Comments for January 18

v.48 - It seems that stones, or heaps of stones, were sometimes erected as a witness. Stone is long lasting. It is there for a long time to keep a 'watch' (Jegarsahadutha (Aramaic) and Galeed (Hebrew) [v.47] both mean 'watch') over the makers of the vows together. In Josh.24:27, the rock seems to have been personalised, as if it had ears. So is this rock a representation of God? Something long-lasting - a memorial stone to remind them of the vows which they swore there?

v3 - Jacob knew this time would come one day because of his experience with the dream of the ladder which caused him to receive and repeat the prophecy of this fact. (ch.28:15,20-22)

In stealing the household gods Rachel demonstrates a rather unsavoury aspect of her character. We tend to think of Rachel, maybe because she was Jacob's favourite wife, as the more spiritual. However look for aspects of Leah's behaviour in the next few days which show her spirituality.

:12 The angel, in saying 'lift up now thine eyes and see' he is quoting Genesis 13:14 where an angel asked Abraham to do the same. So the way that Jacob dealt with the sheep was at the direction of God and in some way related to the promises that had been made to Abraham.

Genesis 31 - The affairs of these families are related very minutely, while (what are called) the great events of states and kingdoms at that period, are not mentioned. The Bible teaches people the common duties of life, how to serve God, how to enjoy the blessings he bestows, and to do good in the various stations and duties of life. Selfish men consider themselves robbed of all that goes past them, and covetousness will even swallow up natural affection. Men's overvaluing worldly wealth is that error which is the root of covetousness, envy, and all evil. The men of the world stand in each other's way, and every one seems to be taking away from the rest; hence discontent, envy, and discord. But there are possessions that will suffice for all; happy they who seek them in the first place.

Genesis 31:7 - The sheep in Mesopotamia, brought forth their young twice a year; so that every weaning time, which was ten times in five years, Laban made an alteration in Jacob's wages; one time he would let Jacob have only the speckled, and not the ringstraked; another time the ringstraked, and not the speckled; and so changed every time, according as Laban observed the prevailing colour was, as may be concluded from the next verse.

Genesis 31:15 - "Are we not accounted of him strangers?".... Laban their father had not treated his daughters as children, nor even as freeborn persons; but as if they were foreigners that he had taken in war, or bought of others; or at least, that they were born bondmaids in his house, and so had a right to sell them as he had.  "....for he hath sold us" - Laban had sold his daughters to Jacob for fourteen years service, as if they had been his slaves, instead of giving dowries with them as his children. "....and hath quite devoured also our money" - that which Laban had got by the servitude of Jacob, instead of giving it back to them as their portion; he spent it on himself and his sons, and there was nothing left for them. Truly Uncle Laban was a serpent, through and through, a real "cheat" [as Jacob's name means].

Genesis 31:23 - "and pursued after him seven days' journey" - which must be reckoned, not from Jacob's departure from Haran, but from Laban's; for Laban being three days' journey from thence, whither he had to return, after he received the news of Jacob being gone; Jacob must have travelled six days before Laban set out with his brethren from Haran; so that this was, the thirteenth day of Jacob's travel; for Laban not having animals to drive as Jacob did, could travel as fast again as he, and do that in seven days which took up Jacob thirteen. "and they overtook him in the mount Gilead" - This is thought to be three hundred and eighty miles from Haran. Laban had been thwarted by Jacob, for his intention was never to let Jacob actually take possession of that which he had worked so hard for. Though part of the "Ecclesia" at Haran, Uncle Laban certainly showed himself to be a man too much in love with this present world.

31:41 Because we read the details of the life of Jacob in a few days we may easily forget the long time periods involved. The events in the house of Laban cover 20 years. How would we deal with 20 years of frustration?

v49.The name Mizpah provides us with a lovely blessing for each other

v51,52. It is possible that the images were title deeds to property. Therefore Jacob is swearing that he will not claim Laban’s land

Gen 31:3,24  The time had come for Jacob to return to his father's house.  V.3 After Laban had realized what had happened, he chased after Jacob, and caught up to him. We see that Laban did him no harm, because of God's intervention. V.24 We see here that God's plan and purpose will be accomplished.  

It is interesting to note that in this chapter all references to God or gods are translated from the word Elohim (the exception is God of Bethel which is El (

v.13).
Thus:

The God of Isaac

v.42

The God of Abraham

vs.42,53

The God of Nahor

v.53

The God of Terah (the father of Abraham and Nahor)

v.53

Laban's gods (teraphim

v.19 = images = household idols) vs.30,32

Other general references to God are all elohim

vs.5,7,9,11,16,24,29,42,50.
Perhaps we associate elohim with the deity we serve, but it is also a generic term encompassing all gods, both true and false.

v.1-16 - The whole of this argument seems to revolve around money and inheritance - things were just the same then as they are now!

V.41 Jacob did not only serve the LORD God, but we see in this verse the decree that he served Laban. As we look at Jacob's service to his father in law; We see how he was taken advantage of for some twenty years. We ask, would we be prepared to serve within the ecclesia under similar circumstances?

31:3 Jacob surely was relieved to hear the words of God that he should return to ‘the land of his fathers’

It is not certain why Rachel stole her father's gods (which were small figurines of female deities), but Charles Ryrie makes some suggestions:

1) They were supposed to guarantee fertility. 

2) The possessor could lay claim to Laban's estate when he died (although this could be disputed since Laban did not give them freely).

3) Rachel still had a strong dependence on these gods for religious purposes.    

