So all Israel were listed by genealogies; and behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel. Judah was carried away captive to Babylon for their disobedience.
Parallel Translations
-
So all Israel were listed by genealogies; and behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel. Judah was carried away captive to Babylon for their disobedience.
-
So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression.
-
So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel; and Judah was carried away captive to Babylon because of their transgression.
Cross-references (13)
Passages linked to 1 Chronicles 9:1 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- 1 Chronicles 5:25-26 They trespassed against the God of their fathers, and played the prostitute after the gods of the peoples of the land, whom God destroyed before them. So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgath Pilneser king of Assyria, and he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, and brought them to Halah, Habor, Hara, and to the river of Gozan, to this day.
- Nehemiah 7:64 These searched for their genealogical records, but couldn’t find them. Therefore they were deemed disqualified and removed from the priesthood.
- Nehemiah 7:5 My God put into my heart to gather together the nobles, and the rulers, and the people, that they might be listed by genealogy. I found the book of the genealogy of those who came up at the first, and I found this written in it:
- Ezra 2:59 These were those who went up from Tel Melah, Tel Harsha, Cherub, Addan, and Immer; but they could not show their fathers’ houses, and their offspring, whether they were of Israel:
- Ezra 2:62-63 These sought their place among those who were registered by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they deemed disqualified and removed from the priesthood. The governor told them that they should not eat of the most holy things until a priest stood up to serve with Urim and with Thummim.
- Jeremiah 52:14-15 All the army of the Chaldeans, who were with the captain of the guard, broke down all the walls of Jerusalem all around. Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive of the poorest of the people, and the residue of the people who were left in the city, and those who fell away, who fell to the king of Babylon, and the residue of the multitude.
- Daniel 1:2 The Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God; and he carried them into the land of Shinar to the house of his god. He brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god.
- Matthew 1:1-16 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham became the father of Isaac. Isaac became the father of Jacob. Jacob became the father of Judah and his brothers. Judah became the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar. Perez became the father of Hezron. Hezron became the father of Ram. Ram became the father of Amminadab. Amminadab became the father of Nahshon. Nahshon became the father of Salmon. Salmon became the father of Boaz by Rahab. Boaz became the father of Obed by Ruth. Obed became the father of Jesse. Jesse became the father of King David. David became the father of Solomon by her who had been Uriah’s wife. Solomon became the father of Rehoboam. Rehoboam became the father of Abijah. Abijah became the father of Asa. Asa became the father of Jehoshaphat. Jehoshaphat became the father of Joram. Joram became the father of Uzziah. Uzziah became the father of Jotham. Jotham became the father of Ahaz. Ahaz became the father of Hezekiah. Hezekiah became the father of Manasseh. Manasseh became the father of Amon. Amon became the father of Josiah. Josiah became the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the exile to Babylon. After the exile to Babylon, Jechoniah became the father of Shealtiel. Shealtiel became the father of Zerubbabel. Zerubbabel became the father of Abiud. Abiud became the father of Eliakim. Eliakim became the father of Azor. Azor became the father of Zadok. Zadok became the father of Achim. Achim became the father of Eliud. Eliud became the father of Eleazar. Eleazar became the father of Matthan. Matthan became the father of Jacob. Jacob became the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, from whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
- 2 Chronicles 33:11 Therefore Yahweh brought on them the captains of the army of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh in chains, bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon.
- 2 Chronicles 36:9-10 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem. He did that which was evil in Yahweh’s sight. At the return of the year, king Nebuchadnezzar sent and brought him to Babylon, with the valuable vessels of Yahweh’s house, and made Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem.
- 2 Chronicles 36:18-20 All the vessels of God’s house, great and small, and the treasures of Yahweh’s house, and the treasures of the king, and of his princes, all these he brought to Babylon. They burned God’s house, and broke down the wall of Jerusalem, and burned all its palaces with fire, and destroyed all of its valuable vessels. He carried those who had escaped from the sword away to Babylon, and they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia,
- Jeremiah 39:9 Then Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carried away captive into Babylon the residue of the people who remained in the city, the deserters also who fell away to him, and the residue of the people who remained.
- Luke 3:28-38 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmodam, the son of Er, the son of Jose, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonan, the son of Eliakim, the son of Melea, the son of Menan, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Salmon, the son of Nahshon, the son of Amminadab, the son of Aram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (20 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain Hitherto he hath described their genealogies before they went…
Hitherto he hath described their genealogies before they went into captivity, and now he describeth their history after their return.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 1Ch 9:1 So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies;…
1Ch 9:1 So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they [were] written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, [who] were carried away to Babylon for their transgression.
Ver. 1. In the book of the kings.] Not now extant. This chapter, and 1Ch 3:19; 1Ch 3:24, are noted for some parcels of the last passages, for history, of the Old Testament.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain In the book of the kings of Israel and…
In the book of the kings of Israel and Judah; not in that sacred and canonical book so called, but (as hath been oft observed before) in the public records, wherein there was an account of that kingdom, and of the several families in it, according to their genealogies. Who were carried away, i.e. which tribe or people of Judah last mentioned.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain The first verse looks back upon the foregoing genealogies,…
The first verse looks back upon the foregoing genealogies, and tells us they were gathered out of the books of the kings of Israel and Judah, not that which we have in the canon of scripture, but another civil record, which was authentic, as the king's books with us. Mentioning Israel and Judah, the historian takes notice of their being carried away to Babylon for their transgression. Let that judgment never be forgotten, but ever be remembered, for warning to posterity to take heed of those sins that brought it upon them. Whenever we speak of any calamity that has befallen us, it is good to add this, "it was for my transgression," that God may be justified and clear when he judges. Then follows an account of the first inhabitants, after their return from captivity, that dwelt in their cities, especially in Jerusalem. 1. The Israelites. That general name is used (Ch1 9:2) because with those of Judah and Benjamin there were many of Ephraim and Manasseh, and the other ten tribes (Ch1 9:3), such as had escaped to Judah when the body of the ten tribes were carried captive or returned to Judah upon the revolutions in Assyria, and so went into captivity with them, or met them when they were in Babylon, associated with them, and so shared in the benefit of their enlargement. It was foretold that the children of Judah and of Israel should be gathered together and come up out of the land (Hos 1:11), and that they should be one nation again, Eze 37:22. Trouble drives those together that have been at variance; and the pieces of metal that had been separated will run together again when melted in the same crucible. Many both of Judah and Israel staid behind in captivity; but some of both, whose spirit God stirred up, enquired the way to Zion again. Divers are here named, and many more numbered, who were chief of the fathers (Ch1 9:9), who ought to be remembered with honour, as Israelites indeed. 2. The priests, Ch1 9:10. It was their praise that they came with the first. Who should lead in a good work if the priests, the Lord's ministers, do not? It was the people's praise that they would not come without them; for who but the priests should keep knowledge? Who but the priests should bless them in the name of the Lord? (1.) It is said of one of them that he was the ruler of the house of God (Ch1 9:11) not the chief ruler, for Joshua was then the high priest, but the sagan, and the next under him, his deputy, who perhaps applied more diligently to the business than the high priest himself. In the house of God it is requisite that there be rulers, not to make new laws, but to take care that the laws of God be duly observed by priests as well as people. (2.) It is said of many of them that they were very able men for the service of the house of God, v. 13. In the house of God there is service to be done, constant service; and it is well for the church when those are employed in that service who are qualified for it, able ministers of the New Testament, Co2 3:6. The service of the temple was such as required at all times, especially in this critical juncture, when they had newly come out of Babylon, great courage and vigour of mind, as well as strength of body; and therefore they are praised as mighty men of valour.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies,.... Not now…
So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies,.... Not now by the writer of this book in the preceding chapters; for two of the tribes are not reckoned at all, and the rest but in part; but there had been kept an exact account of them:
and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel; not in the canonical book or books of Kings, but in the annals, journals, and diaries, which each king took care to be kept with some exactness, often referred to in the preceding books; out of which this writer, under a divine direction, had taken what was proper to be continued, and had carried the genealogy down to the captivity of the ten tribes; but the genealogy being lost with them, he could proceed no further, nor say anything more concerning them:
Read full note →
but Judah; for so the word should be stopped, and read according to the Hebrew accents:
who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression; their idolatry, and were now returned again; of them the writer proposes to give a further account.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain The chief of Judah, Benjamin. Ephraim and Manasseh, who…
The chief of Judah, Benjamin. Ephraim and Manasseh, who returned from captivity and dwelt at Jerusalem, ver. 1-9. The priests, ver. 10-13. The Levites, ver. 14-16. Their various offices in the temple, ver. 17-34. The family of Saul, ver. 35-44.
