This chapter demonstrates that David was aware that there had to be a permanent building for God in Jerusalem. In return for his desire he is promised a house made up of children. This causes David to reflect on the magnitude of God's mercy towards him.

17:11-15 There are significant differences between the record of the promise to David here and the same promise when recorded in 2Sam 7:12-16

17:5 In quoting ‘since the day that I brought up Israel –2Chron 5:6  – we see that Solomon drew on Nathan’s words to David to demonstrate that he was the son promised to David.

17:1So David managed to build his own house before the ark was brought to Zion. This does not indicate that David was more concerned with his own house than the ark of the covenant. Certain conditions had to be met, one being that David’s enemies had been subdued – Deut 12:10 – before the ark could be brought to Zion.

17:2 Nathan’s recorded response to David’s comment which is not even a detailed comment about what he wanted to do indicates that there must have been a lot of discussion between David and Nathan for the prophet to be able to work out from what David said what he really wanted to do.

V.2 It is curious that Nathan, the prophet of Yahweh, was mistaken in his blessing of David’s desire to build God’s House.  Of course, Nathan had no reason to think that Yahweh would be against David’s building the House.  However, there is no sense from the text, that Nathan consulted Yahweh before he made his statement to David.  In any event, Yahweh quickly let His wishes be known (vs.3,4).

The lesson for us is to always consult Yahweh in prayer for His guidance, and not assume that we know His mind (Isa 55:9).

1Chron 17:11 - "When your days are over" can't refer to Solomon as David was still alive when Solomon became king (1Kin 1:32-35,43) - it refers to Jesus.

1Chron 17:20-22 - Only one God. God went out to redeem a people for himself. Israel would be God's people forever.

29:2 against Egypt
29:4 speaks of Egypt being forced into actions against her will.
29:8 - 12 Egypt is to be made desolate because of her pride.
29:11 Egypt to be uninhabited 40 years.
29:13 - 16 But will be restored after 40 years as a base kingdom - Egypt has never been a major power since the days of Nebuchadnezzar - an evidence for the reliability of the Scriptures.

Vs.19,20 Yahweh promised that Nebuchadnezzar would decimate Egypt. 

Vs.10-12 The destruction, and subsequent forty-year desolation of Egypt is taken by some historians from the time of Nebuchadnezzar's invasion.  

Vs.13,14 The restoration of Egypt is seen to occur at the time of Cyrus, coincident with the return of the Jews to the Land.  Egypt has subsequently become a base nation.  The rule of the pharaohs ended with the Persian re-conquest in 343 BC. 

Alexander the Great conquered Egypt in 332 BC.  After him came the Ptolomeic rule of Egypt until Cleopatra's time when it fell to the Romans (30 BC); and continued under the Romans throughout the New Testament era. 

Today, Egypt has some influence in the Arab world as the leader of the Arab League, but has nowhere near the power or influence of ancient Egypt.  In fact, it is largely a puppet of the United States which sponsors Egypt to the tune of $2.5 billion annually.

29:19  The overthrow of Egypt is certain. The evidence that the Egyptians could see was the way that Tyre had already been taken – Eze 29:18  – Egypt, like Tyre, at this time was a powerful nation. But Babylon had been raised by God tp fulfil His will therefore no nation could withstand Babylon.

29:1 In speaking against Egypt in the tenth year of Jehoiachin’s captivity Ezekiel was speaking about 12 months before Zedekiah was taken captive. Whilst the people in the latter days of Zedekiah’s reign did not hear the words of Ezekiel one might think that they had some idea of what sort of state Egypt was in when he sought to flee there.

29:4  In saying that the fish in the rivers would stink Ezekiel is reminding Egypt of the way that God had destroyed them with plagues previously- Exo 7:18 - when He had brought Israel out of Egypt.

29:10 Egypt was prosperous because of the Nile. Egypt had no other water supply. If the Nile did not flood each year then their crops failed. So Egypt’s prosperity and power was a consequence of the river. So the promise from God that the river would fail spelled the profound downfall of Egypt. But this was not to be a natural disaster. The drying up of the Nile is a metaphor for a military invasion.

V.2 Jeremiah, also, prophesies against Egypt (Jer 46:13).

V.4 To put hooks in thy jaws will bring someone (something) along despite initial reluctance to go. The same expression is made concerning Gog in the latter days. Gog will be persuaded to come down into Israel and Egypt and cause much devastation (Eze 38:4).  Jesus and His Redeemed will dispense with the invaders (Eze 38:22; 39:4).

V.11 The number forty is associated with trial: forty days and nights of rain in Noah’s day; forty years of Israel’s wandering in the desert: Jesus fasted forty days before His temptation.

Vs.18-20 Nebuchadnezzar’s campaign against Tyre lasted 13 years, during which he accomplished little. By way of compensation for His dedication on Yahweh’s behalf, Nebuchadnezzar was given Egypt.

V.21 Here is a reference to Jesus when He returns to take control of worldly affairs (Psa 132:17).

A complete picture

This chapter should be read alongside Jer 42-44 where the remnant of Judah returned to Egypt against God's commandment (Jer 42:19). As a result God promised He would send destruction after them to consume them in Egypt (Jer 42:15-22) and finally overthrow Egypt itself (Jer 44:27-30) because they trusted in Egypt, not in God. So once again we can see that the books written at this time illuminate one another. We are familiar with cross-referencing Matthew, Mark, Luke and John to gain an overall picture, and it's just the same with Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel and Daniel.

29:3 Egypt thought of herself as invincible – sadly around the time of the Babylonian invasion of Israel the Jews thought the same! They thought there was safety in going down to Egypt. Ezekiel told them in captivity that their escapades down into Egypt were of no avail. Egypt would fall just as they had done.