Perhaps, though, it was just an act of spite stemming from the sour sentiment of vs.14,15

Reuben would probably be about 13yrs old, and Joseph about 6yrs old at this stage (if he was born at the commencement of the 6yrs Jacob worked for the flocks Gen 30:25, 31:42 )

HOLY CONFUSION
 
Laban seems a bit confused. After Jacob had fled from Laban's house to go back to the land of Canaan, Laban pursued Jacob for two reasons. One, he wanted to say goodbye to his daughters and grandchildren, and secondly, someone had stolen his household gods and he wanted them back. The point on which he seems confused is that of who his god really was.
 
He had seen that the God of Jacob was a powerful and active God, in fact, on his way to meet Jacob we learn that God came to him and spoke to him. There could have been no doubt in his mind that the LORD was God. Remember that Laban's second biggest concern was that his own gods were missing from his house. Laban makes a big deal out of his missing gods, but later, at his departure he makes his covenant with Jacob by "the God of Abraham and the God of Nahor, the God of their father." (Gen 31:53)
 
So Laban, knowing that the LORD was God and acknowledging that fact in his discussions and covenant with Jacob, was also significantly attached to the idols in his own home.
 
But we are not confused - or are we? We, like Laban, may have seen God at work in our lives or in the lives of others, we may worship him at appointed times, but do we have other gods or attachments at home that we would desperately miss if we were to do without? If we examine ourselves closely, we may find that we do. Let us solve the confusion by making the LORD our one and only God at all times.

31:14,19 Rachel possibly shows her lack of spirituality in saying that she did not anticipate any inheritance in her father’s house and in taking the images.

31:7    ‘ten times’  seems to be an idiom for ‘a lot of times’ – see Num 14:22, Neh 4:12, Job 19:3

31:2 Laban’s scheming against Jacob seems to be becoming less effective. The wonderful blessing of having Jacob care for his flock seems now to have turned to be a blessing upon Jacob. So Laban sees Jacob as a liability now. Hence his attitude changes.

31:22 That it took three days before Laban heard that Jacob had left with Rachel and Leah must indicate the degree to which Jacob had become alienated from Laban – notice he did not even see for himself that they had left. He had to be ‘told’.

31:4   Whilst we may understand Jacob’s concerns about how he might be treated the way in which he called his wives to him ‘in the field’ in yet another example of Jacob’s  guile.  He had presumed how Laban would behave and not trusting God to take care of him works out his own solution.  How would we have reacted?

Gen 31:21-22 - V22 - an awareness of escape on the third day not unlike the awareness of Christ's escape on the third day; V23 - meeting up on the 7th day just as Christ is pursued and will be found on the 7th millenial day.   

31:25-28         Laban’s complaint sounds eminently reasonable. Jacob could say little to pacify Laban. All he could do was to complain about Laban’s behaviour. The saving feature – if one can call it that – was that Laban did not find his household Gods! One cannot help but wonder what Laban would have done if he had found his gods.

31:5    Laban was a very poor employer. However the subterfuge used by Jacob is not justified. Our response to the froward must be the same as it would be towards the good – 1Pet 2:18.

31:7  Despite his subterfuge and guile Jacob still recognised that his God took care of him. We should be encouraged by this realisation. God does not only care for those of His children who never do anything wrong. He cares for all His children and actually uses their weaknesses to strengthen their characters. 

God doesn't forget

Verse 3 is a reminder to Jacob of God's promise to him in Gen 28:15 "I will be with you...". It shows that God had been with Jacob all along. Looking at the wording of the promise, we can see that God had intended to bring him back home again, and the events surrounding Jacob's exit were brought about by Him.

Gen 31:53  The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor? - The covenant to ensure peace between Laban and Jacob was confirmed by the construction of a heap of stones by Jacob and his sons (Gen 31:44-46). Jacob named the heap stones “Galeed” (margin, the heap of witness) and “Mizpah” (margin, a beacon or watchtower).  On this heap of stones a pillar was constructed (Gen 31:51). It was Laban (v.51) who said, “The God of Abraham, and the God of Nahor, the God of their father judge betwixt us.”

On first reading, it might appear that Laban is stating that the God of Abraham is the same God as the God of Nahor.  Joshua told the Israel that their fathers Terah and Nachor served other God’s (Josh 24:2).

Jacob acknowledged that the God of Abraham and the fear of Isaac was the guiding hand in Jacob’s life (Gen 31:42).  Laban’s all embracing statement linking Jacob’s God and Nahor’s Gods is perhaps the reason why Jacob limited his response to only swaring by the fear (or dread) of Jacob (v.53).  Jacob thus avoided linking Yahweh with the God of Nachor as witnesses to their covenant.

31:4-6 Laban was not an easy person to work for, as far as Jacob was concerned. However he worked for him “with all my power”. It is easy to work hard for a good employer but not so easy when the employer is bad. Jacob showed the correct spirit in the way he worked for Laban. Do we show the same spirit in our workplace no matter what our employer is like.

Gen 31:49, Gen 31:55 it seems the relationship with Laban and Jacob was not as amicable as we would think. In v49 Laban is basically saying I will be keeping an eye on you, Jacob was not trusted by Laban, and notice in v55 that Laban kisses everyone except Jacob.

Perhaps we try and please everyone at times but can take encouragemant that we we always come across those that will look at us with mistrust, jealousy and envy for the blessing we recieve from God.

31:34   Laban clearly did not understand the Divine principle of marriage – Gen 22:23-24 – The girls were no longer his in the sense that he spoke of. Do we harbour the thinking of Laban with respect to our children, trying to influence and control them even when they have married?

31:47-48        The way in which Laban and Jacob both name the heap of stones in different languages is interesting to consider. We are only three generation from Abram leaving the place where Laban lived. But by now they are speaking different –languages, or at least different dialects of the same language.

