So now the focus is on the families of David and Solomon which traces the kingly line and the other brothers.

Six sons were born to David during his 7 year reign in Hebron, and then a further 13 in Jerusalem
(1Chron 3:1-9). It's not clear how many wives he had, although the Hebron family were all born from different wives.  It's not surprising therefore that Solomon followed in his father's footsteps, and soon started to take multiple wives. 

Polygamy was practiced in the ancient Near-East, although monogamy was also widespread.  Abraham and Jacob had multiple wives, while Isaac did not.  Yahweh did not prohibit polygamy per se, although it did not conform to the Edenic ideal of monogamy. 

The patriarch were not given to idolatry.  But, later an injunction was put in the Law because Yahweh foresaw the danger of a man being led into idolatry because of his wives (Deut 17:17).  This did not pose a problem with David, but it certainly did with Solomon (1Kin 11:4-8). 

The Edenic ideal was restored later under ecclesial leadership (1Tim 3:2;Titus 1:6).  This practice is commonly accepted by most people in the world today, and forms a tenet of civil law.

3:5 Even if Bathsheba was to produce the heir Solomon was not the firstborn, even if we discount the one that died shortly after birth. Another example of god passing over the apparent heir to select the man of His choosing.

3:5 when we see that Bathsheba was the daughter of Ammiel we maybe see a reason why Ammiel was involved in providing sustenance to David when he was fleeing from Absalom – 2Sam 17:27

3:1 Maybe the fact that Amnon was the firstborn of David provided him with the erroneous judgement that he could behave towards Tamar as he did.

V.5 Ammiel, the father of Bathsheba, is called Eliam in 2Sam 11:3.  This Ammiel is not considered the same person as the Ammiel of 2Sam 9:4,5; 17:27.

3:2 Maybe being the third born, Amnon now being out of the way, Absalom saw himself as the obvious next king – though we hear nothing of Daniel, David’s second son.

V.4 David reigned a total of 40 years and 6 months, about the same amount of time as his son Solomon (1Kin 11:42). They were the longest reigning monarchs in the united kingdom of Judah and Israel. However, the longest reigning monarch, and the most evil, was Manasseh who ruled over Judah for 55 years (v.13; 2Kin 21:1).

V.9 Tamar was the only sister to 15 brothers.

3:10-16 this summary provides us with a simple summary of the sons of Solomon who reigned as kings of Judah.

1Chron 3:5;2Sam 11:3 - "Bathshua" [(1340) means "daughter of wealth"] is the same person as "Bathsheba" [(1339) means "daughter of an oath"] - is this perhaps an inference to a promise or oath to Uriah being broken?

1Chron 3:6,8 - the two sets of two brothers of the same name (Elishama, Eliphelet) may be questioned (1Chron 14:5-7;2Sam 5:15-16); perhaps 1Chron.3:6 should read "Elishua, Elpelet" and perhaps 1Chron.3:8 should read "Elishama, Eliphelet". Is this a minor corruption of translation or is it the correct mentioning of several names (people often had more than one name) for the same persons?

"House of David"

In 1993-94, while work crews were preparing the Tel Dan site in the north of Israel at the foot of Mount Hermon for visitors, a broken fragment of basalt stone was uncovered in a wall.  It turned out that the stele fragment mentions King David's dynasty, the "House of David." As the preparatory work for tourism proceeded, two additional fragments of the stele were recovered.

As the fragment and the entire pavement was covered by the debris of the Assyrian destruction of Tiglath Pileser III, in 732 BC, it could not have been laid later. 

Gen 19:4-5 - Emphasizes the sexual immorality of Sodom. In Eze 16:49-50 - We get a more comprehensive depiction of her and her daughters behaviors which included: arrogance, being overfed, lack of concern, not helping the poor and needy, haughtiness, doing detestable things.

Vs.3,45 Yahweh calls the Amorite father of Jerusalem and the Hittite mother.  The land of promise was already occupied by the Amorites and Hittites when the exodus occurred (Exo 3:8). 

