v.48 - It seems that stones, or heaps of stones, were sometimes erected as a witness. Stone is long lasting. It is there for a long time to keep a 'watch' (Jegarsahadutha (Aramaic) and Galeed (Hebrew) [v.47] both mean 'watch') over the makers of the vows together. In Josh.24:27, the rock seems to have been personalised, as if it had ears. So is this rock a representation of God? Something long-lasting - a memorial stone to remind them of the vows which they swore there?

Genesis 31 - The affairs of these families are related very minutely, while (what are called) the great events of states and kingdoms at that period, are not mentioned. The Bible teaches people the common duties of life, how to serve God, how to enjoy the blessings he bestows, and to do good in the various stations and duties of life. Selfish men consider themselves robbed of all that goes past them, and covetousness will even swallow up natural affection. Men's overvaluing worldly wealth is that error which is the root of covetousness, envy, and all evil. The men of the world stand in each other's way, and every one seems to be taking away from the rest; hence discontent, envy, and discord. But there are possessions that will suffice for all; happy they who seek them in the first place.

Genesis 31:7 - The sheep in Mesopotamia, brought forth their young twice a year; so that every weaning time, which was ten times in five years, Laban made an alteration in Jacob's wages; one time he would let Jacob have only the speckled, and not the ringstraked; another time the ringstraked, and not the speckled; and so changed every time, according as Laban observed the prevailing colour was, as may be concluded from the next verse.

Genesis 31:15 - "Are we not accounted of him strangers?".... Laban their father had not treated his daughters as children, nor even as freeborn persons; but as if they were foreigners that he had taken in war, or bought of others; or at least, that they were born bondmaids in his house, and so had a right to sell them as he had.  "....for he hath sold us" - Laban had sold his daughters to Jacob for fourteen years service, as if they had been his slaves, instead of giving dowries with them as his children. "....and hath quite devoured also our money" - that which Laban had got by the servitude of Jacob, instead of giving it back to them as their portion; he spent it on himself and his sons, and there was nothing left for them. Truly Uncle Laban was a serpent, through and through, a real "cheat" [as Jacob's name means].

Genesis 31:23 - "and pursued after him seven days' journey" - which must be reckoned, not from Jacob's departure from Haran, but from Laban's; for Laban being three days' journey from thence, whither he had to return, after he received the news of Jacob being gone; Jacob must have travelled six days before Laban set out with his brethren from Haran; so that this was, the thirteenth day of Jacob's travel; for Laban not having animals to drive as Jacob did, could travel as fast again as he, and do that in seven days which took up Jacob thirteen. "and they overtook him in the mount Gilead" - This is thought to be three hundred and eighty miles from Haran. Laban had been thwarted by Jacob, for his intention was never to let Jacob actually take possession of that which he had worked so hard for. Though part of the "Ecclesia" at Haran, Uncle Laban certainly showed himself to be a man too much in love with this present world. 

31:3 Jacob surely was relieved to hear the words of God that he should return to ‘the land of his fathers’

It is not certain why Rachel stole her father's gods (which were small figurines of female deities), but Charles Ryrie makes some suggestions:

1) They were supposed to guarantee fertility. 

2) The possessor could lay claim to Laban's estate when he died (although this could be disputed since Laban did not give them freely).

3) Rachel still had a strong dependence on these gods for religious purposes.    

Perhaps, though, it was just an act of spite stemming from the sour sentiment of vs.14,15

31:14,19 Rachel possibly shows her lack of spirituality in saying that she did not anticipate any inheritance in her father’s house and in taking the images.

31:7    ‘ten times’  seems to be an idiom for ‘a lot of times’ – see Num 14:22, Neh 4:12, Job 19:3

31:2 Laban’s scheming against Jacob seems to be becoming less effective. The wonderful blessing of having Jacob care for his flock seems now to have turned to be a blessing upon Jacob. So Laban sees Jacob as a liability now. Hence his attitude changes.

