So now we focus on the tribe of Benjamin in order to give the background to Saul and king and Jonathon his son. The scene is now set of the kingdom of God with a man ruling over the nation.

It's apparent from 1Chron 8:32that the Benjaminites lived in or around Jeruslaem.  But when David and Joab conquered Jerusalem it became a city of Judah  (2Sam 5:4-10).  I presume Benjamin never successfully conquered it in the first place.

V.40 mentions archers (bows).  When we think of weapons we think about the material from which they were made.  Unfortunately, those materials, at least the metals, are inaccurately described in the King James Version. 

The KJV mentions steel 4 times (2Sam 22:35; Job 20:24; Psa 18:34;Jer 15:12). Steel is an alloy of iron and carbon which was not in use until a long time after this era.  Iron alone was used, of course, especially for larger war implements such as chariots (Judg 4:13).  The problem with iron was that it was brittle and more difficult to smelter than other metals. 

Modern Bible versions are more accurate in writing bronze instead of steel.  Bronze is an alloy of copper and tin, and is tougher than just copper alone.  Originally, weapons were made of copper until bronze was discovered. 

The term brass (which is an alloy of copper and zinc) is mentioned 126 times in the KJV and is also erroneous.  It should be rendered bronze, as brass was also a later discovery.

8:33 ‘Esh-baal’ is Ishbosheth. Strange isn’t it that Kish and Jonathan built ‘baal’ into the names of their children – though baal simply means lord. Maybe they did not consider the implications in terms of false gods

8:33-36 Here we have valuable information about the family of Saul. The family relationship between these different individuals will figure in providing reasons for certain actions of Saul during his life.

8:6 This ‘Ehud’ is probably the judge of Judg 3:15

V.1 etc. This Chapter contains the genealogy of Benjamin which began in 7:6.  Comparing the two, we notice that the names of the sons are different.  Some plausible explanations are:

-That the persons mentioned had more than one name.

-The term sons are used loosely to mean other relatives like grandsons etc.

It must be remembered that the tribe of Benjamin was almost wiped out (Judg 20:11 etc.).  This event might have affected the genealogy of Benjamin.

V.33 Saul, the first king of Israel is mentioned in this genealogy (See 1Sam 9:1,2 etc).

V.34 Jonathan’s son Meribbaal (quarreller of Baal) later had his name changed to Mephibosheth (idol-breaker) (2Sam 4:4).

8:33 Whilst Saul had three sons we know little about two of the sons, the Scriptural record focussing on the activites of Jonathan. Thus we see a Godly man presented to us and his brothers hardly mentioned.

Vs.28-32 Yahweh had a controversy with the Ammonites as well as with Jerusalem.  Nebuchadnezzar would be the instrument to deal with both (vs.19,20). 

Jerusalem was destroyed by fire in 586 BC, and Rabbah was destroyed when the Babylonians attacked the Ammonites sometime after 586 BC (Jer 49:2,3). 

The Ammonites were related to the Israelites.  One of Lot's sons, Ben-Ammi, was the father of the Ammonites (Gen 19:36-38). 

The Ammonites gave Israel a hard time: first in the time of the Judges when Jephthah was pressed into service (Judg 11:4-6); then Saul defended the men of Jabesh against the Ammonites (1Sam 11:1-11); David had ongoing conflicts with the Ammonites (1Chron 19, 20).  However, Solomon had no conflicts with them because he married Ammonite wives and worshipped Milcom the god of Ammon (1Kin 11:5). 

All this offensive history caused Yahweh to use Nebuchadnezzar His servant, to mete out punishment to the Ammonites (Jer 27:6).

How true these prophecies came! The well known verses of Eze 21:25-27were fulfilled just 70 years later, when the Jews returned to Jerusalem under Cyrus’ proclamation.  Zerubbabel, their leader, was a direct descendant of the Royal line (see 1Chron 3:1,17-19), could have claimed to be king, but didn’t.  He was mayor, or civic leader. There WERE no more kings. For as we know, Jesus Christ is the One “Whose right it is”.

21:25  This use of ‘prince’ should provide us with an insight into what the people in Ezekiel’s day would have thought when Ezekiel spoke of the ‘prince’ in Eze 45. Those in Ezekiel’s day would doubtless have been encouraged that Ezekiel was speaking to the time when the one who had the right would come.

V.4 Yahweh intends His destruction of Judah to be complete, from the south to the north.  However, He states that both the righteous and the wicked will be destroyed. 

There are many scriptures in which Yahweh declares that He will destroy the wicked but uphold the righteous (e.g. Psa 37:17). 

