31:3  There is no command in the law that the king should make special provision for the sacrifices. David gave of his own wealth 1Chron 29:3. Hezekiah follows in the steps of his ancestor David.

v 14 the gatekeepers/doorkeepers had extensive duties, beyond just letting people in & out. See also 1Chron 9:22-32  It was a position of responsibility, & will be in the kingdom.

31:2-3  We see that Hezekiah didn’t just give rough ideas to the people as to what they were to do. He ‘commanded’ and ‘appointed’. Here was a man who knew what had to be done and made sure it was done.

31:2-3  We see that Hezekiah didn’t just give rough ideas to the people as to what they were to do. He ‘commanded’ and ‘appointed’. Here was a man who knew what had to be done and made sure it was done.

31:20 In saying that Hezekiah did ‘good and right’ Deut 12:28 is being quoted to show that He observed what the law said.

31:5 A little phrase ‘as soon as’ however it shows the willingness of the people to follow the commandment of God. How often do we delay our commitment until a time more convenient? Not so the people in the days of Hezekiah.

31:10 The amount of money collected for the work of the temple indicates a wonderful generous spirit among the people which shows that the example of Hezekiah had influenced them to generosity. Does our example of zeal for God encourage our brethren and sisters in the work of God?

2Chron 31:3 - to justify still keeping the Sabbath, some erroneously make an artificial division between the ten commandments written on stone (which they say is "moral law", "law of the LORD", to be obeyed post eternally i.e. post New Testament) and the law not in stone but only written in a book or scroll (which they say is only "ceremonial law" such as feasts and offerings, "law of Moses", done away with in the New Testament); V.3 - notes ceremonial offerings and feasts according to the Law of the LORD which, according to the erroneous view, is supposed to only contain moral law of the ten commandments.

2Chron 31:5 - "firstfruits" [Heb. "reshiyth" (7225) means "the first, in place, time, order or rank (specifically a first fruit), principal thing, best"] are perhaps an echo of Christ who is the first born of the new creation; note we have mention of four specific crops - some feel the number four refers to the creative works of God, the world number, the city number so we could have an echo of a 7th day of rest millenial reference to the return of Christ, the new world order he will bring and the establishment of Jerusalem as the future world capital city.

2Chron 31:7 - the third month began the harvest while the seventh month completed the harvest - this perhaps reminds us that after the third year of ministering Christ was crucified, on the third day the firstfruits arose victorious, and that the full harvest will be gathered when Christ returns on the seventh millenial day of rest.

2Chron 31:12 - "Cononiah" [(3562) means "Yah has sustained"], "ruler", "Shimei" [(8096) means "famous"] - perhaps this suggests God would sustain Hezekiah and the greater Hezekiah, Christ. 

2Chron 31:13-15 - all these names could be interpreted to suggest various attributes/aspects of Christ - V.13 "Nahath" [(5184) means "quiet, rest" - possibly an echo of how Christ like a lamb to be sacrificed didn't open his mouth or a reference to the future millenial rest], "Mahath" [(4287) means "erasure" - possibly an echo of Christ's victory over sin and death] - V.15 "Jeshua" [(3442) means "he will save"].

11:2 In speaking of ‘Grecia’ we have a definite identification of ‘Javan’ in Gen 10:2 for the two words translate the same Hebrew word

11:36 The power spoken of here in doing ‘according to his own will’ is seen to contrast with the power of  Dan 8:24

V.2 The three Persian kings who came after Cyrus were:

-Cambyses (530-522 BC)

-Pseudo-Smerdis (522-521 BC)

-Darius 1 Hystapses (Darius the Great) (521-486 BC). This was the king in Ezra's time.

The fourth and last king of Persia, richer and more powerful than the three mentioned above, was Xerxes (Ahasuerus) (486-465 BC). This was the king in Esther's time.

11:27,29 ‘at the time appointed’ should be a great comfort to us. The things that Daniel saw have happened – or many of them at least. And yet Jesus had not return. However the fact that He has worked His plan so far should give us confidence that he will continue to work in the future because a day is ‘appointed’ – Acts 17:31

11:20 `the end of the ‘raiser of taxes’ – 11:20 who will be destroyed is contrasted with the kingdom that "shall not be destroyed" which is a refrain which starts in 2:44 and is seen again in 6:26, 7:14

11:1 Though this chapter relates to issues some time after the dream of Daniel 7 this chapter, in fact, is God’s interpretation of parts of that dream. Daniel, after so many years, was given more information about the dream that is recorded in Dan 7. One presumes that Daniel had been continually thinking about that dream and now, as if a response to prayer, God provides more information.