In verse 43 we really see what a greedy, avaricious and totally self-centred man Laban was: having just been on the receiving end of Jacob's fully justified tirade in verses 36-42, instead of Laban seeing just how awfully he had treated his own nephew and in response hanging his head in shame, Laban's love of money and haughty pride caused him to respond by claiming that all Jacob owned (and had more than earned!) was still his.

Sadly, in these last days of man's dominion of this world, we regularly witness such awful avaricious behaviour amongst the well-off and powerful in society who, egged on by the right-wing media with agendas of their own, begrudge giving anything to the poor and/or disabled.

In Luke 22:22-30 our Lord shows us the way he and his Father would like us to behave instead, and the infinitely better reward that awaits those who do behave in that way.

THE FEAR OF ISAAC (v.42)

This is a strange but remarkable phrase, denoting the personal God who was the object of Isaac’s worship. The word for "fear" (pachad)  suggests reverential awe, a fear of offending. That was the attitude of Isaac towards God. He is the God whom Isaac feared and revered at the same time. Note that he calls him not Isaac’s God, but "his fear", because Isaac was yet alive, and in the state of probation, he served God with fear and trembling.(see -Gen 27:33 ) 

Let this be the driving force each and every day, that with reverential fear, we may see ourselves as living in the sight of God.

31:52  We may wonder why Jacob never sent to find wives for his sons in the same way that Abraham and Isaac did for their sons. This agreement actually prevented the sort of arrangements that Abraham and Isaac made for their sons happening for Jacobs sons.

31:22  It is all too easy to make hasty judgments or draw hasty conclusions. When we feel things are not going as we would like in our lives we might be tempted to feel that God has forsaken us. This is the sort of thing that David is saying.

31:52  this agreement that Jacob would not pass over to Laban’s territory marks the final break with the ancestral homeland. It has taken three generation before the call to Abraham to leave his father’s house - Gen 12:1– happens

Gen 31:17-21  We see the hand of God preserving Jacob and his ten sons (see posting 17^thJan.2019).  God told Jacob to depart from Haran (Gen 31:13,17-18). Like his grandfather Abraham, Jacob and his sons “crossed over the river”, i.e. River Euphrates (Gen.31:21). So Jacob and his family followed the Divinely established principle to mark a new beginning by passing through water before entering the promised land, (Josh 24:3).

“I took your father Abraham from the other side of the flood and led him…”to enter the land of Canaan, (Gen 12:4-5).

“I brought your fathers out of Egypt and ye came to the sea…”(Josh 24:6-7)

“The priests that bare the ark of the covenant stood firm on dry ground in the midst of the Jordan and all the Israelites passed over…”(Josh 3:17).

“…once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”(1Pet 3:20)  

These and many other examples lead us to the invitation offered by Jesus for us to pass through the waters of baptism. “He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mark 16:16).

31:54 Jacob offered sacrifices. Abraham took the initiative, not Laban. Abraham called his brethren (Laban) to a meal. Laban did not initiate the meal of fellowship. As far as Jacob was concerned he had been wronged. However he took the initiative to “build bridges”. Herein is a lesson for us.

31:14 So the feuding sisters Rachel and Leah actually manage to agree on one thing! They see no future with Laban. They see the way that Jacob has been treated and conclude they would be better off somewhere else.

31:2-3 Notice the contrast. Laban was displeased with Jacob but God promised to be with him. His scheming and planning, even though for good motives, has alienated him from Laban. However, despite his scheming, God was still willing to “be with” him. Our own scheming can look very plausible. However total honesty is required of the faithful believer. God will always bless the one whose mind is focussed on the promises even though the events of this life, often due to our own behaviour, might seem to be going in the wrong direction. So we need not rely on our worldly wisdom to keep ourselves secure. The things God is offering are far more valuable than anything we might be able to acquire in this life using our own wisdom. 

31:1-3 So just as things become difficult between Jacob and Laban and his sons Yahweh spoke to Jacob and said things that would not really have surprised Jacob.

God was working in Jacob’s life and was aware of all that had happened – events designed to change the man Jacob. Instead of working out his own plans he was about to learn that he had to allow God to work out events in his life.

The 2 blind men of Matt 20:31 cry out the more when people tell them to keep quiet....this illusrates their desperatness to be healed,and the sensitivity of The Lord to "stand still" and hear them amoungst the business of the clamour for his attention....How much do we want to be cured from the infliction of this sinfull nature and to be delivered into the Glorious liberty of the children of God Luke 20:36 .....Our Lord warned us of our generation in regard to persistance in prayer of those who "cry day and night unto him",and adds,shall i find this sort of faith on the earth when i come?Luke 18:7-8.Showing how difficult this is to maintain in our times,"when the son of man cometh"

31:2 The relationship between Jacob and Laban must have really deteriorated. Laban had already shown himself to be deceiving and grasping, changing the agreement with Jacob a number of times since Jacob went to dwell with Laban. The cheating, it seems, had turned to outward animosity.

v. 2 - This word 'buckler' seems to feature quite a bit in scripture (eg. Ps.18:2,20, Ps.91:4(AV)). Here is Ps.35 it represents a special sort of shield that went right round the body. It was quite hard to handle - 1Chron.5:18, 12:8. It was a shield of extra protection. See Prov.2:7, 2Sam.22:31

v.5,6 - We have to remember that, as well as encamping round about those that fear Him, the angels also have work involving the destruction of evil men - Isa.37:36, Acts 12:23

35:19 actually is prophetic of the Lord Jesus - John 15:25. From the Psalm we see that Jesus was distressed by the evil thoughts and actions of his opponents.

