18:16 In speaking of people as being sheep without a shepherd we are seeing a theme which runs through Scripture. Numbers 27:17 1 Kings 22:17 2 Chronicles 18:16 Matthew 9:36 Mark 6:34 Thus it is easy to see why Jesus is presented as the 'chief shepherd' 1 Peter 5:4

19:7 We might think that the requirement that one does not show 'respect of persons' is a New Testament teaching from James 2:1,9 1 Peter 1:17 But we know that it is a characteristic of God. Romans 2:11 Ephesians 6:9 Colossians 3:25 2 Samuel 14:14 which we must manifest because that is how Yahweh behaves. Leviticus 19:15 Deuteronomy 1:17 16:19

18:1 Jehoshaphat sought affinity with evil Ahab because of family ties.

Jehoshaphat's son was married to Ahab's daughter

19:2 The rebuke of Jehu was designed to correct Jehoshaphat's misguided loyalty to Ahab. In this rebuke we see the dangers of allowing family relationships to get in the way of God's commands.

18:3 When Ahab asked Jehoshaphat to go with him against Ramoth-Gilead Jehoshaphat may well have been even more disposed to go not only because he was related by marriage but also because the city was a city of refuge (Josh 20:8)

19:9 That a 'perfect heart' was required of the Levites demonstrates that a simple observance of the law of Moses was not enough. The perfect heart is akin to the circumcised heart (Deuteronomy 10:16)

18:6 The question from Jehoshaphat seems to indicate that he had grave misgivings about Ahab's prophets and about the whole escapade that he had committed himself to.

19:11 Having installed the Levites as judges and warned them not to respect persons or take bribes (2Chron 19:7) he told them to 'Deal courageously' because integrity requires courage.

19:5 There had been judicial courts established at an early period. But Jehoshaphat was the first king who modified these institutions according to the circumstances of the now fragmentary kingdom of Judah. He fixed local courts in each of the fortified cities, these being the capitals of every district. Deut 16:18

18:1 Jehoshaphat was essentially a good king.  The only unfortunate occurrence was his association with Ahab.  His son Jehoram was married to Ahab's daughter Athaliah. 

Perhaps Jehoshaphat consented to this marriage as a means of bringing to an end the ongoing hostility between Judah and Israel.  This it did, but at a cost.  Having a liaison with evil is never a good thing regardless of the motive.  Like the old saying says: If you lie down with dogs, you will get up with fleas. 

Yahweh rebuked Jehoshaphat for his association with Ahab.  Ahab's evil continued, even after his death.  We shall shortly read of his daughter Athaliah's exploits and discover that she, like her father, was a nasty piece of work.

18:7  How often do we only seek counsel and advice from those who we know will agree with us?

19:1  Blood ties are often stronger than spiritual ties. As such they can really cloud our judgment. So Jehoshaphat was reminded that he had been involved with the ‘ungodly’ who ‘hate the Lord’. We do well to take heed to the warning that our judgment can easily be clouded by our feelings of loyalty to others.

18:29 One wonders why Jehoshaphat was so willing to be party to Ahab’s subterfuge, especially as it would put him at greater risk. However we do know that the advice of a friend can often be taken, even when in retrospect it can be seen to be utterly unwise counsel.

18:2 Jehoshaphat maybe should have heeded the advice of Solomon - Prov 23:1-3

19:4-5 Having been rebuked by the prophet for his association with Ahab (verse :2) the king sets about a spiritual reform in the land. Maybe his warring with Ahab had led the people to think that the ways of Ahab were acceptable. How easily our actions can be detrimental to the behaviour of others.

2Chron 18:1 - Jehoshaphat had a marriage alliance with Ahab (2Kin 8:18,26).

2Chron 18:2 - "persuaded" [Heb. "suth" (5496) means "seduced, enticed, persuaded"] perhaps in part with animal sacrifices pretending to honor Jehoshaphat by paying respects to his God.

2Chron 18:26 - "prison" [Heb. "kele" (3608) means "imprisonment, confinement, prison, restraint"] - compare this with a different Heb. word that refers more to stocks in 2Chron 16:10 - "prison" [Heb. "mahpeketh" (4115) means "stocks, wrench, crooked posture, stock house, prison stocks, prison"].