31:22 That it took three days before Laban heard that Jacob had left with Rachel and Leah must indicate the degree to which Jacob had become alienated from Laban – notice he did not even see for himself that they had left. He had to be ‘told’.

v. 2 - This word 'buckler' seems to feature quite a bit in scripture (eg. Ps.18:2,20, Ps.91:4(AV)). Here is Ps.35 it represents a special sort of shield that went right round the body. It was quite hard to handle - 1Chron.5:18, 12:8. It was a shield of extra protection. See Prov.2:7, 2Sam.22:31

Psalm 35 - A Psalm of David. This psalm seems to have been written by David, when he was persecuted by Saul; and when many false charges were brought against him by his courtiers; and when he was the scorn and derision of the people; the subject of it is pretty much of the same kind with Psalm 7, and might be written about the same time that was, or at least describing the same occasion. There is a passage in it, Psalm 35:19, which our Lord seems to refer to and apply to Himself, John 15:25.

Psalm 35:2 -  "Take hold of shield and buckler, and stand up for mine help." -  The shield is a small hand held device, whilst the buckler describes a large body shield. Both these were defensive weapons. "Draw out also the spear" - In contrast, the spear is an offensive weapon. The weapons of our warfare are likewise, defensive and offensive, as we fight the carnal mind in our own lives - but all weapons are useless, except the Lord stand for us.

Psa 35:20 - "For they speak not peace" - They seek a quarrel. They are unwilling to be on good terms with others, or to live in peace with them. The idea is that they were "disposed" or "inclined" to quarrel. Thus we speak now of persons who are "quarrelsome." "They devise deceitful matters" - literally, "they think of words of deceit." That is, they set their hearts on misrepresentation, and they study such misrepresentations as occasions for strife with others. They falsely represent my character; they attribute conduct to me of which I am not guilty; they pervert my words; they state that to be true which never occurred, and thus they attempt to justify their own conduct. Almost all the quarrels in the world, whether pertaining to nations, to neighborhoods, to families, or to individuals, are based on some "misrepresentation" of facts, designed or undesigned, and could have been avoided if men had been willing to look at facts as they are, or perfectly understood each other. "Against them that are quiet in the land" - That are disposed to be quiet, or that are inclined to live in peace with those around them. The word rendered "quiet" means literally those who are "timid;" then, those who shrink back, and gather together from fear; then, those in general who are disposed to be peaceful and quiet, or who are indisposed to contention and strife. David implicitly asserts himself to be one of that class; a man who preferred peace to war, and who had no disposition to keep up a strife with his neighbours.

Vs.1-8  David called on the Lord for both protection against and destruction of his enemy.  God's enemies were David's enemies and so calling for their destruction was legitimate. The same is true for us.  However, we are told to love our enemies (Matt 5:44) and to follow peace with all men (Heb 12:14). But we are not friends with the world (James 4:4).
Thus, we are not pacifists, but followers of our commander-in-chief who has told us to forbear for the moment. 
Like David, who had more than one opportunity to defeat his enemy Saul, we restrain ourselves, having faith that the Lord will liberate us (Rom 12:19).

35:13    We learn a little about the way in which David sought forgiveness after his sin with Bathsheba when we read of him ‘fasting’

 35:4    The repeated use of ‘them’ speaks of those who spoke against David as he prayed and mourned for the child born to him of Bathsheba.

V.2 A shield (Heb. magen) was a small shield that could be wielded. A buckler (Heb. tsinah) was a large shield that protected the whole body. And so, Yahweh has property of warding off danger, while fully protected the whole person. By the way, the symbol for the modern Sate of Israel, which is on the Israeli flag, is the Magen David, the Shield of David.

35:8 In the context of the Psalm – that is David felling from Saul and hiding in the cage an En Gedi – the ‘him’ and the ‘he’ of this Psalm must be king Saul.

