King James Bible Adam Clarke Bible Commentary Martin Luther's Writings Wesley's Sermons and Commentary Neurosemantics Audio / Video Bible Evolution Cruncher Creation Science Vincent New Testament Word Studies KJV Audio Bible Family videogames Christian author Godrules.NET Main Page Add to Favorites Godrules.NET Main Page




Bad Advertisement?

News & Reviews:
  • World News
  • Movie Reviews
  • Book Search

    Are you a Christian?

    Online Store:
  • Your Own eBook/eBay Business
  • Visit Our eBay Store

    Automated eBook Business



  • PARALLEL HISTORY BIBLE - Deuteronomy 6:11


    CHAPTERS: Deuteronomy 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34     

    VERSES: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

    TEXT: BIB   |   AUDIO: MISLR - DAVIS   |   VIDEO: BIB


    ENGLISH - HISTORY - INTERNATIONAL - FACEBOOK - GR FORUMS - GODRULES ON YOUTUBE

    HELPS: KJS - KJV - ASV - DBY - DOU - WBS - YLT - HEB - BBE - WEB - NAS - SEV - TSK - CRK - WES - MHC - GILL - JFB

    LXX- Greek Septuagint - Deuteronomy 6:11

    οικιας 3614 πληρεις 4134 παντων 3956 αγαθων 18 ας 3739 ουκ 3756 ενεπλησας λακκους λελατομημενους ους 3739 3775 ουκ 3756 εξελατομησας αμπελωνας και 2532 ελαιωνας ους 3739 3775 ου 3739 3757 κατεφυτευσας και 2532 φαγων και 2532 εμπλησθεις

    Douay Rheims Bible

    Houses
    full of riches, which thou didst not set up, cisterns which thou didst not dig, vineyards and oliveyards, which thou didst not plant,

    King James Bible - Deuteronomy 6:11

    And houses
    full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantedst not; when thou shalt have eaten and be full;

    World English Bible

    and houses
    full of all good things, which you didn't fill, and cisterns dug out, which you didn't dig, vineyards and olive trees, which you didn't plant, and you shall eat and be full;

    Early Church Father Links

    Npnf-109 xix.xix Pg 12, Npnf-110 iii.LIII Pg 60, Npnf-111 vi.xvi Pg 28, Npnf-111 vii.xxxiv Pg 6

    World Wide Bible Resources


    Deuteronomy 6:11

    Early Christian Commentary - (A.D. 100 - A.D. 325)

    Anf-03 iv.ix.xiii Pg 26
    See Ex. xv. 22–26.

    just as we do, who, drawn out from the calamities of the heathendom1405

    1405 Sæculi.

    in which we were tarrying perishing with thirst (that is, deprived of the divine word), drinking, “by the faith which is on Him,”1406

    1406


    Anf-02 vi.iii.i.ix Pg 70.2


    Anf-03 iv.viii.ii.ii Pg 5
    Prov. ix. 10; Ps. cxi. 10.

    But801

    801 Porro.

    fear has its origin in knowledge; for how will a man fear that of which he knows nothing? Therefore he who shall have the fear of God, even if he be ignorant of all things else, if he has attained to the knowledge and truth of God,802

    802 Deum omnium notititam et veritatem adsecutus, i.e., “following the God of all as knowledge and truth.”

    will possess full and perfect wisdom.  This, however, is what philosophy has not clearly realized. For although, in their inquisitive disposition to search into all kinds of learning, the philosophers may seem to have investigated the sacred Scriptures themselves for their antiquity, and to have derived thence some of their opinions; yet because they have interpolated these deductions they prove that they have either despised them wholly or have not fully believed them, for in other cases also the simplicity of truth is shaken803

    803 Nutat.

    by the over-scrupulousness of an irregular belief,804

    804 Passivæ fidei.

    and that they therefore changed them, as their desire of glory grew, into products of their own mind. The consequence of this is, that even that which they had discovered degenerated into uncertainty, and there arose from one or two drops of truth a perfect flood of argumentation. For after they had simply805

    805 Solummodo.

    found God, they did not expound Him as they found Him, but rather disputed about His quality, and His nature, and even about His abode. The Platonists, indeed, (held) Him to care about worldly things, both as the disposer and judge thereof. The Epicureans regarded Him as apathetic806

    806 Otiosum.

    and inert, and (so to say) a non-entity.807

    807 “A nobody.”

