that I am careful about reading any type of doctrinal commentary from non-Apostolics. Most of the writers of these commentaries have a view of salvation, the Godhead, etc that don't line up with scripture. So if they've "missed it" on such basic essentials of the faith, I sure don't need to spend a lot of time depending on the commentaries of these men when it comes to doctrine in general.

If they're speaking on biblical history, cultural/geographical context, archeology, or other things not directly doctrinal in nature, that's fine. But I don't use their theological commentary to form, or help form, my own theological positions on what I'm reading in scripture.

Other saints may take a different approach to this issue, but this has always been my approach to it. It has served me well so far, and its certainly not going to change.

[Rico]

So.............it seems like most of you are saying you use commentaries more to get an idea of customs, the historical context, and general help in understanding where society was at the time rather than letting the commentary tell you what God is trying to say. I suppose I can accept that.

[TRFrance]

So.............it seems like most of you are saying you use commentaries more to get an idea of customs, the historical context, and general help in understanding where society was at the time rather than letting the commentary tell you what God is trying to say. I suppose I can accept that.
Exactly.
I remember for example, reading the commentary in a Scofield bible (an older edition. It seems they've changed it since)... in which, for his commentary on Matt 28:19, Cyrus Scofield stated that "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is the final name of the one true God".

(http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/srn.cgi?book=mt&chapter=028 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/srn.cgi?book=mt&chapter=028))

This is utter hogwash, of course, so I just shook my head and ignored it. But who knows, because Scofield was so respected, I'm sure there were many people that took this seriously, and felt like the man was dropping some serious truth on them.

[pelathais]

Exactly.
I remember for example, reading the commentary in a Scofield bible (an older edition. It seems they've changed it since)... in which, for his commentary on Matt 28:19, Cyrus Scofield stated that "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is the final name of the one true God".

(http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/srn.cgi?book=mt&chapter=028 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/srn.cgi?book=mt&chapter=028))

This is utter hogwash, of course, so I just shook my head and ignored it. But who knows, because Scofield was so respected, I'm sure there were many people that took this seriously, and felt like the man was dropping some serious truth on them.
I hadn't noticed that Scofield Note before, thanks for the link as well.

I think I can see where Scofield would get into trouble among Trinitrarian absolutists, however. Scofield say of God, "He subsists in a personality which is threefold..."

"Personality" is singular here. Does Scofield intend to say that God is a single Person with a complex nature? He goes on to appear to deny "Personality" to the Holy Spirit by stating that this "name" is a reference to a "mode of being" as opposed to the usual statements about "relationship between the Persons..."