The book - In the publick records, wherein there was an account of that kingdom, and of the several families in it.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain All Israel reckoned by genealogies, 1.
CHAPTER IX
All Israel reckoned by genealogies, 1.
Read full note →
The first inhabitants of Jerusalem, after their return from
their captivity, who were chiefs of the fathers, 2-9.
Of the priests, 10-13;
Levites, 14-16;
porters, their work, lodgings, c., 17-29
other officers, 30-32;
the singers, 33, 34.
A repetition of the genealogy of Saul and his sons, 35-44.
NOTES ON CHAP. IX
Verse 1. Were reckoned by genealogies] Jarchi considers these as the words of Ezra, the compiler of the book; as if he had said: I have given the genealogies of the Israelites as I have found them in a book which was carried into Babylon, when the people were carried thither for their transgressions; and this book which I found is that which I have transcribed in the preceding chapters.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain 1Ch 9:1. They were written in the book —…
1Ch 9:1. They were written in the book — In the public records, wherein there was an account of that kingdom, and of the several families in it.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain Rather, “So all Israel were reckoned ... the kings…
Rather, “So all Israel were reckoned ... the kings of Israel. And Judah was carried away captive to Babylon for their transgressions.”
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Israel. These registers were preserved by those who fled…
Israel. These registers were preserved by those who fled from the arms of Salmanasar, into the kingdom of Juda. Such records were preserved with the utmost care, and were collected by the author; who could give an account of what happened during and after the captivity, as he was an irreproachable eye-witness; not to mention the divine inspiration, which places his testimony out of the reach of criticism. (Calmet) --- And Juda; perhaps by some historian. (Menochius) --- Babylon, while Israel was removed elsewhere, by the Assyrians. (Haydock) --- The genealogies of Israel being hitherto recited, now those who came back from captivity appear. (Worthington)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain f. The Inhabitants of Jerusalem till the Times of…
f. The Inhabitants of Jerusalem till the Times of the Kings, with a Repetition of the Genealogy of Saul.—Ch. 9
1. The Inhabitants of Jerusalem: 1Ch_9:1-34
Read full note →
1Ch_9:1.And all Israel was registered; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel; and Judah1 was carried away to Babel for his transgression. 2And the former inhabitants, that were in their possession in their cities, were Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinim. 3And in Jerusalem dwelt, of the sons of Judah, and of the sons of Benjamin, and of the sons of Ephraim and Manasseh.
4Uthai the son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the son of Bani,2 of the sons of Perez the son of Judah. 5And of the Shilonites:3 Asaiah the first-born, and his sons. 6And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel and their brethren, six hundred and ninety.
7And of the sons of Benjamin: Sallu the son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah. 8And Ibneiah the son of Jeroham, and Elah the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri, and Meshullam the son of Shephatiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah. 9And their brethren in their generations, nine hundred and fifty and six; all these men were chiefs of their father-houses.
10,11And of the priests: Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, and Jachin. And Azariah the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, a prince of the house of God. 12And Adaiah the son of Jeroham, the son of Pashhur, the son of Malchijah, the son of Maasai, the son of Adiel, the son of Jahzerah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Meshillemith, the son of Immer. 13And their brethren, heads of the father-houses, a thousand and seven hundred and sixty, able men for the work4 of the service in the house of God.
14And of the Levites : Shemaiah the son of Hashub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, of the sons of Merari. 15And Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal, and Mattaniah the son of Micah, the son of Zicri, the son of Asaph. 16And Obadiah the son of Shemaiah, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun, and Berechiah the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, who dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites.—17And the porters: Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, 18and Ahiman, and their brethren; Shallum the head. And hitherto he was in the king’s gate eastward; these are the porters for the camps of the sons of Levi.—19And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, for the house of his father, the Korhites, were over the work of the service of the keepers of the thresholds of the tents; and their fathers in the camp of the Lord were keepers of the entry. 20And Phinehas the son 21of Eleazar was formerly prince over them ; the Lord with him. Zechariah5 22the son of Meshelemiah was porter at the door of the tent of meeting. All these that were chosen to be porters at the thresholds were two hundred and twelve; they were registered in their villages: David and Samuel the 23seer had ordained them in their trust. And they and their sons were over 24the gates of the house of the Lord, at the house of the tent, by wards. To the four winds were the porters, to the east, west, north, and south. 25And their brethren in their villages were to come in seven days from time to time26with them. For they were in trust, the four head keepers of the gates, these Levites, and were 6over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God.27And they lodged around the house of God; for on them was the charge, and 28they had to open every morning. And some of them were over the vessels of service, for they brought them in and out by tale. And 29some of them were appointed over the vessels, even over all the holy vessels, and over the 30flour, and the wine, and the oil, and the frankincense, and the spices. And of the sons of the priests some were compounders of the ointment of the spices.31And Mattithiah of the Levites, who was the first-born of Shallum the Korhite,32was in trust over the baking in pans. And of the Kohathites their brethren,33some were over the shew-bread, to prepare it every Sabbath. And these the singers, heads of the fathers for the Levites, were free7 in the chambers; for they were over them in the service day and night.
34These are the heads of the fathers for the Levites, heads in their generations; these dwelt in Jerusalem.
2. Register of Saul’s Family repeated: 1Ch_9:35-44
35And in Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon, Jeiel ;8 and his wife’s name was36Maachah. And his first-born son Abdon, and Zur, and Kish, and Baal, and 37Ner, and Nadab. And Gedor, and Ahio, and Zechariah, and Mikloth. 38And Mikloth begat Shimam; and they also, beside their brethren, dwelt in Jerusalem with their brethren.
39And Ner begat Kish, and Kish begat Saul, and Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchi-shua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal. 40And the son of Jonathan was Merib-baal: and Merib-baal begat Micah. 41And the sons of Micah: Pithon, and Melech, and Tahrea. 42And Ahaz begat Jarah; and Jarah begat Alemeth, and Azmaveth, and Zimri; and Zimri begat Moza. 43And Moza begat Bina,and Rephaiah his son, Elasah his son, Azel his son. 44And Azel had six sons; and these are their names: Azrikam, Bocheru, and Ishmael, and Sheariah, and Obadiah, and Hanan; these were the sons of Azel.