11:12 The word 1675 is only translated Grecians Acts 6:1 9:29 11:20

It is the word 1675 Hellenistes {hel-lay-nis-tace'} from a derivative of 1672; see John 7:35

AV - Grecians (3)
1) a Hellenist, i.e. one who imitates the manners and customs or the worship of the Greeks, and use the Greek tongue; used in the NT of Jews born in foreign lands and speaking Greek

12:9 Peter did not expect to be released from prison nor did the disciples believe that their prayers would be answered Acts 12:13-15. However God did answer their prayers because it was not His will that Peter would die at that time.
How do we relate this to our unbelief during our own prayers?

11:22 Locate Antioch and work out how far Barnabus travelled - on foot - to visit the ecclesia.

12:4 We might wonder how many years this event was after the death and resurrection of Jesus. It must have been an exact number of years because the death and resurrection of Jesus took place at Passover time.

11:17 Peter's response 'what was I that I could withstand God' is the correct way to view the way in which God calls individuals. Sadly, at  times, this may not match our preferences and we may then be partial in our preaching thinking that some are not worthy of the gospel as they do not fit into our perception of who would make a 'good' brother or sister.

12:4 When Peter was imprisoned by Herod, especially when he had already killed James, the ecclesia in Jerusalem would have been very distraught. So his release by the angel would have caused great joy. In that the brethren and sisters may well have been like those Jews who would have sung Psalm 126 when they were delivered from Babylon.
Peter thought he saw a vision  (12:9)   which answers to    Psa 126:2
In bringing Peter out of prison (12:17)  we see an echo of  Psa 126:3

11:2,3 There were some Jewish believers who thought that salvation was only for Jews. Peter convinced these particular Jews that salvation was also extended to Gentiles. 

However, Paul was constantly plagued by elitist Judaizers who wanted to dictate Christ's agenda. 

Jonah was another example of an elitist who decided who was (or was not) worthy of salvation, until Yahweh educated him.  Let us not fall into the same elitist trap in our own community.

11:28 Claudius Caesar ruled 41-54 AD.  He was murdered by his wife Agrippina to pave the way for her son Nero to rule the empire.

12:12,13,15 Many believers had gathered at Mary's house when Peter knocked at the door. When Rhoda told those gathered that Peter was at the door, they scoffed and said that it must be his angel. It was clear the company understood that each believer had an angel assigned to him or her (Heb 1:14). 

Present-day believers are no different.  Being aware that our angel (who carries the Name of Yahweh) is ever-present should prompt us to behave acceptably at all times (Psa 34:7; Heb 1:14). 

11:28 The short term prophecy of Agabus, and it’s fulfillment, provide the evidence that he truly was a prophet Deut 18:21-22.

12:13-14 We might overlook the consequences of Peter knocking at the door and having to wait outside. The door was locked for fear of the Jews – but a maid went to the door!

11:2  notice the wrong way to approach a problem - they jumped in & criticised, without 1st asking for, or listening to, an explanation of Peter's actions. Once they had heard, they had no objection 11:18  so why not listen 1st....

12:2,5 : the implication is not that they weren't praying for James, so that he was killed, but rather that God's answer was different. One can understand that they found it hard to believe that Peter was spared, after the death of James.

12:13-15 The sequence of events – the disciples thinking that Rhoda had heard Peter’s angel and then were glad when they let Peter into the house echoes the sentiments outlined in Psa 126

11:23 The normal process is that the person died and then the worms consume the body. In Herod’s case the reverse is the case. He was dead whilst he lived because of his Godlessness.

11:12 The preaching of the gospel to the gentiles was a contentious issue for the believers. Peter also had problems with the idea – hence the vision from God. The fact that Peter took six other (Jewish) believers with him to see Cornelius provided the witnesses who could vouch for what Peter was saying. It is always valuable to have corroboration for matters that may cause contention. Not to enable one to prove one’s point but to maintain harmony and unity among believers.

12:4 This is the only place in the KJV where the word Easter appears.  It is an error which has been corrected by modern translators as Passover.  

The term Easter (from the Saxon word Eostre) is named after the pagan Anglo-Saxon goddess of dawn.  Springtime is an awakening like dawn, and hence the connection. 

Springtime is associated with fertility and thus such manifestations as eggs and bunnies form part of the tradition. It was at the time of Passover that sacrifices were made to Eostre.

True believers should shun participation in any pagan activity, no matter how innocent it seems.

11:26 Whilst the term ‘Christian’ today is simply a descriptive term it is probable that in the first century it was coined by the Jews as a derisive term of abuse – 1Pet 4:16