V.17 In today's society it is taught that our abilities and successes are of ourselves. Here we clearly see everything is of, or from our Heavenly Father 

Daniel was taken to Babylon during the first wave of captives in about 602 BC.  He was a youth when taken, but lived and witnessed in Babylon until he was an old man. 

He served as an official through the reigns of successive Babylonian kings: Nebuchadnezzar (604-562 BC); Evil-Merodach (561-560 BC); Neriglissar (559-55 BC); Nabonidus (555-539 BC) (actually his son Belshazzar took charge for him).  Then Daniel served under several Persian and Mede kings: Cyrus (539-529 BC); Cambyses (529-522 BC); Darius I (522-436 BC). 

As we can see by these timelines, Daniel would have been about one hundred years of age during Darius' time.  The incident of the Lion's Den places Daniel at about eighty years old.  His long, successful witness under servitude is an example of faith and patience that we can look towards for encouragement. 

1:2  This captivity, the first, answers to Jer 27:19-20

1:8 Daniels’ conscience dictated that he could not eat the king’s meat – doubtless because it had been offered to idols. However his approach is not to demand but to ‘request’ that he be excused of the king’s meat. An example of a man who knew what was wrong but asked rather than demanded exemption.

1:21 This little almost throw away point about how long Daniel continued indicates that he survived the whole of the 70 year captivity. So he must have been a good age at the time of the decree of Cyrus – at least 85 it seems.

1:10  Notice the way that the prince of the eunuchs reacted. He could have simply said ‘this is the king’s command – just do it’. However rather he expressed concerns for himself. It is as if he was happy to co-operate with Daniel.

Vs.19-21 The Jews were upset at the superscription on the cross.  The common language of the Jews was Aramaic. This was the language that Jesus uttered from the cross (Mark 15:34).  The fact that the superscription was written in Hebrew must have irked the Jews further.  Hebrew was the holy tongue, the language of Moses and the prophets (largely).  Ironically, it is in this language that Jesus is spoken about (Luke 16:31; John 5:46,47). 

Vs.28-30 It was customary to give those about to be crucified a drink of wine-vinegar mixed with gall (hemlock) to deaden the pain.  Jesus refused this as He needed to fully experience his painful death (Matt 27:34).  Immediately before his death, however, He requested a drink to fulfil Psa 69:21.

V.36 Not a bone of the Lord's body was broken.  This fulfilled scripture as it pertained to the Passover Lamb (Jesus) (Exo 12:46; Num 9:12; Psa 34:20).  We are the Lord's body and we cannot be broken (divided, dismembered) (1Cor 12:27; Eph 4:15,16). 

With that understanding, it is, therefore, wrong to say, at the memorial feast, that the bread represents the broken body of Christ (1Cor 11:24).  The bread is broken (divided to share) but the body is always whole.  The KJV has an unfortunate translation which is, thankfully, corrected in modern translations.

19:30 In bowing his head Jesus is like Samson – Judg 16:30 when he killed the Philistines in their temple. Samson killed Philistines. Jesus killed sin in his own flesh.

19:18 Notice here, and in the other records, the details of the crucifixion are not mentioned. The Bible focus is not on the physical suffering but on the resolute way in which Jesus wanted to do his Fathers will. Any consideration of the death of Jesus which does not have this Biblical focus is at variance with Scripture and, by implication, is not deemed as helpful as considering Jesus’ will rather than the details of the crucifixion.

19:12 Whilst the Jews had asserted that Jesus’ sin was to claim to be the son of God – John 19:17 – they now speak of Jesus as king so that they can force Pilate’s hand lest he fall foul of the wrath of Caesar.

19:3 There is a certain irony in the soldiers crying ‘hail king of the Jews’ for it was a desire to ‘worship’ Jesus that prompted Herod to enquire where Jesus was to be born – Matt 2:2

19:13 In telling us that Pilate brought Jesus forth we realise that this is the first time that the common people have actually seen what was going on with Jesus in his trial. This point marks a change in the trial from a private to a public trial.