EXEGETICAL
Preliminary Remark.—Of the two unequal sections into which our chapter falls, the second, 1Ch_9:35-44, coincides almost literally with 1Ch_8:29-38, and so presents only a repetition of the register of Saul and his house there given, preliminary to the narrative of the fall of his dynasty following in 1 Chronicles 10. The first section, 1Ch_9:1-34, presents in its first half, containing a list of the heads of families dwelling in Jerusalem, 1Ch_9:4-17, several points of contrast with a similar list in Neh_11:3-19. The plan of both lists is at all events the same; and if, with Bertheau, of the three chiefs of Judah, 1Ch_9:4-6, we put Uthai beside Athaiah (Neh_11:4), and Asaiah beside Maaseiah (1Ch_9:5) (so that only the third name, Jeuel, has nothing corresponding to it in Nehemiah); if we consider the recurrence of the Benjamite chiefs Sallu and Hodaviah in Neh_11:7-9 (where, certainly, the remaining names are wanting); if we compare the six chiefs of the priestly divisions with those corresponding in number and mostly in name in the list of Nehemiah, and find here (1Ch_9:10-13) the series: Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, Jachin, Azariah, Adaiah, Masai, there the series : Jedaiah, Joiarib, Jachin, Seraiah, Adaiah, Amashai; if we observe among the chief of the Levites two, Shemaiah and Mattaniah, verbally identical, and a third, Obadiah (= Abda in Nehemiah), approximately so; if, lastly, we perceive at least two of the four chiefs of the porters, Shallum and Akkub, common to both lists,—a pretty general agreement even in names appears to prevail between the two registers. It seems natural, also, either with Zunz (Gottesdiensll. Vorträge der Juden, p. 31; also Herzfeld, Gesch. p. 298) to conceive our list modelled after that of Nehemiah, or both drawn from one source, and in like manner referring to the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the exile, as Movers (p. 234), Berth., Kamph., etc., do. But if both lists are based upon one common document, relating to the times of Ezra and Nehemiah, and arising from them, we should expect a more complete agreement with regard to all the names. The accordance of the names in only half of the whole number given, and the resemblance in place (giving first the sons of Judah, then the sons of Benjamin, then the priests, and then the Levites and porters), are sufficiently explained by supposing a general continuity of the inhabitants of Jerusalem before and after the exile, and laying the diversities of the two lists to the account of the altering, disturbing, and partly destroying effects of the exile, and the similarities to that of the endeavour of those returning with Zerubbabel and Ezra to restore as far as possible the former state of things. The following exegetical treatment of the passage will prove that, with this presupposition, the assumption of the origin of our present list before the exile, in contrast with the obvious reference of Nehemiah’s list to the times after the exile, has nothing of moment against it, and is even demanded by 1Ch_9:2 and other indications.
1. 1Ch_9:1-3. Transition from the Genealogical Registers of the Twelve Tribes to the Enumeration of the Inhabitants of Jerusalem.—And all Israel was registered; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel; and Judah was carried away. By the Masoretic accentuation, which plainly separates וִיהוּדָה from the foregoing words, and makes it the subject of a new sentence (comp. Crit. Note), the first sentence appears to treat of Israel in the narrow sense that is, of the northern kingdom, and its kings in particular (so Berth., Kamph., etc.). But the phrase “all Israel” makes it more natural here to think of the people of the south as well as of the north; and it is also in favour of this, that the expression: “the book of the kings of Israel,” is in 2Ch_20:34 manifestly of like import with “the book of the kings of Judah and Israel,” or “Israel and Judah,” as well as that the universal sense of the term “Israel” is found at the beginning of the second verse. Keil therefore justly remarks: “The antithesis of Israel and Judah is analogous to that of Judah and Jerusalem;” that is, Israel denotes the whole covenant people, Judah a part. To understand the name Israel of the whole people is also demanded by the position of our verse at the end of the genealogies of all the tribes of Israel, and not merely of the ten northern tribes. That 1Ch_9:1 effects the transition from the genealogies to the following enumeration of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and so forms properly the close of the genealogies in 1 Chronicles 2-8, is so obvious, that Bertheau has not been able to bring forward a single tenable ground for his counter assertion, that “the verse forms obviously a new beginning. “For the affirmation, that “we perceive in it a brief introduction to the historical accounts of the tribe of Judah, or of the Israelites after the exile,” can furnish no ground for this, because it not only contradicts the assertion that Israel is to be understood of the northern kingdom, but cannot be reconciled with the letter of the verse (that begins with the connective ו). The same exegete justly declares against the further assertion of Berth., that 1Ch_9:1 cannot be written by our historian himself, but must have been taken literally from his source,—an assertion which is devoid of all solid ground.—For their transgression: so 1Ch_5:25-26.
1Ch_9:2. And the former inhabitants, that were in their possession in their cities. Movers, Berth., and Kamph., who find in the following list the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the exile, in the time of Nehemiah, will understand by these “former inhabitants” those citizens of Jerusalem who dwelt there in the time of Zerubbabel and his immediate successors, before Jerusalem was newly peopled from the surrounding districts. It is much more natural, with almost all old expositors, and with Keil, to refer הָרִאשׁוֹנִים here to the inhabitants of Jerusalem before the exile; for, in that case, “the inhabitants in their possession in their cities” are in no way opposed as former inhabitants of Jerusalem to the later, but both appear so placed side by side that this opposition is excluded. The parallel Neh_5:15, quoted by Bertheau, where the governors from Zerubbabel to Ezra are opposed as הַפַּחוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנִיםto Nehemiah as the later פֶּחָה, proves indeed the possibility of understanding the predicate הראשׁונים in the sense of “before the exile,” but not the necessity. And from the dwelling “in their cities” (comp. Ezr_2:70; Neh_7:23; Neh_11:1 f.) nothing can be concluded in favour of this interpretation.—Were Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinim. “Israel” denotes here obviously the lay element of the citizens, that which is otherwise designated by עַם beside כֹּהֵן (Isa_24:2; Hos_4:9). For the notion and name of the Nethinim, properly the “bestowed,” that is, the temple ministers, comp. Num_8:19; Jos_9:27; 1Sa_1:11; Ezr_2:43; Ezr_8:17; Ezr_8:20, and elsewhere.
1Ch_9:3. And in Jerusalem dwelt of the sons of Judah, etc. These words are not a superscription of the list of those dwelling in Jerusalem in contrast with those living in other cities (as Berth., etc.). The list rather begins with these words, so that thus the verse serves to introduce the contents of the greater part of our chapter (to 1Ch_9:34), and corresponds to 1Ch_9:35. This close connection of our verse with the following special enumeration of the families of Jerusalem (1Ch_9:4 ff.), and the mention of “the sons of Ephraim and Manasseh” as fellow-citizens with them in Jerusalem (comp. 2Ch_34:9), are against referring the present list to the time after the exile. The book of Nehemiah (1Ch_11:3) announces its list corresponding to ours in quite another way, so that there no doubt at all remains of its exclusive reference to conditions and relations after the exile. Moreover, the circumstance that the following list contains no names of Ephraimites and Manassites in Jerusalem, is simply explained by this, that of the former only a very few families dwelt in Jerusalem, while the Jews and Benjamites formed the bulk of its population. On the evangelical and theocratic import of the association of Ephraim and Manasseh with Judah, Benjamin, and Levi in the citizenship of Jerusalem, comp. below, evangelical and ethical principles, No. 1.