Psalm 35 - A Psalm of David. This psalm seems to have been written by David, when he was persecuted by Saul; and when many false charges were brought against him by his courtiers; and when he was the scorn and derision of the people; the subject of it is pretty much of the same kind with Psalm 7, and might be written about the same time that was, or at least describing the same occasion. There is a passage in it, Psalm 35:19, which our Lord seems to refer to and apply to Himself, John 15:25.

Psalm 35:2 -  "Take hold of shield and buckler, and stand up for mine help." -  The shield is a small hand held device, whilst the buckler describes a large body shield. Both these were defensive weapons. "Draw out also the spear" - In contrast, the spear is an offensive weapon. The weapons of our warfare are likewise, defensive and offensive, as we fight the carnal mind in our own lives - but all weapons are useless, except the Lord stand for us.

Psa 35:20 - "For they speak not peace" - They seek a quarrel. They are unwilling to be on good terms with others, or to live in peace with them. The idea is that they were "disposed" or "inclined" to quarrel. Thus we speak now of persons who are "quarrelsome." "They devise deceitful matters" - literally, "they think of words of deceit." That is, they set their hearts on misrepresentation, and they study such misrepresentations as occasions for strife with others. They falsely represent my character; they attribute conduct to me of which I am not guilty; they pervert my words; they state that to be true which never occurred, and thus they attempt to justify their own conduct. Almost all the quarrels in the world, whether pertaining to nations, to neighbourhoods, to families, or to individuals, are based on some "misrepresentation" of facts, designed or undesigned, and could have been avoided if men had been willing to look at facts as they are, or perfectly understood each other. "Against them that are quiet in the land" - That are disposed to be quiet, or that are inclined to live in peace with those around them. The word rendered "quiet" means literally those who are "timid;" then, those who shrink back, and gather together from fear; then, those in general who are disposed to be peaceful and quiet, or who are indisposed to contention and strife. David implicitly asserts himself to be one of that class; a man who preferred peace to war, and who had no disposition to keep up a strife with his neighbours.

35:11 This Psalm could reflect David’s feelings when he was being pursued by Saul – though the experience of persecution can be seen at other times in his life. The ‘false witnesses’ is like the situation in 1Sam 24:9.

Psalm 35  This Psalm probably refers to David's plea for God's help against Saul and his associates

Vs.1-8  David called on the Lord for both protection against and destruction of his enemy.  God's enemies were David's enemies and so calling for their destruction was legitimate. The same is true for us.  However, we are told to love our enemies (Matt 5:44) and to follow peace with all men (Heb 12:14). But we are not friends with the world (James 4:4).
Thus, we are not pacifists, but followers of our commander-in-chief who has told us to forbear for the moment. 
Like David, who had more than one opportunity to defeat his enemy Saul, we restrain ourselves, having faith that the Lord will liberate us (Rom 12:19).

v.7 - There is much in the Psalms that present David, and, by implication, Jesus as unworthy of their punishment. See also 7:3-5, 25:3, 64:4.  Bildad has stated the converse in Job 18:8.  One wonders whether David is purposely picking up this language and turning it round to be positive.

This Psalm, like so many, is about David, but also about Christ.  The Lord's suffering was just as real as was David's, but worse. Jesus Christ did nothing wrong. He never killed a man, or fought in battle. He had no riches to provoke men's jealousy. He was altogether lovely. Yet they hated Him, and plotted His death.

35:13    We learn a little about the way in which David sought forgiveness after his sin with Bathsheba when we read of him ‘fasting’

In this prophetic psalm of David, we get a glimpse into the intensity the prayers of Jesus during the long nights spent talking to his Father. He put all his trust in God to look after him, despite what he was going through.

35:7  It is the utter unfairness of the reaction of men to David that troubles him. We, doubtless feel the same when wrongfully accused.

 35:4    The repeated use of ‘them’ speaks of those who spoke against David as he prayed and mourned for the child born to him of Bathsheba.

35:7  Wouldn't it be good if we could always say that it was ‘without cause’ that people sought occasion against us? If we never did anything to offend others.

V.2 A shield (Heb. magen) was a small shield that could be wielded. A buckler (Heb. tsinah) was a large shield that protected the whole body. And so, Yahweh has property of warding off danger, while fully protected the whole person. By the way, the symbol for the modern Sate of Israel, which is on the Israeli flag, is the Magen David, the Shield of David.

35:8 In the context of the Psalm – that is David fleeing from Saul and hiding in the cage an En Gedi – the ‘him’ and the ‘he’ of this Psalm must be king Saul.

35:9    David’s joyfulness was because his enemies had been removed. However his rejoicing was ‘in the Lord’, not simply in his deliverance. He saw that his deliverance had come from God.

35:20-21        The “they” spoken of by David are the conspirators working with Absalom to take the throne from him.

Psa 35:3 - KJV "Draw out also the spear, and stop the way against them that persecute me..." - this sounds like Saul against David but could it also be the spear stuck into Christ proving he was dead and had achieved victory (1Sam 26:12;John 19:31-37)?

Psa 35:11 - KJV "False witnesses..." - could this have application to those who falsely accused Christ (Matt 26:59-60)?

Psa 35:12 - KJV "They rewarded me evil for good..." - This could apply to Saul and David (1Sam 24:8,17,19) and those who betrayed Christ.

Psa 35:13 - KJV "my soul", NIV "myself" [Heb. "nephesh" <5315>].

Psa 35:14 - could this have application to Christ mourning for Judas?

Psa 35:15 - NIV "stumbled", KJV "adversity" [Heb. "tsela" <6761> means "limping or fall", fig. "adversity"] - could this have application to Jesus stumbling and needing help carrying the cross (Matt 27:32)?

Psa 35:16 - NIV "mocked" - certainly they mocked Christ (Luke 22:63).