Matthew 20:15 - "Is thine eye evil, because I am good?" - What is an evil eye? The eye is the entrance to the brain. To have ones eyes opened, is to have the brain excited with new information that sheds light upon a problem, Ecclesiastes 11:7. To give someone an "evil eye," is to lower the eyelids and screw up the face in a squint, so as to give someone a "dark look" as we say today. Another saying we have today is "to shoot daggers" at somebody. Jesus is remonstrating with the Pharisees here, because they were always "shooting daggers" at Him, giving Him the evil eye. Why? Because His way of life and words, which were of God or good, showed them up so badly. If they only wanted it, Jesus could heal them of their evil eye, as we see in v30-34, where He healed two [or is it three?] blind men near the town of Jericho.

Matthew 20:33 - "They say unto him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened" - That is, that their sight might be restored to them; for being deprived of that, it was all one as if their eyes were so closed, that they could not open them; and so the recovery of their sight is expressed by an opening of them. The opening of the eyes of the blind was prophesied of, as what should be done in the days of the Messiah, and by Him, as an evidence of His being that person, Isaiah 35:5 which prophecy these blind men might be acquainted with, and be an encouragement to their faith to expect a cure from Him. They do not ask for alms, but for the recovery of their sight; which being granted, they would be able to get their bread in another way; for they were not like some idle persons that choose rather to be under such a calamity [see v6], or any other, that they might not be obliged to work with their hands for a livelihood. Their request shows, that they made no doubt of it, but firmly believed that Christ was able to do this for them, though the thing was impossible to be done by man. We therefore, by miracles such as these, must conclude that He was not a mere man, but also the Son of the living God.

The parable of the householder begins in Matt 19:30 and finishes with a parallel verse in Matt 20:16.  The chapter division is misplaced
 
V.23 is another example which shows that Jesus and His Father are not the same person.

20:20  The concern of the mother shows that status was still a problem to the disciples and their family.

1-16 We are always comparing our lot in life to others, instead of thanking God for what He gives. For what He gives us is grace, the free gift, and not the wages that we deserve Rom 6:23

Matt 20:25-28 Luke puts these words in the context of Jesus' washing the disciples' feet at the Last Supper.

20:28 The ‘many’ catches the work of God in Christ as spoken of in Isa 53:11.

V.34 The two blind men's persistence appears from the fact that instead of being quiet, they cry all the louder. Finally, the blessing which Jesus bestows on them becomes evident in that not only are they healed, but are treated with marvelous compassion and tenderness.

v31  "the crowd rebuked them & told them to be quiet, BUT they shouted all the louder......"    Do we keep quiet & conform with the world, or do we dare to be different & go against the flow.

20:8    ‘last unto the first’ catches precisely Jesus’ words in Matt 19:30and is a phrase found later in this chapter – Matt 20:16 so we see the way in which the disciples concern of the last chapter is dealt with extensively in this chapter.

There is a very unfortunate chapter devision from ch19 to ch20. The context of this chapter is wholy an expanded answer of Jesus. Notice the joining statement: "But many who are first will be last, and the last first. For the kingdom of heaven is like..."

So in this chapter first and last are mentioned 5 times, most noticeably in v8 and the summation in v16. The men in v2 and v6 are the first and last whose reward appeared to be reversed in magnitude. But this was only the way it appeared to those who expected more than they had been promised (see v10). Jesus is merely pointing out that he, as the master, doesn't want there to be a link between our level of attainment and the level of reward (v14-15). This is much harder to accept for those who have attained much; the example being Saul of Tarsus (Phil 3:4-9). But it is the way it is because life is a gift of God, offered by Him because of the magnitude of HIS goodness; not ours (1John 4:9-11).

20:24 The rest of the disciples were indignant when Peter and John had made their request. This contrasts with the ‘ruler’ in Chapter 19. On hearing what was required of him he ‘went away sorrowful’ – Matt 19:22