2. 1Ch_9:4-17. Special Enumeration of the Inhabitants of Jerusalem, and first, of the Heads of Families of Judah and Benjamin, of the Priests and Levites: 1Ch_9:4-6.—Three heads of families out of the three chief branches of Judah, those of Perez, Shelah, and Zerah (comp. 1Ch_2:3-4).—Uthai, the son of Ammihud. . . of the sons of Perez. The name Uthai might be etymologically equivalent to that of the Athaiah (עֲתיָה) mentioned Neh_11:4 as a head of a family of the sons of Perez; for עוּתְיָה=עוּתַי “whom Jehovah helps,” might, if we regard the somewhat obscure root עתה as a by-form of עוּת, have the same meaning as עֲתָיָה. But to the still diverse form is to be added the quite diiferent series of ancestors that connect Athaiah with Perez (Uzziah, Zechariah, Amariah, Shephatiah, Mahalalel, instead of the present Ammihud, Omri, Imri, Bani). It seems therefore very doubtful whether Uthai be the same with Athaiah. For the defective reading concealing the name Bani, see the Crit. Note.
1Ch_9:5. And of the Shilonites, Asaiah the first-born, etc. It seems pretty certain, that הַשֵּׁלָנִי should be read here instead of הַשִּׁילֹנִי, as in Neh_11:5. We expect to find the descendants of Shelah (Num_26:20; comp. 1Ch_2:3; 1Ch_4:21) mentioned between the sons of Perez and those of Zerah. Moreover, it is doubtful whether the Shelanite Asaiah (עֲשָׂיָה, “whom Jehovah has made”) is to be at once taken as identical with the Maaseiah (מַֽעֲשֵׂיָה, “Jehovah’s Work”), as both names are of frequent occurrence (comp. for Asaiah, 1Ch_4:36, 1Ch_6:15, 1Ch_15:6; 1Ch_15:11, 2Ki_22:12; 2Ki_22:14, and for Maaseiah, 1Ch_15:18; 1Ch_15:20, 2Ch_23:1, Jer_21:1; Jer_29:21). The existence of an Asaiah as head of a house in the family of Shelah before the exile does not preclude the appearance of a Maaseiah, son of Baruch, son of Col-hozeh, son of Hasaiah, etc., as head of this family after the exile.
1Ch_9:6. And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel and their brethren, six hundred and ninety. This number refers, as the plur. suff. in אֲחֵיהֶם shows, not to Jeuel alone, but to the three chiefs named in 1Ch_9:4-6, and to their brethren, the remaining heads of houses of subordinate import. So it is also with the number 956 in 1Ch_9:9. Moreover, the name Jeuel (יְעוּאֵל), or its variant (יְעִיאֵל), occurs elsewhere; for example, 1Ch_5:7, 2Ch_26:11. In Nehemiah 11. no descendants of Zerah are given.
1Ch_9:7-9. Four Benjamite chiefs: Sallu, Ibneiah, Elah, Meshullam, of whom the first (and, as here, the son of Meshullam) occurs also Nehemiah 11, but the other three not ; see the Preliminary Remark.
1Ch_9:9. And their brethren, etc.; comp. on 1Ch_9:6.—All these men were chiefs of their father-houses. This remark, which naturally refers, not to the brethren numbered, but to the chiefs named, applies to all that are named from 1Ch_9:4, both Jews, and Benjamites. It serves thus to close the list of family chiefs, and lead to the following one of the priests and Levites.
1Ch_9:10-13. The priests of Jerusalem.—Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, and Jachin. The names of these three priestly classes dwelling in Jerusalem (comp. 1Ch_24:7; 1Ch_24:17) are found also in the parallel list in Neh_11:10 ff. (supposing that there, by a change of בֶּן־יוֹיָרִיב into יְהוֹיָרִיב, the true reading is restored).
1Ch_9:11. And Azariah the son of Hilkiah ... a prince of the house of God. Instead of this prince or president of the temple, Azariah ben Hilkiah, certainly the same who, 1Chr 5:40, was named as grandfather of the Jehozadak who was carried to Babel (comp. also 2Ch_31:13), Neh_11:11 names rather a Seraiah son of Hilkiah. Yet the identity of this Seraiah with the Azariah of our passage is probable, as the other ancestors of both up to Ahitub (Meshullam, Zadok, Meraioth, Ahitub) are quite the same. Seraiah might indeed be a descendant of Azariah ben Hilkiah after the exile.
1Ch_9:12. And Adaiah the son of Jeroham, etc. This priestly chief Adaiah (belonging to the class of Malchijah; comp. 1Ch_24:9) is given in Neh_11:12 in the same form and with the same line, up to Malchijah, as here. The following Maasai (מַעְשַׂי), belonging to the class of Immer (1Ch_24:14), is called in Nehemiah Amashai (עֲמַשְׁסַי), and appears there connected by another line with Immer. Another priestly chief given by Nehemiah, Zabdiel, son of Hagge-dolim, who is designated the president or overseer of the last-named priestly family (that of Amashai), is wanting here.
1Ch_9:13. And their brethren, heads of the father-houses, 1760. This number cannot possibly refer to the heads; it rather denotes (like the number 1192 in Nehemiah) that of the brethren or the heads of houses standing under the heads of the great complex of families. The phrase appears thus inexact; perhaps, with Keil, a transposition of the words is to be assumed, in such a way that “heads of father-houses” is placed before and drawn to 1Ch_9:12 as closing formula, while “and their brethren” (וַֽאֲחֵיהֶם) is immediately connected with the number 1760. Moreover, that all the priests dwelling in Jerusalem, or the priestly families of the six classes named, amount in our passage to 1760, and in Nehemiah only to 1192, tends to confirm our view of the present list as belonging to the period before the exile; we expect for the priesthood of Jerusalem after the exile, about 150 years after the restoration of the city and temple, not so great a number as here.—Able men for the work of the service in the house of God. Before מְלֶאכֶת, which may not be a mere accusative of reference (“able men with respect to the work”), the word עשֵֹׁי (comp. 1Ch_23:24; Neh_11:12), or perhaps a mere ל (which might easily be overlooked after חַיִל), appears to have fallen out; see Crit. Note.
1Ch_9:14-16. The Levites of Jerusalem.—Shemaiah the son of Hashub, etc. This Merarite Shemaiah, as the descendant of Asaph (therefore Gershonite) Mattaniah named in 1Ch_9:15, recurs in Neh_11:15, and with substantially the same line of ancestors. Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal (1Ch_9:15 a) are wanting there; for the first name would have to be identified with Bakbukiah, Neh_11:17, of which there are grave doubts, as בַּקְבַּקַּר ( = בַּקְבַּק הָהָר) seems to mean “destruction of the hill;” but בַּקְבֻּקְיָה, “desolation from Jehovah.” And of the names of Levites in 1Ch_9:16, only Obadiah can be identified with Abda, Neh_11:17 (as Jeduthun appears as the ancestor of both). Berechiah is wanting in Nehemiah; and the latter has two names, Shabbethai and Jozabad, which are foreign to our text.—And Berechiah, the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, and so a Kohathite, as the name Elkanah is native in this family; comp. 1Ch_6:18-23.—Who dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites, thus near Bethlehem; comp. Neh_7:26. This clause refers, not to Berechiah, whose dwelling is in Jerusalem, but to his ancestor Elkanah. It is impossible to determine what the Kohathite so called in 6. 18 ff. was to this Elkanah.