Why would He not spare the righteous in this case? (For possible explanation, e-mail me for my comment: Righteousness and Salvation).

21:3 ‘Draw forth my sword’, in quoting Lev 26:25, is showing Israel that the events that are happening are not accidents. They are in direct fulfilment of His words to them at Sinai if they were unfaithful to Him.

21:9 In saying ‘a sword, a word’ speaking of judgement against the land we might think that this is just a simple warning. However, like so much of the language of the prophets at this time, Ezekiel is quoting the curses of Lev 26:25,33

Vs.26,27 Jerusalem would be destroyed and the kingdom cease.  No king has reigned there since: and will not until Jesus returns to the earth to claim the throne (Luke 1:32).

21:3 That Go will draw a sword after Israel, as well as echoing what God had said – Lev 26:25 – continues the theme spoken of earlier by the prophet – Eze 5:12 etc:

When God says that the Babylonian army would be His sword, how do we imagine this worked in practice? As they approached a city to take it, did the eyes of each soldier glaze over as he went into a trance; his every move controlled by God from that point on? Or was it their individual swords that took on a mind of their own, cutting a perfect path of destruction (v16)? Or did God work in swaying the decisions of the king of Babylon by manipulating the signs he was looking for (v21-23)? Or was it by dreams that God controlled these decisions (v29)?

Some of these answers have scriptural backing; some don't. Daniel and Esther are good places to start looking for answers, because there we have written for us the thoughts, dreams and decisions of the mighty Emperors of Babylon, Media and Persia. We can then understand how God might use rulers today (Rom 13:3-5).

21:27 There is an ironic contrast between the Rechabites – Jeremiah 35 – and Zedekiah. Whilst Zedekiah was to be overthrown, even though he was the king the Rechabites who really were of little consequence, would continue – Jer 35:18-19

V.8 - When the son of man comes will he find faith on the earth is presented as a challenge for us. But Matt 24:12-13 additionally notes that, "Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved."  This suggests a serious two fold challenge of a lack of faith and a lack of love in the last days.

18:31  And yet again Jesus told the disciples that he was going to be killed and rise from the dead. But they did not understand. Their minds were so full of a conquering Messiah that they could not understand what they were being told. How often are our minds closed to ideas simply because we already have decided what Scripture means?

18:10-13 Notice that both the Pharisee and the publican spoke in their prayer of themselves. The Pharisee with ‘I’ and the publican with ‘me’. However the way in which they spoke of themselves is radically different. The Pharisee was exalting himself. The publican was exalting God.

18:13  The call for God to be ‘merciful’ in the parable is echoed – Luke 18:38 - in the ‘blind man’. The one who cannot see actually saw his need.

Vs.2-8 The unjust judge finally helped to avenge the widow after her persistent appeals for help.  After Jesus ascended into heaven, He left His bride, Israel and His ecclesia, to work through history without His complete protection.  The Jews (the elect nation) and the ecclesia (Spiritual Israel) are represented by the widow in the parable. 

The ravages of the world have torn into the Jews and Christ's ecclesia over the centuries.  Where is their avenger?  He is in heaven, and will soon come to avenge His people.  If an unjust judge would do that to the widow, then the just judge, Jesus, will certainly do that for His people. 

But will he find faith when He comes?  That is the troubling question Jesus poses.  The faithful, like the widow, will be persistent in prayer to gain the ear of the Lord.  And, the Lord will not disappoint.  He will deliver vengeance and relief for His people.  Let us pray that He will soon come!

18:18 Whilst it might be thought that Jesus’ response to the ruler was rather abrupt and might have put him off further questioning the ruler’s response highlighted a fundamental flaw in his way of thinking so it had to be addressed before there was any hope of further instruction.

V.1 etc. The parable of the unjust judge serves to show that persistence in prayer is desirable. It is not that Yahweh does not hear the first time. In fact, He knows what we are going to pray for even before we say it (Matt 6:8).

Paul urges us to persist in prayer (Rom 12:12; 1Thess 5:17).

Jesus worries that He might find some of His brethren not being engaged in effective prayer when he comes (v.8). That is because some will have fallen away from faithfully obeying the commandments of Jesus. Those who are not friends of the Lord will not be in the kingdom (John 15:14).

18:33 Notice that whilst Jesus speaks of his death to his disciples he does not mention crucifixion. Whilst he speaks of his death on a number of occasions there is only one time – Matt 20:19- when Jesus actually says the he will be crucified and that is in the last week of his life