| |  |
PARALLEL HISTORY BIBLE - Deuteronomy 11:8
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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32
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 11:8 και 2532 φυλαξεσθε πασας 3956 τας 3588 εντολας 1785 αυτου 847 οσας 3745 εγω 1473 εντελλομαι 1781 5736 σοι 4671 4674 σημερον 4594 ινα 2443 ζητε 2198 5719 και 2532 πολυπλασιασθητε και 2532 εισελθοντες 1525 5631 κληρονομησητε 2816 5661 την 3588 γην 1093 εις 1519 ην 2258 3739 5713 υμεις 5210 διαβαινετε τον 3588 ιορδανην 2446 εκει 1563 κληρονομησαι 2816 5658 αυτην 846
Douay Rheims Bible That you may keep all his commandments, which I command you this day, and may go in, and possess the land, to which you are entering,
King James Bible - Deuteronomy 11:8 Therefore shall ye keep all the commandments which I command you this day, that ye may be strong, and go in and possess the land, whither ye go to possess it;
World English Bible Therefore you shall keep all the commandment which I command you this day, that you may be strong, and go in and possess the land, where you go over to possess it;
World Wide Bible Resources
Deuteronomy 11:8
Early Christian Commentary - (A.D. 100 - A.D. 325) Anf-01 ix.vi.xvii Pg 21
Deut. x. 12. Now these things did indeed make man glorious, by supplying what was wanting to him, namely, the friendship of God; but they profited God nothing, for God did not at all stand in need of man’s love. For the glory of God was wanting to man, which he could obtain in no other way than by serving God. And therefore Moses says to them again: “Choose life, that thou mayest live, and thy seed, to love the Lord thy God, to hear His voice, to cleave unto Him; for this is thy life, and the length of thy days.”4000 4000
Anf-02 vi.iv.iv.xxi Pg 60.1
Anf-01 vi.ii.x Pg 3
Deut. iv. 1. Is there then not a command of God they should not eat [these things]? There is, but Moses spoke with a spiritual reference.1577 1577 Literally, “in spirit.” For this reason he named the swine, as much as to say, “Thou shalt not join thyself to men who resemble swine.” For when they live in pleasure, they forget their Lord; but when they come to want, they acknowledge the Lord. And [in like manner] the swine, when it has eaten, does not recognize its master; but when hungry it cries out, and on receiving food is quiet again. “Neither shalt thou eat,” says he “the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the kite, nor the raven.” “Thou shalt not join thyself,” he means, “to such men as know not how to procure food for themselves by labour and sweat, but seize on that of others in their iniquity, and although wearing an aspect of simplicity, are on the watch to plunder others.”1578 1578 Cod. Sin. inserts, “and gaze about for some way of escape on account of their greediness, even as these birds alone do not procure food for themselves (by labour), but sitting idle, seek to devour the flesh of others.” The text as above seems preferable: Hilgenfeld, however, follows the Greek. So these birds, while they sit idle, inquire how they may devour the flesh of others, proving themselves pests [to all] by their wickedness. “And thou shalt not eat,” he says, “the lamprey, or the polypus, or the cuttlefish.” He means, “Thou shalt not join thyself or be like to such men as are ungodly to the end, and are condemned1579 1579 Cod. Sin. has, “condemned already.” to death.” In like manner as those fishes, above accursed, float in the deep, not swimming [on the surface] like the rest, but make their abode in the mud which lies at the bottom. Moreover, “Thou shall not,” he says, “eat the hare.” Wherefore? “Thou shall not be a corrupter of boys, nor like unto such.”1580
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Anf-03 iv.ix.v Pg 5
See Lev. xvii. 1–9; Deut. xii. 1–; 26. Why, accordingly, does the Spirit afterwards predict, through the prophets, that it should come to pass that in every place and in every land there should be offered sacrifices to God? as He says through the angel Malachi, one of the twelve prophets: “I will not receive sacrifice from your hands; for from the rising sun unto the setting my Name hath been made famous among all the nations, saith the Lord Almighty: and in every place they offer clean sacrifices to my Name.”1200 1200
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
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. 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-01 v.iii.x Pg 7
Isa. lxii. 2; 12. This was first fulfilled in Syria; for “the disciples were called Christians at Antioch,”700 700
Anf-01 viii.iv.cxix Pg 6
Isa. lxii. 12. Therefore we are not a people to be despised, nor a barbarous race, nor such as the Carian and Phrygian nations; but God has even chosen us and He has become manifest to those who asked not after Him. ‘Behold, I am God,’ He says, ‘to the nation which called not on My name.’2405 2405
Anf-01 viii.iv.cxvi Pg 4
[Isa. lxvi. 21; Rom. xv. 15, 16, 17 (Greek); 1 Pet. ii. 9.]
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 God. God 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 God. God 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
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Anf-01 viii.iv.xxvii Pg 2
Isa. lviii. 13, 14.
Anf-01 ix.vii.xxxv Pg 9
Isa. lviii. 14. This is what the Lord declared: “Happy are those servants whom the Lord when He cometh shall find watching. Verily I say unto you, that He shall gird Himself, and make them to sit down [to meat], and will come forth and serve them. And if He shall come in the evening watch, and find them so, blessed are they, because He shall make them sit down, and minister to them; or if this be in the second, or it be in the third, blessed are they.”4754 4754
Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 171
Catal. Scrippt. Eccles. c. 18. and on Ezek. xxxvi.;55 55 P. 952, tom. iii. Opp. ed. Bened. and by Gennadius of Marseilles.56 56 De Ecclesiæ dogmatibus, c. 55.
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 God. God 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 God. God 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-01 v.v.viii Pg 5
Ps. cxvi. 12. Now God, even the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, shall reveal these things to you, [so that ye shall know] that I speak truly. And do ye pray along with me, that I may attain my aim in the Holy Spirit. I have not written to you according to the flesh, but according to the will of God. If I shall suffer, ye have loved me; but if I am rejected, ye have hated me.
Anf-01 vi.ii.vi Pg 10
Ps. xxii. 17, Ps. cxviii. 12. and “upon my garment they cast lots.”1502 1502
Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 11VERSE (8) - De 8:10,11; 10:12-15; 26:16-19; 28:47 Ps 116:12-16
|
|
PARALLEL VERSE BIBLE
|