1Ch_9:17. And the porters: Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren; Shallum the head. The four here named (of whom, in Neh_11:19, only two, Akkub and Talmon, recur) are to be regarded, as appears from the particulars following (1Ch_9:24; 1Ch_9:26), not as common porters, but as captains of the four companies of porters, who were to keep guard on the four sides and gates of the temple : they are designated, 1Ch_9:26, as “head keepers of the gates,” a phrase reminding us of the στρατηγοὶ τοῦ ἱεροῦ in Luk_22:52. The number of all the doorkeepers, which is stated to be 172 in Neh_11:19, is wanting here, where it would, like that of the priests, have been considerably higher, because Jerusalem before the exile must have had a much more numerous staff of officers in every respect than that after the exile, to which the catalogue of Nehemiah refers. From all this, the correspondence of the two similar lists in the personal matters is only partial, and by no means such as to be inconsistent with the origin of the one before the exile and of the other after it. The resemblance and even sameness of the names in two or three generations does not of itself prove the identity of the persons, because we learn from the genealogy of Aaron (5. 29 ff.) that the series Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok repeats itself at different times (comp. 1Ch_9:33 f. and 37 f.). In general, the same names recur very often in genealogies, because it was the custom to give the children the names of their ancestors; comp. Luk_1:59; Winer, Realw. ii. 133; Hävernick, Einl. ii. 1, 179 ff. But if the likeness of names in the two lists furnishes no necessary ground for the identity of the lists, and in no way warrants us to identify the like sounding names by the assumption of errors of the pen, we must, on account of the great diversity in all points, understand our list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem before the exile, especially as the following remarks on the functions of the Levites demand this, because they relate throughout to the time before the exile.
3. 1Ch_9:18-34. The Ministerial Functions of the Levites, and first (1Ch_9:18-26 a), of the Levitical porters.—And hitherto (he was, namely Shallum, who is called in 1Ch_9:17 the head of the porters) in the king’s gate eastward; that is, till the present time the family of Shallum had to keep the guard at the east gate of the temple, that chief entrance to the inner court, by which the king alone entered (comp. 2Ki_16:18; Eze_46:1-2). The “hitherto” scarcely gives a hint of the time when the present list was composed. It may point as well to a time before the exile as after it, as Shallum is here obviously named as a hereditary name of a house or collective personality, which Keil contravenes unnecessarily. For the circumstance that a pedigree of Shallum is given, not yet in 1Ch_9:18, but at length in 1Ch_9:19, shows that in this latter passage the person of the patriarch of the leading house of doorkeepers is first distinguished from his descendants; see also after.—These are the porters for the camps of the sons of Levi. This expression, having an antique ring, and reminding us of the wanderings of the people under Moses (Num_3:21 ff.), proves no more than the many other designations of this kind (“tent,” 1Ch_9:20; “tent of meeting,” 1Ch_9:21; “house of the tent,” 1Ch_9:23 a) that our list was composed before Solomon or near the time of Moses; comp. “camp of Jehovah” of Solomon’s temple, 2Ch_31:2.
1Ch_9:19. And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah. This reference of Shallum to Korah, the grandson of Kohath (1Ch_5:7), comes so close upon the ancestry of Shelemiah or Meshelemiah, the Korhite appointed by David over the east gate, 1Ch_26:1; 1Ch_26:14, that the Shallum of our passage can scarcely be different from him. It is also highly probable that the name of אֶבְיָסָף, the father or ancestor of Korah, should be restored there (see Crit. Note), so that the identity of the two persons and the merely formal diversity of their names (שַׁלּוּם, requital; מְשֶׁלֶמְיָהוּ, whom Jehovah requites) is almost certain; and the Meshelemiah, 1Ch_9:21, must be held to be identical with the Shallum belonging to the time of David; for there, as in 1Ch_26:2, a son Zechariah is ascribed to him. Thus the record goes back, as in 1Ch_9:20 to Phinehas the contemporary of Joshua, so in 1Ch_9:21 at least to a contemporary of David; and the guard at the east gate (the king’s gate), as it was hereditary in the family, is referred to a nomination by King David. The then mentioned brethren of Shallum, of the house of his father, the Korhites, are the heads of the other three families of porters, Akkub, Talmon, and Ahiman, living in the time of David, 1Ch_9:18.—Were over the work of the service of the keepers of the thresholds of the tent. This specifies the service performed by these Levites at the temple; they were threshold or gate keepers; comp. 2Ki_12:10; 2Ch_23:4. The genit. “of the tent” (here expressed by לְ before אֹהֶל, because the preceding word having the article cannot be in the construct state) applies to the tent in Jerusalem erected by David, without, however, expressing any contrast to the temple of Solomon (which, in 1Ch_9:23, seems clearly to be included in the term “tent”); comp. on 1Ch_9:18.—And their fathers in the camp of the Lord were keepers of the entry, namely, in the time of Moses, to which there is reference here as in the following verse. “In the Pentateuch there is no mention of the Korhites keeping guard in the time of Moses; but as the Kohathites to whom they belonged were the first servants of the sanctuary, Num_4:4 ff., and especially had the charge of the tabernacle, it is in itself probable that they had to keep the entrance to the sanctuary (comp. Num_4:17-20); and therefore we cannot doubt that our statement follows an old tradition” (Berth.).
1Ch_9:20. And Phinehas the son of Eleazar was formerly prince over them, over the porters of the Korhite family. Phinehas cannot have been invested with this oversight of the Korhite porters when he was high priest, but only under the high-priesthood of his father Eleazar; as also Eleazar, as chief over the chiefs of Levi, Num_3:32, under the presidency of Aaron, had the oversight of the keepers of the sanctuary.—The Lord with him. This clause might be meant as a historical remark, and so completed by a הָיָה “was,” in which case the copula ו was to be expected before יְהוָֹה, as in 1Ch_11:9. It is more natural to see in the two words a blessing, “God be with him,” and to compare the German phrases, “God bless him,” “Of blessed memory.” We may remember also God’s covenant of peace with Phinehas and his posterity, Num_25:11 ff. [This goes to prove that the historical is the correct meaning, and not one that is nearly akin to an error of doctrine.—J. G. M.]
1Ch_9:21. Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah, that is, Shallum; see on 1Ch_9:19. The designation of this Shallum (before whose name we miss the copula ו; see Crit. Note) as porter at the door of the tent of meeting has something indefinite needing explanation. But we can find nothing either from the present passage or from 1Ch_26:2 to clear up this difficulty, or account for the prominence given to this Zechariah.