Yahweh expected Israel to rid the land of the Amorites' and the Hittites' idolatry (Exo 23:23,24).  Unfortunately this did not happen.  In fact two of the greatest indictments for Amorite idolatrous worship, and beyond, were against Ahab (1Kin 21:26); and Manasseh (2Kin 21:11).  Yahweh was so angry, particularly with Manasseh, that he vowed to destroy Jerusalem and Judah, and would not relent (2Kin 21:12). 

Thus, Ezekiel's description of Jerusalem as the daughter of idolatrous parents is apt.  His diatribe against her is a confirmation of Yahweh's promise of destruction.

This is a fascinating chapter.  A godly man finds a little baby girl, newly born, but forsaken by her parents. The man takes her home, lavishes love and attention on her, gives her everything including some costly presents, and brings her up.  When she is grown he falls in love with her, and marries her.  But she throws it all back in his face, and commits adultery with other men.  She is even worse than a harlot, and actually pays money to her male lovers (Eze 16:34). That girl is Israel.  God chose her, lavished His blessing on her, and gave her everything a nation could possibly want. But she played the harlot, and went after other gods.
How terribly sad the Lord God must have been!  BUT, in the end, He will forgive her, and take her back (Eze 16:60-63). That’s real love!

16:2  Whilst this chapter speaks of the awfulness of Judah the purpose of highlighting it all is to ‘cause Jerusalem to know …’ Again God is seeking repentance, not destruction.

V.3 It is interesrting to note the Canaanite aspects in both the history of Jerusalem, and of the people of Judah. Jerusalem was an Amorite city at the time of Joshua (Josh 10:1,5) also a stronghold of the Jebusites (Judg 19:10). Both the Amorites and the Jebusites were Canaanite peoples. Three of Judah's sons were born of a Canaanite mother. Only one of these sons survived (Shelah) and his decendants formed part of the tribe of Judah (1Chron 2:3, 1Chron 4:22-23) It is also worth noting that Zedekiah, king of Judah was a descendant of Judah through Tamar.

16:48 In saying ‘Sodom thy sister’ Ezekiel is reminding Israel that Isaiah had already spoken of her leaders as rulers of Sodom – , Isa 1:10

16:23 The ‘whoredoms’ that Ezekiel speaks of picks up the words of Hos 2:2

16:3 Israel’s father and mother were not Amorites and Hittites. However spiritually speaking they were. They did the work of their father and mother. As Jesus said to the Jewish leaders, they were not Abraham’s children –John 8:44

V.4 All these elements spelled death for the infant. Israel, in its infancy in the Land, was subject to death because of its abominations (v.3).

v51 "Samaria did not commit half your sins" reminds us that this prophecy is against the two tribes making up Judah. Samaria is the name used for the Northern Kingdom of 10 tribes, and had already been judged. The comparison here is directly between Jereboam and Manasseh, and how the latter acted far worse than the first. Much of this chapter finds its counterpart in 2Kin 21:1-18.

16:37-39 Here the prophet uses the idea which Hosea has already used – Hos 2:3

12:14 man who made me a judge ... over you Exodus 2:14

v.1 Consider that number of people that is implied by 'innumerable'. Also consider, generally the crowds that came to listen to Jesus at different times,
v.10 'Blasphemies against the holy spirit' in the context of the Pharisees is the accusation that Jesus cast out devils by Beelzebub - Luke 11:15, an accusation only recently made.
v.37 'he shall gird himself ...'. We see that Jesus actually did this - John 13:4 etc. One wonders whether the disciples remembered this comment on that occasion.
v.51 - 53. This comment shows that Micah 7:6 has a fulfilment in the tie of Jesus. Firstly in the way his own family responded to him and secondly it is to be seen in the response of families to the beliefs of the followers of Christ. In a Jewish context, where being 'put out of the synagogue' was the price that was paid for being a disciple of Jesus, being ostracised would be common for Jews who accepted Jesus as Messiah.

Here Jesus presents teaching to his disciples - notice the way the record emphasises that the words are for the disciples -:1,15,16,22 - which he later develops in private discussion with his disciples in the last week of his life.

So Jesus uses the interruption, not to teach the man but rather to use that man's problem as an object lesson for the disciples.