3:1 In saying 'before whose eyes' the Apostle Paul is not thinking that the brethren and sisters in Galatia were actually present at the crucifixion of Jesus. The evidence of the resurrection of Jesus and all that this implied in terms of the death and resurrection of Jesus rendered the sacrifices of the law of Moses obsolete. The Jewish brethren in Galatia should have taken what they had heard and learnt as if it were their own eyewitness evidence. If thy had viewed the preaching that they had heard like that they would not have been beguiled so easily. Eyewitness evidence is not easily overthrown.

4:12-16 Clearly Paul had been very close to the brethren and sisters in Galatia. However those who would have them turn back to the law of Moses had sought to alienate them from Paul and his teaching. Paul, therefore, appeals to their knowledge of him and previous relationship as a basis to encourage them to faithfulness.

3:27-29 In Christ are Abraham's seed - not those who observe the Law of Moses.

4:5 In talking abut redeeming 'them that are under the law' Paul introduces an interesting concept. Israel were redeemed from Egypt. So we might have thought that they were free. However they were not, it seems, as they were in bondage to the law of Moses. It took the sacrifice of Christ to bring true redemption.

3:24,25 'Schoolmaster' or 'tutor' (RV) is not a very good translation of Pedagogue Rather he was the one who ensured the child accepted the discipline of education rather than being the teacher.

4:22-26 If we only had the Genesis record of the matter of Agar we doubtless would never have been able to develop the allegory that Paul presents. He, as an New Testament prophet, and by inspiration, expounds the Old Testament.

3:18 Whilst Paul is keen to establish the superiority of the promise over the law we should dwell for a moment on the fact that we are associated with God because of a promise - that is not by some inalienable right conferred on us by a law.

4:6 We are so familiar with the concept of God as our Father that the force of this verse might be lost on us. The message here is particularly to Jews. A review of the Old Testament will show that Israel were never encouraged to speak of God as their father.  This, then, was a totally new concept to them.

3:17 Christ will dwell in our hearts to the extend which we develop his mind in ourselves. It is not some mystical event over which we have no control. Nor is it something that does not require our effort. Elsewhere (Gal 4:19)  Paul says that he strove for the formation of Christ in the brethren.

4:13 And so again we are directed to realise that 'unity' is the objective in all things.

4:22-31 Paul draws from the Old Testament to illustrate Bondage vs. Freedom (i.e. the Law vs. Christ). He equates: Hagar (bondwoman) with Sinai (the introduction of the Law) which equalled (at the time) Jerusalem (i.e. perpetuation of the Law). The offspring of this line were of the flesh (ordinary birth) and in bondage. 

On the other hand: Abraham (via Sarah) gave the son of promise (who is free, not from the bondwoman; spiritual, not of the flesh (i.e. ordinary birth), because of miraculous birth through God).  This equates to spiritual Jerusalem (i.e. free from perpetuation of the Law because of Christ).  The bondwoman (The Law) was to be cast out so that sons of freedom (followers of Christ) might reign.

3:8 In quoting Gen 12:3 ‘in thee shall all nations be blessed’ Paul reinforces his argument abut faith coming before law and introduces the call of the gentiles in the context of the promises to the gentiles.

4:21-26 When this letter was read out to the ecclesia there must have been a double take in the minds of some. Did he really say that! That the law of Moses is related to the son of the bond woman? But that indeed is what Paul said.

4:19 In talking about travailing ‘again’ we learn of the degree to which the Judaisers had influenced the brethren. However Paul, rather than simply rejecting the brethren because they had become confused about what was right and wrong. Started all over again to tech them the gospel. Herein is a lesson for us.

3:10   Those who felt observance of the law would rejoice in their adherence to it. However that very law condemned them as the principle proves. The law was unable to be kept in totality by any man.

3:27-29 True believers of Christ are subject to the same promises as Abraham.  He was promised the land of Canaan (Israel) for an everlasting inheritance.  That promise has not been realized, and so Abraham will be raised from the dead to have that promise fulfilled (Heb 11:8-10, 13).  By extension, all dead believers in Christ will be raised to inherit the same promise.

3:10 See Deut 27:26.

3:13 See Deut 21:22,23.

3:17 Much time elapsed between the Covenant given to Abraham and the appearance of Jesus, over 1900 years. Even from the giving of the Law, the appearance of Jesus was almost 1500 years. And yet, through the passage of time, the promises to Abraham still stand (3:29).

3:28 There is great freedom in Christ for both male and female.  However, there are still points which mark the difference in roles, for example 1Cor 14:34.

4:10 Ecclesial members were continuing to uphold Jewish feasts and sabbatical and jubilee years.

Just like me

Notice in 4:29 "you are all one" not "you are all the same". It's sometimes easy to confuse the two. We like to make everyone else like us because we know very well that they will never be as much like us as we are. You're the best at being you. This is a common desire to all of us. Take for example the Pharisees who were always going on about the Sabbath: "Why aren't you like me, keeping completely away from work?" not mentioning the fact that Pharisees didn't have full time jobs to go to or demanding masters to serve. So to expect others to be like them gave the Pharisee a sense of superiority, because others could never be quite as good at it as them.

We can do this too when we focus on our best character traits and expect others to reach our level in those traits, but omit to mention other areas we're not so great at. So Paul says "you are all one", in other words you are a body made up of seperate functions which are great when they come together. We should look for character traits in others that can complement our weaknesses, rather than focussing on being just like me. And this is a healthy way to be, since it fosters respect for one another, not criticism.