1Ch_9:22 returns to the description of the service of the porters, which was interrupted by the historical digression, 1Ch_9:19-21. What is now stated belongs to the time of the author of the list, with the exception of the remark applying to the time of David, 1Ch_9:22 b.—All these, that were chosen to be porters at the thresholds. On בְּרוּרִים, “chosen,” comp. 1Ch_7:40, 1Ch_16:41; for construction with לְ, 1Ch_25:1. The number 212 as the total of the porters agrees neither with the time of David, in which (1Ch_26:8-11) 93 porters in all officiated at the tabernacle; nor with that of Zerubbabel, for which Ezr_2:42 gives the number 139; nor, lastly, with that of Nehemiah, for which, Neh_11:19, the number 172 is set down. But it suits the time before the exile, to which also the numbers of the families and priests in 1Ch_9:6; 1Ch_9:9; 1Ch_9:13 most probably point.—They were registered in their villages. They dwelt, therefore, in villages (חֲצֵרִים, as 1Ch_6:41 ff.) around Jerusalem, and came to it on the days of their service, as the singers in the time after the exile, Neh_12:29 f.—David and Samuel the seer (ancient designation for prophet, נָבִיא; comp. 1Sa_9:9) had ordained them in their trust.בֶּאֱמוּנָתָם, “in their trust,” official trust or duty; comp. the same term without suffix, 1Ch_9:26; 1Ch_9:31; 2Ki_12:16; 2Ki_22:7; 2Ch_31:12. The naming of Samuel with David (and after him, against the order of time; comp. Heb_11:32) the Chronist no doubt found in his source, and it is explained by the fact that the agency of Samuel in the religious institutions of Israel prepared the way for the reforms of David, and were therefore usually mentioned along with them. And perhaps some arrangement regarding the Levitical porters was made by Samuel which laid the foundation for that of David, though we have no information concerning this beyond the present passage.
1Ch_9:23. And they and their sons, the porters of the time of David and after it. The following phrase also, “at the house of the tent” (comp. on 1Ch_9:18-19), is chosen, because the present statement applies to both—the tent-sanctuary before Solomon, and the stone temple built by him.
1Ch_9:24. To the four winds (quarters of the heaven; comp. Job_1:19; Mat_24:31) were the porters,יִהְיוּ, that is, according to the arrangement of David (1Ch_26:14 ff.).—By wards, מִשְׁמָרוֹת of persons, as Neh_12:9; Neh_4:3; Neh_4:16.
1Ch_9:25. Were to come in seven days, the seventh day from time to time, that is, on the Sabbath of the week, on which every family was in their rank to perform the service ל in לָבוֹא, to denote obligation, as 1Ch_5:1).—With them (עִם אֵלֶּה), along with the heads or chiefs of the divisions, 1Ch_9:17, who dwelt in Jerusalem itself, and to whom the notice in 1Ch_9:26 a refers.—For they were in trust, the four head keepers of the gates; comp. on 1Ch_9:17.
1Ch_9:26 b–32 report on the duties of the other Levites besides the porters.—These Levites, and were, etc. It has been remarked in the Crit. Note that for this we are most probably to read (according to 1Ch_9:14), “And of the Levites were.” At all events, the duties enumerated in the following passage (exclusive of 1Ch_9:27) belong to the Levites in common, and not to the porters. Accordingly, the words וְהֵם הַלְּוִיִּם must be regarded either as a subscription to the whole preceding paragraph from 1Ch_9:14 (so Berth.), or amended (with Keil) in the way indicated.—Over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God. These chambers (לְשָׁכוֹת) and treasuries (אֹצָרוֹת) were in the side buildings of the temple, over which the Levites presided; comp. Eze_40:17; Eze_42:1 ff.; Neh_10:38; and Keil, Bibl. Arch. i. pp. 121, 124.
1Ch_9:27. And they lodged around the house of God. This notice, referring again to the porters, with the subjoined statement, that they had to open every morning (lit. “were set over the keys;” comp. מַפְתֶּחַ, Jdg_3:25; Isa_22:22), is strange in the present place: it had its place perhaps originally after 1Ch_9:26 a.
1Ch_9:28. And some of them were over the vessels of service, the more valuable vessels of gold and silver, with the sacrificial bowls (1Ch_28:13 f.; Dan_1:2; Dan_5:2 ff.), which required careful keeping, and as they were to be taken out of the treasuries for the public worship an exact “tale.”
1Ch_9:29. Over the vessels, even over all the holy vessels, and over the flour, and the wine, etc. As the term כֵּלִים is used here as in 1Ch_9:28, the difference between the vessels here and there mentioned seems to depend on the articles which are here named in connection with the latter, namely, flour (סֹלֶת, Lev_2:1 ff.), wine, oil, frankincense, and spices (בְּשָׂמִים, as Exo_30:23). They may be, therefore, the more ordinary, less costly vessels used in the daily incense, meat and drink offering (comp. on Exo_25:6). For מנה, “order, appoint,” in the Piel, comp. Dan_1:5; Dan_1:10-11; the partic. Pi. only here.
1Ch_9:30. And of the sons of the priests, etc. To them belonged, Exo_30:23 ff., the preparation of the holy anointing oil, by the compounding of several spices. This notice referring to the priests does not, strictly taken, belong to the functions of the Levites. The division of things has here for the moment overruled the division of persons. [The priests, however, were Levites.]
1Ch_9:31. And Matti-thiah of the Levites, who was the first-born of Shallum the Korhite: thus an elder brother of that porter Zechariah, 1Ch_9:21, if this is actually to pass for the son of the Shallum here. But certainly, in 1Ch_26:2, Zechariah is directly called first-born (בְּכוֹר) of Meshelemiah; and hence, to maintain the identity of this Meshelemiah with Shallum, we must assume “that in our passage Mattithiah bears the honourable title of first-born only in an improper sense, because he ranks high among the descendants of Shallum on account of his office” (Berth.). Nothing further is known to us concerning the person or time of Mattithiah.—Was in trust over the baking in pans. The term הַֽחֲבִתִּים, a baking in pans (comp. מַֽחֲבַת, an iron pan, Lev_2:5; Lev_6:14; 1Ch_23:29; Eze_4:3), is used only here.
1Ch_9:32. And of the Kohathites their brethren, the brethren of the last-mentioned Levites, at whose head was the Korhite Mattithiah. For the way of laying on the shew-bread, see Lev_24:6 ff.—Every Sabbath. For the phrase שַׁבַּת שַׁבָּת (the first with Pattach in the last syllable, for euphony), comp. Bertheau.
1Ch_9:33. And these the singers, heads of the fathers for the Levites, were free in the chambers. This is usually regarded as a first subscription to the foregoing, from 1Ch_9:14, to which a second still more general subscription is added in 1Ch_9:34. Yet in the mention of the singers (the families of which had been reported in 1Ch_9:14-16), the enumeration of the ministerial functions of the several classes of the Levites, which had begun 1Ch_9:26 b, is rather continued; and therefore, instead of “these are the singers,” the rendering is rather “these singers, etc.,” and thus a force, extending to a rather remote point (1Ch_9:14), is to be assigned to the demonstrative (Kamph. justly). The “being free” in their chambers is set forth very naturally, because their exclusive occupation with their art was to be indicated. Comp. Rashi’s and Kimchi’s interpretation of פְּטוּרִים, immunes ab omni alio officio.—For they were over them in the service day and night. This literal rendering of the Masoretic text (עֲלֵיהֶם בַּמְּלָאכָה) seems to express the sense: “they were placed over them, the subordinate singers, had to superintend them” (Berth.). But the comparison of the somewhat different passage, 2Ch_34:12, is insufficient to justify this view. It is more natural to take עֲלֵיהֶם to mean: “it lay upon them;” but then בַּמְּלָאכָה would have to be changed into הַמְּלָאכָה (1Ch_9:27), and so the suitable sense restored: “for by day and night their service, their singing function, was incumbent on them.”