Psa 35:18 - both David and Christ will praise God when the kingdom of God, with Christ as king, is established on earth (Isa 2:1-5;Isa 4:2-6).

Psa 35:19 - they hated Christ without cause (John 15:25).

35:1       In asking God to “plead my cause” David, even though the powerful king of Israel does not rely on that status but rather leaves tings in God’s hands.  If king David did that we have a wonderful example to copy when we feel we are wronged.

35:24    David had asked to be judged according to his own righteousness – Psa 7:8 – in a specific set of circumstances which I comment on in the notes on Psa 7. However ultimately it is God’s righteousness that we can rely on. Paul develops this for us in Rom 3:25-26 where we can see that God’s righteousness is seen in the forgiveness of sin. 

Psa 35:11-14 we perhaps see in these verses the emotional suffering our master went through, imagine your brethren (Israel) the ones you had come to redeem turning on you, even his disciples struggled to believe him. After the feeding of the 5000 in John 6 over 5000 people walked away, 12 remined but only Peter stood up for him.

Judas of course betreyed him Psa 35:14, Matt 12:46 though Jesus knew he was to be betrayed it still grieved him that a friend Judas should do it and still Jesus tried to warn him.

Psa 35:15 I believe the word adversary should be "halting" a reference to Jacob? But when Jesus halted they mocked him they abused a man who was physically weak from punishment the smiters (abjects) gathered around him hitting him so he didnt know who did it, Luke 22:63 an image perhaps of a child being punched and kicked on a playground with noone helping him and those not hitting him laughing.

Let us remember what our father has done in allowing his only son suffer for us, and what our Lord Jesus Christ has done for his friends!

35:24-26        This Psalm seems to have been penned as a consequence of the uprising of Absalom. If this is so the “them” included both Ahithophel and Absalom.

v3. I wonder whether David was thinking about what happened to Asahel, brother to Joab? 2Sam 2:19-23.

v16. This feasting sounds like 1Kin 1:25, where Joab made a feast to proclaim Adonijah king instead of David.

Do these links potentially tell us that the man in v8 is Joab?

35:19  That David was hated without reason is seen also in Psa 69:4. Another Psalm which speaks of Absalom’s uprising against David.

35:21    The opposition and persecution meted out on David through the open mouth contrasts with the support they should have given David in the spirit of Deut 15:8

35:28  Despite his problems. Despite the opposition David was experiencing - :18  – David recognised that God’s righteousness should be proclaimed. We do well to reflect on that when we feel we are being ill-treated.

35:7 David recognised that he had sinned. However this did not justify men to persecute him. Hence he said “without cause”. God was the judge, not the men who were persecuting him.

35 This Psalm may have been written as a consequence of David fleeing from Saul and Saul seeking David;’ life.

On a couple of occasions we find ideas in this Psalm that we see in 1Sam 24 – when David spared Saul’s life

35:1 plead my cause 1Sam 24:15

35:11 false witnesses 1Sam 24:9

Whereas David was encouraged to kill Saul (1Sam 24:4) David would rather ask God to “plead his cause ( 35:1).

It was not just Saul who was pursuing him. Saul had his faithful followers with him. So in the Psalm David speaks of “them” ( 35:3-7) culminating in a call to God that Saul “him” (35:8) would be judged.  

For how long would Saul pursue David? This was David’s concern (35:17).

Such might be our thoughts when we are experiencing difficulties. David’s realisation was that his God was in control of the events in his life.

The Psalm, against the experience of David being pursued by Saul, is written for our learning.

35:22When our lives are not running as smooth as we would like and life is difficult we should remember, as David clearly did, that our Father is fully aware of our circumstances and will do as he knows is best for us.

35:7 The “net” and “pit” language here speaks of the sort of trap that might be laid for an animal. A pit is dug and covered with a net which is then camouflaged to make it appear like the surrounding ground. The unsuspecting animal, walking across it, would fall into the pit and be unable to get out.

v.7. Are we going out in these last days to find the few that stand idle and have not been hired. It is certainly the 11th hour (v.9). If we can hire them now, they can still receive the kingdom with us. We have a responsibility Rom.10:14-17. We were all there once Eph.2:12. Remember the situation Jesus describes at the end in another parable Matt.22:9

:1-16 The parable of the labourers in the vineyard is directed at the disciples because of Peter's question [19:27] about what they would have in the kingdom. The lesson did not sink home immediately because :20 The mother of Zebedee's children - Mark 10:35 says it was the sons - asked a favour of Jesus which showed that the parable had not been understood.

Notice the recurring phrase 'first … last' 19:30 20:8 :16. The parable of Chapter 20:1-16 was directed to the disciples because of their obsession with greatness manifest in Chapter 19.

Matthew 20:15 - "Is thine eye evil, because I am good?" - What is an evil eye? The eye is the entrance to the brain. To have ones eyes opened, is to have the brain excited with new information that sheds light upon a problem, Ecclesiastes 11:7. To give someone an "evil eye," is to lower the eyelids and screw up the face in a squint, so as to give someone a "dark look" as we say today. Another saying we have today is "to shoot daggers" at somebody. Jesus is remonstrating with the Pharisees here, because they were always "shooting daggers" at Him, giving Him the evil eye. Why? Because His way of life and words, which were of God or good, showed them up so badly. If they only wanted it, Jesus could heal them of their evil eye, as we see in v30-34, where He healed two [or is it three?] blind men near the town of Jericho.