    The Stoics believed Him to be outside of the world; the Platonists, within the world.  The God whom they had so imperfectly admitted, they could neither know nor fear; and therefore they could not be wise, since they wandered away indeed from the beginning of wisdom,” that is, “the fear of God.” Proofs are not wanting that among the philosophers there was not only an ignorance, but actual doubt, about the divinity. Diogenes, when asked what was taking place in heaven, answered by saying, “I have never been up there.” Again, whether there were any gods, he replied, “I do not know; only there ought to be gods.”808

    808 Nisi ut sint expedire.

    When Crœsus inquired of Thales of Miletus what he thought of the gods, the latter having taken some time809

    809 Aliquot commeatus.

    to consider, answered by the word “Nothing.”  Even Socrates denied with an air of certainty810

    810 Quasi certus.

    those gods of yours.811

    811 Istos deos.

    Yet he with a like certainty requested that a cock should be sacrificed to Æsculapius.  And therefore when philosophy, in its practice of defining about God, is detected in such uncertainty and inconsistency, what “fear” could it possibly have had of Him whom it was not competent812

    812 Non tenebat.

    clearly to determine? We have been taught to believe of the world that it is god.813

    813 De mundo deo didicimus.

    For such the physical class of theologizers conclude it to be, since they have handed down such views about the gods that Dionysius the Stoic divides them into three kinds. The first, he supposes, includes those gods which are most obvious, as the Sun, Moon, and Stars; the next, those which are not apparent, as Neptune; the remaining one, those which are said to have passed from the human state to the divine, as Hercules and Amphiaraus. In like manner, Arcesilaus makes a threefold form of the divinity—the Olympian, the Astral, the Titanian—sprung from Cœlus and Terra; from which through Saturn and Ops came Neptune, Jupiter, and Orcus, and their entire progeny. Xenocrates, of the Academy, makes a twofold division—the Olympian and the Titanian, which descend from Cœlus and Terra. Most of the Egyptians believe that there are four gods—the Sun and the Moon, the Heaven and the Earth. Along with all the supernal fire Democritus conjectures that the gods arose. Zeno, too, will have it that their nature resembles it. Whence Varro also makes fire to be the soul of the world, that in the world fire governs all things, just as the soul does in ourselves. But all this is most absurd. For he says, Whilst it is in us, we have existence; but as soon as it has left us, we die. Therefore, when fire quits the world in lightning, the world comes to its end.


    Anf-03 v.iii.xliii Pg 4
    Ps. cxi. 10; Prov. i. 7.

    Where the fear of God is, there is seriousness, an honourable and yet thoughtful2295

    2295 Attonita, as if in fear that it might go wrong (Rigalt.).

    diligence, as well as an anxious carefulness and a well-considered admission (to the sacred ministry)2296

    2296 In contrast to the opposite fault of the heresies exposed above.

    and a safely-guarded2297

    2297 Deliberata, where the character was well weighed previous to admission to the eucharist.

    communion, and promotion after good service, and a scrupulous submission (to authority), and a devout attendance,2298

    2298 Apparitio, the duty and office of an apparitor, or attendant on men of higher rank, whether in church or state.

    and a modest gait, and a united church, and God in all things.


    Anf-01 ix.vi.xxxvii Pg 6
    Jer. vii. 3; Zech. vii. 9, 10, Zech. viii. 17; Isa. i. 17–19.

    And again: “Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips that they speak no guile; depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it.”4359

    4359


    Anf-01 v.xvi.i Pg 5
    Isa. i. 19.

    And again, “Ye shall eat flesh even as herbs.”1270

    1270


    Anf-02 vi.ii.x Pg 14.1
    1588 Cod. Sin. here has the singular, “one who ruminates.”

    upon the word of the Lord. <index subject1="Animals" subject2="cloven-footed" title="144" id="vi.ii.x-p15.1"/>But what means the cloven-footed? That the righteous man also walks in this world, yet looks forward to the holy state1589

    1589 Literally, “holy age.”

    [to come]. Behold how well Moses legislated. But how was it possible for them to understand or comprehend these things? We then, rightly understanding his commandments,1590

    1590 Cod. Sin. inserts again, “rightly.”

    explain them as the Lord intended. For this purpose He circumcised our ears and our hearts, that we might understand these things.