1Ch_9:34. These are the heads of the fathers for the Levites, etc. Comp. the similar subscription, 1Ch_8:28. Since this precedes the first genealogy of Saul, as here the repetition of this genealogy immediately follows, Movers (p. 82 f.) conjectured that it had its place here originally, but was taken by an old transcriber erroneously for the beginning of the following genealogy of Saul, and therefore transposed with this (as he endeavoured to point out a more suitable place, as he thought, for it at the close of the genealogy of Benjamin, 1Ch_8:1-27) to that previous place, and thereby somewhat altered. This assumption would only be plausible if the double position of the genealogy of Saul must be regarded as resting on a mistake, and contrary to the plan of the writer, for which there is no manner of ground. He rather repeated this genealogy intentionally here to form a proper transition from his genealogical section to his following (introducing the historical section) account of the fall of Saul’s house. This simple consideration removes all that was formerly adduced in the way of doubts, conjectures, and highly absurd and superfluous reflections on the supposed ground of this repetition, as, according to Mar Sutra in Tr. Pesachim 62b, 400 (or in another report, 1300) camel-loads of explanations are forthcoming on this repetition and on the present section; comp. Herzfeld, Gesch. p. 299.
4. Repeated Genealogy of Saul: 1Ch_9:34-44.—On the deviations of this list from 1Ch_8:29-39, see on that passage, where it has been already stated that our present passage seems to present the older and more correct text with respect to the forms of the names.
EVANGELICAL AND ETHICAL REFLECTIONS ON CH. 1–9
There is in many respects the impression of wandering in a wilderness, of walking among the stones in a graveyard, ranged in long rows, and more or less weathered, remaining on the mind after the exegetical examination of the genealogical contents of these chapters. But as in the wilds of Hauran, Idumæa, and Arabia Petræa, bristling with innumerable bare rocks, there is, notwithstanding all the drought and waste, a mysterious charm that acts with irresistible attraction on all Christian travellers animated by the spirit of biblical research; or as, to use another but kindred figure, the labyrinthine windings of the old Christian catacombs of Rome, with their thousands of sarcophagi, and the ever-varying inscriptions and manifold symbolic figures on them, prepare for the Christian antiquarian walking through them, not weariness, but an inexhaustible charm and ever new satisfaction; even so do the seemingly so dry and unrefreshing names of these nine chapters act upon the searchers of Scripture, not only the Jewish, but also the Christian. For it is from beginning to end holy ground through which we here pass. They are the grave-stones of the people of God, the monuments of a thousand years of the old covenant people, between the rows of which the Chronist leads us. They are the cities and places of the holy land, the origins of which are here presented to us in greater or briefer extent. And the same mysterious attraction that yearly impels thousands of Christian pilgrims, of all countries and confessions, to that land, in which not merely Israel after the flesh, but also the confessors of Christ, have to seek a right of home, insensibly influences every reader of this section who is led by a Christian and scientific interest. The same home-longing that comes upon us on beholding every chart of the country of the twelve tribes, on examining every plan and picture of Jerusalem, even on reading the plainest and simplest of the innumerable books of travels with which the present luxuriant literature of Palestine constantly floods us, seizes with irresistible power the biblical inquirer who turns his attention to these opening chapters of our work; it sweetens in many ways the hard labours that are occasioned by the deciphering of the often illegible text, the pondering on the import of so many isolated names, the reconciling of so many contradictory statements concerning places, persons, and genealogical lists. Considered in detail, there are four chief aspects in which the deeper significance of the history of salvation in our chapters is presented, and on which the attention of the historical inquirer, moved by higher motives than mere profane history and criticism can yield, will be concentrated.
1. The grouping and arrangement of the genealogical material, with all the complication, seeming inconnection and arbitrariness of the considerations involved, is highly attractive, as it affords a deep insight into the organic arrangement of the tribes of God’s people, and the parts they are destined to perform in the history of the theocracy. The fundamental principle of division is neither purely genealogical nor politico-theocratic, but has reference to all these relations. The enumeration of the tribes is not arranged genealogically, according to the ages of the twelve sons of Jacob; otherwise it would have begun with Reuben and ended with Benjamin. It proceeds not according to the political relations of the time of the divided kingdom; otherwise Judah and Benjamin would have stood first, and Ephraim would have followed at the head of the northern kingdom. It follows not exclusively the geographical principle; for if it starts with Judah, the chief tribe of the south, and passing over the seats of the Simeonites, extending far to the south, bends round to the three eastern tribes, and enumerates them from south to north, in order to pass on to the remaining tribes of middle and northern Canaan, in the enumeration of the latter it abandons all geographical order, as the southern Benjamin and probably Dan are annexed to the northern Issachar, and then follows, not Ephraim, the more southern of the tribes of Joseph, but the more northern Manasseh, next to Naphtali; and lastly, after Ephraim and Asher, Benjamin reappears. In the midst of this not very geographical enumeration falls the copious genealogical details of Levi, to whom a definite territory was wanting, on account of its distribution over all the tribes. And yet in this apparently ungeographical and unhistorical order there lies a deeper sense. The author, as a strict theocratic legitimist, subordinates all the others to the two chief tribes, Judah and Benjamin, forming the kingdom of Judah, and adhering to the legitimate national sanctuary, as well as the tribe of Levi remaining in natural mutual connection with them. As he otherwise ignores, as far as possible, the northern kingdom, that had revolted from the legitimate worship, and subordinates the tribes belonging to it, on every occasion, to the orthodox tribes of the south, and regards them as mere dependencies of the latter (comp. 1Ch_9:3, where, along with Jews, Benjamites, and Levites, those belonging to the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are named as belonging to the inhabitants of Jerusalem; also the quite similar passage, 2Ch_34:9, and our remarks on it), here also is all that does not belong to the kingdom of Judah treated as accessory, and not only more briefly despatched (none of the tribes belonging to the north is given as fully as the tribe of Simeon belonging to Judah; some, as Dan and Naphtali, are almost wholly, and one, Zebulun, wholly omitted), but pushed in as subordinate, filling up between the tribes of Judah, Levi, and Benjamin, forming the beginning, the middle, and the end. What is especially conspicuous and beautiful is the central, all-pervading, embracing, and connecting position of the priestly tribe of Levi. “Over the whole distribution of the tribes is spread out as a connecting network the uniformly-distributed tribe of Levi, as the priestly mediator between God and His people, in its forty-eight cities, that belonged to all the tribes, but are not to be regarded as exclusively inhabited by Levites (comp. our remarks on 1Ch_6:65); whereby, according to Joshua 21 (and our 1 Chronicles 6), a peculiar crossing of the families of Levi took place, partly in the east and partly in the north of Palestine, so that those akin in family appear removed as far asunder as possible (Kohathites in Judah and Simeon, but also in Ephraim and West Manasseh; Merarites in Reuben and Gad, but also in Zebulun, etc.). It is as if this tribe, provided it remained at the height of its destiny, and the consciousness of God’s people clung to it, should represent the strong sinews and muscles running through the body of the people, which bind the members into a living and moving whole” (Hoffmann, Blicke in die früheste Geschichte des gelobten Landes, p. 99 f.).