Matthew 20:33 - "They say unto him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened" - That is, that their sight might be restored to them; for being deprived of that, it was all one as if their eyes were so closed, that they could not open them; and so the recovery of their sight is expressed by an opening of them. The opening of the eyes of the blind was prophesied of, as what should be done in the days of the Messiah, and by Him, as an evidence of His being that person, Isaiah 35:5 which prophecy these blind men might be acquainted with, and be an encouragement to their faith to expect a cure from Him. They do not ask for alms, but for the recovery of their sight; which being granted, they would be able to get their bread in another way; for they were not like some idle persons that choose rather to be under such a calamity [see v6], or any other, that they might not be obliged to work with their hands for a livelihood. Their request shows, that they made no doubt of it, but firmly believed that Christ was able to do this for them, though the thing was impossible to be done by man. We therefore, by miracles such as these, must conclude that He was not a mere man, but also the Son of the living God.

20:15 The evil eye catches the language of Deut 15:9 where, at the time of the year of release, a man might not be willing to be generous.

:15 - In saying 'Is thine eye evil?' Jesus refers back to his own words in ch. 6:23

Matt 20:18-19  Here we have the third and final time that Christ would tell the disciples of His crucifixion and resurrection. The other two times that Matthew records this are (Matt 16:21) and (Matt 17:22-23). Each time Christ tells them, He adds more details, so this third discourse is more detailed than the previous two. We learn that not only is the Sanhedrin going to cause the Lord to suffer but, that they would hand Him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and scourged. Each time they were told that on the third day He would be raised from the dead.

The parable of the householder begins in Matt 19:30 and finishes with a parallel verse in Matt 20:16.  The chapter division is misplaced
 
V.23 is another example which shows that Jesus and His Father are not the same person.

v.22 - Although it is their mother that broaches this issue, it is the sons that are really making the request, and they are the ones Jesus interrogates, not their mother.

WORKERS
 
The climax of the parable of the workers in the vineyard is the moment when each worker received their wages. It is on the seemingly unfair distribution of the landowner's wealth that we usually focus our attention, but I would like to concentrate on the event that led up to the payment of the workers.
 
We read, "For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in his vineyard." (Matt 20:1)  Finding others later on, he said, "You also go and work in my vineyard." (v.4)  And right at the end of the day he said the same thing to others, "You also go and work in my vineyard." (v.7)  The key to this whole parable is work. Without work there can be no reward.
 
As we interpret the parable we find that the landowner represents God, and we are the workers.  We are the ones who are called to work in God's vineyard. We are not called to be freeloaders, eating the landowners grapes, but are called to the harvest - to work in his vineyard.
 
So let us fulfil our duty and do the work we have been called to do. Let's not just be seat-warmers at church, sitting there waiting to be fed, but active, doing all we can to preach the word, to encourage the other workers and to reap the harvest for the Lord Almighty.

20:20  The concern of the mother shows that status was still a problem to the disciples and their family.

V.21 From Mark 10:35-41 it is clear that the request which the mother of James and John makes, is also the request of her sons. In fact, Mark does not even mention the mother. Matthew tells us the request is from the mother, while Mark says it was from the sons. mother and sons were in perfect agreement. together they came to Jesus with the request.

1-16 We are always comparing our lot in life to others, instead of thanking God for what He gives. For what He gives us is grace, the free gift, and not the wages that we deserve Rom 6:23

Matt 20:25-28 Luke puts these words in the context of Jesus' washing the disciples' feet at the Last Supper.

I wonder if there is a link between the passage in Matt 20:17-19 where Jesus forthrightly told His disciples that he was going to be crucified (notice, not just to be killed), and the next few verses where James and John’s mother asked for a position of honour for her two sons in the kingdom (Matt 20:20-28). Perhaps Mrs Zebedee didn't know what Jesus had just said, or on the other hand, she was a real woman of faith and believed that although He would die, He would rise again, and later come in His kingdom. Mark records the two events together (Mark 10:32-45), but Luke only tells us of Jesus’ prediction of His own death (Luke 18:31-34).

V.34 The two blind men's persistence appears from the fact that instead of being quiet, they cry all the louder. Finally, the blessing which Jesus bestows on them becomes evident in that not only are they healed, but are treated with marvelous compassion and tenderness.

20:28 The ‘many’ catches the work of God in Christ as spoken of in Isa 53:11.

v31  "the crowd rebuked them & told them to be quiet, BUT they shouted all the louder......"    Do we keep quiet & conform with the world, or do we dare to be different & go against the flow.

20:8    ‘last unto the first’ catches precisely Jesus’ words in Matt 19:30and is a phrase found later in this chapter – Matt 20:16 so we see the way in which the disciples concern of the last chapter is dealt with extensively in this chapter.

20:10 The important principle for us to understand here is that God can decide what he will give to each of His servants. Whilst what He gives may well vary in this life His servants are in no position to question their lot.

V.23 The phrase prepared of my Father seems to suggest that Jesus has no say in the decision making.  But, that would be inconsistent with His role of judge, king, and high priest, all of which are top administrative positions.  When Jesus was resurrected, Yahweh placed all authority under him (Psa 110:1-7; 1Cor 15:27).  But, at the time the request was made (v.21) this was not the case.  Anyway, it would have been inappropriate to show favouritism, or to declare rewards before the allotted time (i.e. when Jesus returns to earth Rev 22:12).  Yahweh who knows all things from the beginning to the end would have already prepared conditions and places (Isa 46:9,10).

There is a very unfortunate chapter division from ch19 to ch20. The context of this chapter is wholly an expanded answer of Jesus. Notice the joining statement: "But many who are first will be last, and the last first. For the kingdom of heaven is like..."

So in this chapter first and last are mentioned 5 times, most noticeably in v8 and the summation in v16. The men in v2 and v6 are the first and last whose reward appeared to be reversed in magnitude. But this was only the way it appeared to those who expected more than they had been promised (see v10). Jesus is merely pointing out that he, as the master, doesn't want there to be a link between our level of attainment and the level of reward (v14-15). This is much harder to accept for those who have attained much; the example being Saul of Tarsus (Phil 3:4-9). But it is the way it is because life is a gift of God, offered by Him because of the magnitude of HIS goodness; not ours (1John 4:9-11).

