20:2 Whilst it appears that the idea to Pass Sarai off as his sister was his it becomes clear (:5) that Sarai was compliant. Both Abram and Sarai carried the blame for this deception so Sarai was ‘reproved’ (20:16)

21:10-12 So the problems because of the birth of Ishmael raise their ugly head again. Likewise in our lives. The consequences of our errors can surface years later. This should caution us to take care to think through the implications of our plans before we implement them.

20:3 Abimelech’ is not a person’s name. It is a title – in the same way that for example Charles is ‘prince of Wales. In England. ‘Abimelech’ means ‘My father is king’ denoting that the man with the title is the king by inheritance

21:2  We might think it quite normal to say ‘Sarah conceived and bare Abraham a son’ however Abraham was already a father to Ishmael. The emphasis on naming both parents is to stress that Isaac is the very child of promise spoken of in Gen 18:10

20:6 Notice the irony ‘thy brother’. Notice also that Abimelech spoke to Sarai more than he did to Abraham, indicating that as far as he was concerned she was the main culprit in the deception.

v7  It is interesting that although Abraham is the one in the wrong, God says that he must pray for Abimelech. This perhaps served several purposes for Abraham, as we know that God does not need our prayers to know what we need - He in fact shows here that he already knows what the prayer will be about.

Perhaps the purposes for Abraham are: that Abraham's relationship with God would be strengthened again after this slip of faith; one cannot be an enemy to one for whom one is praying, so Abraham & Abimelech would be reconciled; it showed Abraham that God was willing to work & save others, even though they were Gentiles.

We perhaps note similar principles at work in Job's situation Job 42:8,10

20:17  So the one who did the wrong prays for the one who is wronged.  Doubtless because Abraham realised the damage he had caused. How often do we pray for those we have wronged?

20:4 Abimelech clearly had an understanding of the laws of God. We should not presume that when Abraham was in the land of Canaan that he and his group were the only ones who feared the Lord. Clearly Abimelech did and we have already come across Melchisedec in Genesis 14. Abraham left a Godless place and moved to the land of Canaan where, even though there were wicked people, there were some faithful individuals.

First Principles>Kingdom of God>Existed in the past
2. Isaac, Abraham's son has a son called Jacob Gen 16 Gen 21:3 Gen 25:19-28
Go to Gen 12:1-5 for more about First Principles>Kingdom of God>Existed in the past

20:11  It is easy to think that the only people who had a knowledge of God at this time was Abraham and his family. Clearly this is not so. As you read Genesis see if you can identify other occasions when individuals had a knowledge of God and some sort of respect for Him.

:2 Being made to 'lie down' indicates the state of David's peaceful mind when he was in Mahanaim.
:5 The prepared table in the wilderness - when 2 Samuel 17:27-29 all those material goods and food were brought to David
:6 Dwelling in the house of the Lord - looking to returning to Jerusalem.

24:3 David returns again - as he does in many Psalms - to reflect on the qualities of the man who will inherit the kingdom.

24:3-4 In saying that it is the 'pure heart' that will 'ascend into the hill of the Lord' David expresses a fundamental truth which Jesus takes up (Matthew 5:8)

23:6The ‘goodness and mercy’ to which David refers is that which God displayed to Moses (Exo 34:6)

24:7-8  Gates do not have ‘heads’ – but people do. The ‘gates’ speaks of the gatekeepers who would keep the city secure. They would keep out those that were unwelcome but would welcome the Lord into the city. Likewise we should all be gatekeepers of the ecclesia – keeping out all that offends the Lord but welcoming in all those who love Him.

25:5 David’s waiting on God is not a passive position of waiting for God to do something. Rather David is in God’s servant and is ministering to Him all the day – which is most interesting. God needs nothing from David but David gives himself to Him.

Psalm 23  David in this Psalm relates his experiences of tending to the flock of sheep to God's care for him in his life.

Psalm 24 This Psalm was probably written when the Ark of God was brought into Jerusalem. The Psalm sets out the conditions for those who would stand in the holy place.

Psalm 25  A Psalm of David, expressing faith in God who is good and upright and who will teach sinners the (right) way.

A pure heart is an essential part of our life in Christ (Psa 24:4). I presume "clean hands" mean innocent hands, referring to the lack of guilt clinging to them, (as in Young's Concordance). Therefore David is commenting on the Godliness both inside and outside of our lives.

23:1      The religious leaders in Israel were to be shepherds – representing God in their car for His people. Mostly they were not good shepherds – Ezekiel 34 – Jesus was the shepherd par excellence and is our model who we are to imitate in caring for our brethren and sisters 1Pet 5:2

Psa 23:1-6 - In v1 Christ was both lamb and shepherd. In v2 Sheep only lay down when they are fully fed, thus Christ was fully fed by the word, fed the 5000, and feeds his followers even today. Might the still waters refer to baptism and/or the word? In v3 might the restoring of the soul refer to resurrection as Peter Cresswell noted? Christ only followed the paths of righteousness. As Christ was/is a manifestation of God "for his name's sake" would be particularly applicable. In v4 perhaps the valley of the shadow of death could refer to the dark valley of Kidron on the way to Gethsemane. Christ feared no evil, his death would destroy the power of evil (power of sin and death) and God was with him. A rod would be perhaps for accepted chastening while a staff would be more for support. In v5 perhaps we have the last supper, the anointing, and Christ's bitter cup sacrifice of his shed blood. In v6 As a result of his sacrifice there will be goodness and mercy all the days of his life (now eternal life) and that goodness and mercy extends hope to all who chose to follow Christ's paths of righteousness. When Christ returns he will sit on the throne of David in God's kingdom on earth and will always dwell in God's house.