    Anf-02 vi.iv.i.xviii Pg 8.1


    Anf-02 vi.iv.vi.vi Pg 28.1


    Anf-03 v.viii.xxvi Pg 8
    Isa. i. 19.

    the expression means the blessings which await the flesh when in the kingdom of God it shall be renewed, and made like the angels, and waiting to obtain the things “which neither eye hath seen, nor ear heard, and which have not entered into the heart of man.”7467

    7467


    Anf-02 vi.iii.i.ix Pg 70.2


    Anf-01 v.xvi.viii Pg 2
    Comp. Deut. xxxi. 7; 23.

    in and out the people of the Lord that are in Antioch, and so “the congregation of the Lord shall not be as sheep which have no shepherd.”1293

    1293


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Anf-01 v.xvi.viii Pg 2
    Comp. Deut. xxxi. 7; 23.

    in and out the people of the Lord that are in Antioch, and so “the congregation of the Lord shall not be as sheep which have no shepherd.”1293

    1293


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Npnf-201 iii.ix.xv Pg 33


    Anf-03 v.x.ii Pg 8
    Deut. vi. 12.

    But setting before them blessings and curses, He also says: “Blessings shall be yours, if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God, whatsoever I command you this day, and do not wander from the way which I have commanded you, to go and serve other gods whom ye know not.”8234

    8234


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.xxxiii Pg 6
    What in the Punic language is called Mammon, says Rigaltius, the Latins call lucrum, “gain or lucre.” See Augustine, Serm. xxxv. de Verbo domini. I would add Jerome, On the VI. of Matthew where he says: “In the Syriac tongue, riches are called mammon.” And Augustine, in another passage, book ii., On the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, says: “Riches in Hebrew are said to be called mammon.  This is evidently a Punic word, for in that language the synonyme for gain (lucrum) is mammon.” Compare the same author on Ps. ciii. (Oehler).

    For when advising us to provide for ourselves the help of friends in worldly affairs, after the example of that steward who, when removed from his office,4776

    4776 Ab actu.

    relieves his lord’s debtors by lessening their debts with a view to their recompensing him with their help, He said, “And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness,” that is to say, of money, even as the steward had done. Now we are all of us aware that money is the instigator4777

    4777 Auctorem.

    of unrighteousness, and the lord of the whole world. Therefore, when he saw the covetousness of the Pharisees doing servile worship4778

    4778 Famulatam.

    to it, He hurled4779

    4779 Ammentavit.

    this sentence against them, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”4780

    4780


    Anf-01 ix.vi.xxvii Pg 22
    Num. xvi. 15.

    In this way, too, Samuel, who judged the people so many years, and bore rule over Israel without any pride, in the end cleared himself, saying, “I have walked before you from my childhood even unto this day: answer me in the sight of God, and before His anointed (Christi ejus); whose ox or whose ass of yours have I taken, or over whom have I tyrannized, or whom have I oppressed? or if I have received from the hand of any a bribe or [so much as] a shoe, speak out against me, and I will restore it to you.”4167

    4167


    Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 49
    See Judg. ix. 2 sqq.

    and perhaps, too, to the “thistle” of Jehoash’s.31

    31


    Npnf-201 iii.xv.ix Pg 24


    Npnf-201 iv.vi.i.xxxviii Pg 12


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1


    Anf-02 vi.ii.viii Pg 17.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
    Isa. xl. 18; 25.

    Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with GodGod is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371

    2371 Denique.

    you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372

    2372 Excidet.

    from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373

    2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument.  In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2.

    in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374

    2374 Scilicet.

    who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375

    2375 Graduum.

    to Him) the very summit,2376

    2376 Culmen.

    as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377

    2377 Minutalibus regnis.

    prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378

    2378 Undique.

    into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379

    2379 Substantiis.

    and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380

    2380 Eliquetur.

    to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
    Isa. xl. 18; 25.

    Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with GodGod is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371

    2371 Denique.

    you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372

    2372 Excidet.

    from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373

    2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument.  In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2.

    in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374

    2374 Scilicet.

    who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375

    2375 Graduum.

    to Him) the very summit,2376

    2376 Culmen.

    as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377

    2377 Minutalibus regnis.

    prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378

    2378 Undique.

    into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379

    2379 Substantiis.

    and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380

    2380 Eliquetur.

    to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.


    Anf-02 v.ii.ix Pg 5.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.xxxi Pg 23
    Jer. ii. 31.

    That is to say: “Then have I none whom I may call to me; have I no place whence I may bring them?”  “Since my people have said, We will come no more unto thee.”4747

    4747


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.xxxi Pg 24
    Jer. ii. 31.

    Therefore He sent out to call others, but from the same city.4748

    4748


    Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 6

    VERSE 	(11) - 

    De 7:12-18; 8:10-20; 32:15 Jud 3:7 Pr 30:8,9 Jer 2:31,32


    PARALLEL VERSE BIBLE

    God Rules.NET