20:24 The rest of the disciples were indignant when Peter and John had made their request. This contrasts with the ‘ruler’ in Chapter 19. On hearing what was required of him he ‘went away sorrowful’ – Matt 19:22

v9  The denarius was a small silver coin.  In a sense, it survived a long time.  English coinage prior to 1971 was reckoned in pounds, shillings and pence, commonly abbreviated to L-S-D.  The "D" stood for the denarius.

20:16 The way in which Jesus says many are ‘called’ is exemplified in verse 32 when Jesus calls the two blind men.

20:17-18        Going up to Jerusalem was the whole focus of Jesus’ journeying. He had an end in sight. He was going to lay down his life in obedience to God. So this is not merely a comment about Jesus’ travelling around the land. It is making a point about his focus.

20:12   The use of the word ‘equal’ makes the point. Rather than pre-eminence there was to be equality between disciples. A point missed by the two sons of Zebedee – Matt 20:20-22

 Matt 20:20-23.

In v. 22, Jesus is obviously speaking in a figurative way concerning drinking of the cup (i.e. the cup of suffering and death). The disciples answer his question, "Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?" in this way: "Yes, we can." What might they have been thinking at this time for them to answer this question in such a positive way?

In Matt 20:17-19, Jesus tells his disciples explicitly of what will soon happen to him at Jerusalem and in the parallel account in Luke 18:34, Luke records the fact that they did not understand and that its meaning was hid to them. So when James' and John's mother, on their behalf, asks Jesus for the quality spots - at his right and left hand - in the kingdom, it really has to mean that they thought that he would overthrow the power of Rome and immediately set up God's kingdom on earth. The whole concept of this vibrant and powerful and godly man enduring the horrors of crucifixion was the farthest thing from their thinking. Therefore it looks like they likely interpreted Jesus' straightforward message to being some kind of parable that they just didn't quite get. Or possibly that he was being unduly pessimistic.

So given these facts, I would think that they were likely thinking that "the cup" he was referring to was part of the great reward of sitting with him in positions of power and honor when he established the kingdom - soon! - not ~2,000 years into the future after a death, resurrection, ascension to heaven and return to earth. As he would say later at the last supper -

"I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred on me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (Lk. 22:29,30)

So when Jesus endorsed their positive response - "You will indeed drink from my cup" - they heard it one way while Jesus really meant it in another. This is not the only time, by any means, that they were not on the same page with Jesus in what he was saying. At times when he was speaking symbolically as in the need for them to beware "the leaven" of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Matt 16:5-12), they thought he was being literal. And now they were misinterpreting what he meant by "drinking the cup".

This, though, is not to say we would have done any better in that situation. A lot would be cleared up in their thinking when Jesus' promise of the Comforter - the Holy Spirit - would come and "will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I said to you" (Jn. 14:26).

20:11   “murmured” might seem to just speak of complaining. However Jesus, in this parable, is putting into the mouths of those hired early the words of those who perished in the wilderness –Exo 15:24, 16:2 etc. It was that murmuring which showed the people’s attitude to God and eventually contributed to their death in the wilderness.

20:4,7 In offering “whatsoever is right” we see, in the parable, men who trusted their master to be fair.  In fact in the parable the master was more than fair. Do we view God as “fair”? Are we willing to trust that he will give that which is right?

20:17-19 We can conclude that there were many travelling with Jesus. However it was only the twelve who were told about Jesus’ impending death. Why? Maybe if the multitude knew they would attempt to try and make Jesus king and defend him.

20:17     Jesus had many disciples following him during his ministry. There were a number who were with him all the time Acts 1:21-22 - so we see that Jesus told just the 12 about his impending trial and death in Jerusalem. It was not something that he shared with all those that followed him.

20:19-20         Either the mother of Zebedee’s children had not understood that Jesus was going to be crucified or she was a fervent believer in the resurrection of the Messiah.

20:30 Jesus has “two” blind men. This doubling is a feature in Matthew’s record as we can see by looking at 8:28 and 9:27 and 10:21 where two are mentioned. At times this contrasts with the other writers who, whilst recording the same event, only have “one”.

20:24 We might ask why the rest of the disciples were “indignant” Jesus had not granted the wish of the sons of Zebedee. Maybe the rest of the disciples were expecting Jesus to tell them in no uncertain terms that they would not sit on his right and left hand. Rather he left the matter open from which, it seems, the rest of the disciples drew a conclusion that they did not like. If this is correct it shows the dangers of drawing conclusions based on insufficient information.

1. Matt 20:1-16 - the parable of the workers in the Lord's vineyard starting out at different times yet getting the same reward demonstrates not that God is unfair, but rather that God is more than fair as no one was short changed; the generosity of God is extended to late comers, Gentiles, along with the poor and outcasts of society.

H.A.Whittaker in "Studies of the Gospels" p.531 observes that the first workers correspond to the Pharisaic principle of justification by works (Exo 19:5-6) and later workers made no firm agreement, they had faith they would be given what is right; the workers hired at the 3rd, 6th, and 9th hours are associated, according to Whittaker, with the preaching of the gospel at Pentecost and to the Gentiles (Acts 2:15;Acts 10:3,9) while the 11th hour hired workers may indicate those who have come to the truth in Christ, again by faith, in the end of these Gentile times; the 1st hired workers were like the grumbling 1st century Jewish reaction to the preaching of the gospel to publicans, sinners, and Gentiles.