12:51 So returning to the 'division' that Jesus is going to bring on the earth. We should appreciate that this division is because most will not submit to the teaching of Jesus. The tolerant Jesus of secular Christianity has no counterpart in Scripture. Jesus repeatedly challenges his followers to put him first.

13:13  In that the woman was 'made straight' literally experienced the fulfillment of  Isa 40:3.

12:24,27 Jesus is not suggesting that one should not work to provide the necessities of life for the nateral man. Rather, it means that if even these creatures are the objects of God's concern, then surely we, whom God has endowed with gifts and talents enabling us to plan and to work, will be provided for.

-

12:15  The parable of the bigger barns which proceeds this verse seems to be talking about materialism and the man who came with the question, however Jesus now speaks to ‘them’ – the disciples – so we see Jesus has been using the man with the problem as an object lesson for the disciples.

13:35  When Jesus says the disciples should have their "loins girded about you" Jesus is speaking of more than clothing. He is speaking of being mentally prepared for the work. Peter (1Pet 1:13) explains this for us.

WHILE THERE IS YET TIME (V.54-59)

Jesus used a very vivid illustration here. "When you are threatened with a law-suit, come to an agreement with your adversary before the matter comes to court, for if you do not you will have imprisonment to endure and a fine to pay". The assumption is that the defendant has a bad case against you and you will lose in court.

Every man has a bad case in the presence of God, and if he is wise, he will make his peace with God while there is yet time.

12:20 In pronouncing ‘thou fool’ to the man in the parable we can possibly identify the Old Testament event which formed the basis for the parable. The ultimate ‘fool’ in the Old Testament was Nabal – for that is what his name meant. He was not rich towards God when he had a good harvest because he did not share what he had been blessed with with David and his men – 1Sam 25

12:14  The reproof ‘ who made me a judge or a divider over you’ quoting Exodus Exo 2:27 is a powerful reproof when we realise those words originally spoken to Joseph who was rejected as the saviour are now spoken to Jesus who was to be rejected as the saviour.

12:19 The man in the parable’s problem was not the building of bigger barns. It was his attitude to the blessings of God. ‘I will take my ease’ is hardly an appropriate response to God’s blessing. This is highly pertinent for those of us who have been able to leave employment with a good pension. How are we to spend our time now?

V.5 The parallel passage in Matthew says: And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell (Matt 10:28).

Men can only kill the body, but Yahweh is able to kill both the body and the soul (breath, spirit which animates the body).

Disciples of Jesus should not be worried about physical death. The same God who can destroy all remnants of life, can also restore life.  And, this is what is promised to those who love and obey Him (1Cor 15:52-54).

The question is: Are we now eagerly working towards being accepted by Jesus when He returns (Matt 16:27)? The choice is between this fleeting life of imperfection and eternity in perfection. No contest!

V.15 We live in a very materialistic world, one in which people are defined by what they possess.  Let us not become caught up in the things of the world, but concentrate on the Kingdom (v.31; Matt 6:19,20).

V.34 See Matt 6:24.

V.40 The disciple of Jesus has to be ready and waiting for his/her Lord’s return at any time.  If he/she is not ready, then he/she will miss the marriage feast (Kingdom) (Matt 25:1-13).

12:22 In saying ;take no thought’ Jesus is representing his own words that he spoke to the disciples in the Sermon on the Mount – Matt 6:31

WHISPERED IN THE DARK

Talking about other people behind their backs is one of the easiest sins to slip in to. We are nice to their face but when their back is turned we question their motives or even go as far as abusing them while they are out of earshot. Would we say any of those things directly to that person? Probably not. We are too polite. But when Jesus talks about what we have said in the dark or whispered in the ear, I wonder if it goes furter than just talking to other people. We all do a lot of self talk, and though we may not speak our thoughts directly to anyone else, if we are concerned about what could come out of our mouths, then we need to cut the thoughts off before they develop.

None of us want to be humiliated by the words of Jesus when he said, "There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight; and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs." (Luke 12:3-4)

In our dealings with other people, let us upgrade our opinions of them to the height of the words we would say to them face to face. One day we will be found out as to what we have said in secret. Let us hope that the words we have said are words we are proud to have everybody hear.