23:5     The prepared table has a fulfilment in Jesus feeding the 4,000 and 5,000, for example in Mark 8:8

24:4 The ‘pure heart’ is not the heart of a man who never sins. Rather it is the heart of a man who has God and His purpose at the centre of his life. Whilst the natural heart is ‘deceitful’ – Jeremiah 17:9 - the faithful servant has his focus on the things of the kingdom – Matt 6:21

23:5 Just as God prepared a table for David He has prepared a table for us – it is the memorial of Jesus’ death and resurrection.

Have you ever read the famous Psalm 23 carefully enough to notice that v4 just doesn't make any sense? If I were to make list comforting things, a rod and staff certainly wouldn't feature! So what did David mean?

In Jer 48:17 rod and staff are used to describe the strength and glory of Moab. In Isa 10:24 it's the might of Assyria. In Isa 10:5 we learn that Assyria were in fact God's rod and staff with which He caused His judgements to come on the nations.

So following the Bible usage of the phrase "Rod and Staff" it would appear David is saying "Knowing about Your might and power (in battle) comforts me", which would fit in with the context of v4-5.

Psalm 23 has much in common with  the events leading up to the feeding of the 5000.  Mark 6:32-33 tells us that Jesus and his disciples were in a boat and that the people ran round the lake to the other side and outwent the boat.  From this we can conclude that the waters were still and that there was little wind, othwerwise the boat would have arrived first.  Jesus, although on a boat, led the people by quiet waters.

He fed them - their souls were restored and there was plenty left over - there was no more want amongst the people.

Mark 6:39 talks of sitting on green grass.  Mark is the only gospel writer who comments on the colour.  It was green because this was just after the Passover, when the spring rains would have turned everything green.  This also means that the Jordan would have probably been in flood when the people waded across it in order to reach Jesus on the oposite shore.

The word translted as sit also means to lean back or to lay.  Jesus was laid in a manger (Luke 2:7) which is the same Greek word.

Mark 6:34 tells us that Jesus saw the people as sheep without a shepherd and promptly started leading them.

How keen are we to be with the Lord? Do we hear his voice?  Do we run to the meeting on a Sunday?  Afterwards are we satisfied, no longer in want of anything?

The parable of the wheat and tares is interesting. At first glance it might appear that the wheat and tares were clearly distinguishable.  However, that is not the case.  The tares referred to is darnel (genus lolium) which looks very similar to wheat.  If one were to survey a field mixed with wheat and darnel it would look all the same.  Essentially, the parable pits the members of the ecclesia against unbelievers in the world.  However, we could apply the parable to the household of faith where the distinction between the two plants is even less obvious.  Clearly, not all who are in the household of faith will attain the Kingdom. But, the job for us is to take care of our own walk (Phil 2:12); encourage our brethren in their walk (Heb 13:13); and not to judge (condemn) others - Luke 6:37.  The Lord will make the final determination when He comes.

13:14  In quoting Isa 6:9 and saying that it was fulfilled in those who rejected his teaching demonstrates that Jesus knew from Scripture that his message would be rejected by many.

13:22   The way in which Jesus explains the ‘thorns’ explains the relevance of the ‘thorns’ of Gen 3:18. The labour in the garden that occupied Adam was to provide him with the opportunity to see life for what it was.

Matt 13:10-11 The disciples were perplexed that Jesus taught in parables. So it must not have been the normal means of teaching. Jesus’ explanation highlights the point. His message was designed for those who sought things out, not those who wanted to be spoon fed.

The seed isn't the word of God. Bible symbols aren't as simple as that. In v22 the seed appears to be the word of God, yet in v25 it is the seed which produces tares. So the quality of the seed makes a difference, and also who sows it. This is an important principle when interpreting symbols. Each symbol has a quality and context. Symbols describe qualities and atributes, not actual people or kingdoms.

See for example the tree in v31-32. We could look at it and say "the symbol of the tree means the kingdom of God", but we'd be incorrect. In Dan 4:20-22 the same symbol refers to Nebuchadnezzar. Again, the symbol describes a quality possessed by the man, not the man himself. So in v31-32 Jesus is saying that the man who is affected by the word of the kingdom will be able to give spiritual nourishment and protection to others.

13:22 Do we think that riches are ‘deceitful’? Clearly for some people they are. We must take care that we are not amongst those for whom the acquisition of wealth takes precedence over the things of the kingdom. So can we carefully and honestly examine our own motives when we seek the ‘better’ job or the ‘better’ home etc:?