Some who think they are first in the world are going to find themselves last when Christ returns (Matt 19:30;Matt 20:16;Mark 10:31;Luke 13:30). As Robert Prins said in his 2005 comments, all those hired worked, those who worked less still got the reward, even those told to "go thy way" (Matt 20:14) got a reward.

2. Matt 20:1 - "For" connects Matt 20 with Matt 19:16,27 indicating God provides for daily needs and offers the future reward of eternal life as a gift of grace (Matt 6:11;Psa 37:25;1Tim 4:8;Matt 7:7-11;Rom 6:23). At approximately the same early morning hour as this parable began, Jesus was before Pilate.

3. Matt 20:2 - the "penny<1220>" was the daily wage of a laborer or Roman soldier. Some believe the small coin represents salvation, others feel it represents baptism and/or the hope of salvation as in Matt 20:14 the vineyard owner says "go thy way <5217>" which suggests a rebuke if not a rejection of sorts.

4. Matt 20:3 - At the same time as workers were hired at 9am (the 3rd hour Jewish time) Jesus was stretched out on the cross; the number 3 is associated with divine perfection, being in the grave 3 days, being resurrected on the 3rd day, and the third day of creation seed (grass, herb, seed of a tree) or descendants.

5. Matt 20:3,6 - "idle<692>".

6. Matt 20:5 - At the same time as workers were hired at 12pm (the 6th hour Jewish time) and Jesus suffered near death, the sky turned dark with the number 6 being associated with "man" and "the flesh" as Christ had his fleshly nature (Heb 4:15) and body crucified as he paid the price for others as an unblemished sacrifice; the same time as workers were hired at 3pm (the 9th hour Jewish time) Christ died on the tree; the number 9 is associated with "the end, finality ("it is finished" John 19:30), judgment".

7. Matt 20:6 - the same time as workers were hired at 5pm (the 11th hour Jewish time) Jesus would be taken off the cross and interned before nightfall (approx 6pm); the workers hired at the 11th hour were desperate and likely the least desireable (Luke 14:23); the number 11 is associated with "disorder, disorganisation, disintegration". No doubt the followers of Jesus were shocked, dismayed, and in disaray till Jesus was resurrected.

8. Matt 20:8 - the angel gathering those called for judgment at Christ's return; "last<2078>", "first<4413>, both first and last can refer to time or importance.

9. Matt 20:8,16;Luke 13:30 - "the first last" suggests a rebuke if not a rejection of sorts.

10. Matt 20:14 - Jesus didn't like spiritual snobbism and the elevating of some for none are worthy, it is by grace any are saved.

11. Matt 20:15 - "evil eye" refers to "a malicious, covetous, envious, jealous person".

12. Matt 20:16 - "many<4183>", "called<2822>", "few<3641>", "chosen<1588>".

13. Matt 20:17-19;Mark 10:32-34;Luke 18:31-33 - all three gospels say Christ would be killed  by Gentiles and resurrected on the third day (Matt 16:21;Matt 17:23).

14. Matt 20:20-21;Mark 10:35-37 - the brothers John and James (the sons of thunder) along with their mother ask about
exaltation for the two; unlikely they understood the cup of pain Jesus was referring to.

15. Matt 20:22 - drink the cup is a figure of speech referring to experiencing or undergoing something which in this case is suffering (Matt 26:39;Isa 51:17;Mark 10:37-40), and refers to Christ's baptism of suffering where his sinful nature (Heb 4:15) was buried; James was put to death as a martyr (Acts 12:2).

16. Matt 20:23 - Jesus didn't have the authority of his Father God.

17. Matt 20:25-28 - those who want to be great must first serve others and put themselves last.

18. Matt 20:26-28 - V26 "minister<1249>"; V28 "to minister<1247>"; a minister serves others, it is the opposite of the prosperity gospel where the minister gets served and the objective is wealth, Jesus didn't have a place to lay his head (Matt 8:20); V28 part of Christ's serving others was to give his life as a "ransom<3083>" for many thus paying with his own life to free true belivers from the slavery to sin and death; 1Tim 2:6 "ransom<487>".

19. Matt 20:29-34 - two blind men with more spiritual vision than the large naturally sighted crowd.

20. Matt 20:30 - the blind men knew "Son of David" was a messianic title; (Mark 10:46-52) was "Bartimaeus<924>" one of the two blind men healed?

21. Matt 20:34;Mark 10:46-52 - in V50 his inferior cloak/covering is thrown aside as now he is covered by Christ.

20:1-7 The concept of casual labourers waiting to be hired is foreign to our western way of thinking where people tend to have permanent jobs. Jesus is, however, drawing on the practice that operated in Israel in his day. Much of the time men were hired as and when needed. This “hand to mouth” form of existence means income is unpredictable and people may well have time on their hands to follow a preacher.

21:20-21 All the disciples had been promises places of honour in the coming kingdom of God – Matt 19:28 – but that was not sufficient for two of the disciples. Encouraging their mother they seek even greater status. This request brought about the “indignation” of the other disciples - :24 – even though Jesus had told the two that he was not in a position to grant their requests.

All of the disciples were at fault. The two for even asking for honour and the rest for their response which, in itself, was selfish. How do we compare when looking at our fellow believers?

20:1-15 We might think of the kingdom of God as a physical entity on the earth but Jesus calls it “the kingdom of heaven” and speaks of how individuals respond in this life. The lesson is clear. Unless in this life we life as if we are focused on the principles of the gospel – the kingdom of heaven – we will not be in the kingdom of God on the earth.

20:24 Notice that the other disciples were indignant with the two disciples, even though they had not been granted their request.  Do we consider the impact of what we say and do might have on our fellow disciples? The two disciples here clearly did not. They were so focussed on getting what they wanted.