2. Prominent in this arrangement, with regard to the history of grace, is the passing over of two tribes in silence. That Dan is only indicated, not named, in 1Ch_7:12, can only be conceived as a critical judgment on this tribe, that early and almost wholly fell into idolatry (see on the passage, and comp. 1Ch_27:16 ff., where there is not so much an overpassing of the name as a transposition of it to the end of the twelve tribes, by which the same theocratico-critical judgment is passed upon it). On the contrary, it may be accidental that no mention is made of the tribe of Zebulun in giving the genealogy of the twelve tribes, though it occurs in the enumeration of the Levitical cities (1Ch_6:48; 1Ch_6:62). Yet a certain significance for the history of salvation cannot be denied to this accidental omission, as it was certainly the relative smallness of the tribe, the low number of famous and populous families, that occasioned its disappearance from the genealogical traditions of the later time. Yet this so small and obscure tribe9 it was that included Nazareth, the dwelling - place of the earthly parents of Jesus. Zebulun, with its neighbour Naphtali, was, according to prophetic announcement (Isa_9:1; Psa_68:28), to prove to be “the people walking in darkness,” the land overshadowed with heathen gloom, that was to see the great light of salvation go forth from its midst. In this contemporaneous omission, then, of Dan, the tribe typically pointing to the Antichrist, and of Zebulun, the tribe serving as the earliest scene of the earthly living and working of the Saviour, there is in our registers a certain significance for the history of salvation, that even if it rests upon accident, points to a higher guidance and a providential arrangement.
3. The investigator of all that is significant for the history of salvation and the defence of the truth, will take no less interest in the many historical and archæological notices that are interwoven in the genealogical text. With their now scanty, now copious, contributions to the special history of the tribe, their details, often truly surprising by the epic grandeur and dramatic life of the narrative (to which belong, in particular, the records of the conquests of the Simeonites, the successful raids of the three trans-jordanic tribes against the north Arabian Beduin, and the slaying of the two sons of Ephraim, Ezer and Elad, by the primeval inhabitants of Gath), their highly ancient colouring both in style and deed, which prompts us almost to generalize the remark once added by the author: “these are ancient things,” and apply it to the whole of these accounts,10 these notices delight us as petrifactions from the grey foretime imbedded in the strata of genealogical series; they resemble scattered gems or medals of antique stamp shining through the rubbish of ages, that give us accounts of otherwise unknown events of theocratic history, and open to us perspective views into remote epochs of the development of God’s people, on which the darkness of absolute oblivion would otherwise have rested. From each of these, now shorter, now longer, documents concerning the older and oldest history of the tribe, goes forth the testimony of an unusually rich and many-sided individual impress of the Israelitish spirit, reminding us almost of the German nation in the multiplicity of its tribes, of a fresh but rude native power as a heritage more or less proper to each of the twelve tribes, and to each in peculiar modification, and thereby of a divine providence guiding and governing the life of the several tribes and of the whole nation with uninterrupted fatherly love as well as judicial integrity.
4. Of pre-eminent importance is finally the appearance, more or less clear in every tribe, of a preponderating repute and influence of one family over the rest. In the tribe of Judah, it is the family of Hezron the son of Perez, and grandson of Judah, that by its growth and power casts all the rest into the shade. In the tribe of Levi, the Kohathites predominate; in that of Benjamin, it is the house of Jeuel, or Abi-gibeon, the ancestor of Saul (1Ch_8:29, 1Ch_9:35 ff.), that, obscuring all the rest, rises to kingly worth and power, and even in its later offshoots, especially the sons of Azel and the bold archers of Ulam (1Ch_8:38-40), remains great and renowned. Among the Simeonites, Shimei, the descendant of Shaul, the last of the five sons of Simeon, becomes the ancestor of the most flourishing family (1Ch_4:26 f.). Among the Reubenites, the family of Joel is conspicuous (1Ch_5:4 f., 8 f.); among the Gadites, that of Buz (1Ch_5:14); among the Manassites, that of Machir the father of Gilead (1Ch_7:14 ff.); among the Ephraimites, that of Resheph the ancestor of Joshua (1Ch_7:25); among the sons of Issachar, that of Izrahiah the son of Uzzi, the son of Tolah (1Ch_7:3); among the sons of Asher, that of Heber the son of Beriah (1Ch_7:32 ff.). It is obvious enough to explain this remarkable phenomenon naturally, and regard it as preservation and completion of the strong families in “the struggle for existence,” or, if you will, as natural training. The statement of Palgrave, the English traveller, regarding the division of all the Arab tribes into two kinds of families, the townsmen or peasants, and the nomads or beduin, of which the former are the stronger and more developed, the latter the weaker, though patriarchally the more simply constituted, and therefore better fitted for handing down faithfully their genealogical recollections, should perhaps be regarded as pointing to a partial explanation of the present interesting phenomenon.11 Neither of these two purely natural attempts at explanation can be called satisfactory. The last and deepest ground of the rise of one family or tribe to a physically, ethically, or intellectually distinguished preeminence, and to an illustrious name, obscuring kindred tribes or families, is the secret of the divine election, that, without respect to character or conduct, raises and glorifies the one people or family, and leaves the other to lowness and oblivion, according to the words, “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated;” and, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion” (Rom_9:13; Rom_9:15; Mal_1:2 f.; Exo_33:19). As in the life of nations, so is this elective grace visible in the development of single tribes, clans, and families, and often in a way that directly contradicts the normal mode of growth and self-development, especially the law of the prevalence of the strong over the weak in “the struggle for existence,” and rather proceeds according to the Pauline saying: “ God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence” (1Co_1:27-29). Above all, in the development of the forefathers of Christ, before David as well as after, in the times of the rise as in those of the decline, this election by grace has repeatedly asserted itself, and operated as the proper principle and inmost motive of that blessed historical process, embracing many thousands of years, which, as the divine education of the human race, is the counterpart of all natural training, and the ideal archetype of all human education.
Footnotes:
[1]The Sept, the Vulg., and Luther attach וִיהוּדָה to the foregoing word (τῶν βασιλέων ’Ισρκὴλ καὶ ’Ιοῦδα), with an arbitrary interpretation of the following הָגְלוּ וגו׳ (μετὰ τῶν ἀκοικισθέντων εἰς Βαβυλῶνα,—translatique sunt in Babyl.).
[2]For the Kethib בֶּן־בִּנְיָמִן־בְּנֵי is doubtless to be read the Keri בֶּן־בָּנִי מִן־בְּנֵי (comp. the name בָּנִי in 1Ch_6:31, among the Merarites).
[3]For הַשִּׁלֹנִי, since שִׁילֹה (שִׁלוֹן is a city of Ephraim, must apparently have been read, according to Gen_26:20, הַשֵּׁלָנִי (the Shelanites, descendants of Shelah, third son of Judah). The incorrect pointing הַשִּׁילֹנִי appears to have arisen from the scriptio plena: הַשֵּׁילָנִי. Comp. Neh_11:5, where, instead of הַשִּׁילֹנִי, we should also perhaps point הַשֵּׁלָנִי.
[4]Before מְלֶאכֶת a ל (in consequence of the ל at the end of חַיִל) seems to have fallen out. Comp. εἰς ἐργασίαν of the Sept., and 1Ch_7:2; 1Ch_12:25 (also F. Böttcher, Neue exeg. krit. Aehrenlese, iii. 223).
[5]Before זְכַרְיָה a ו seems to have fallen out.
[6]For וְהֵם הַלְּוִיִּם וְהָיוּ the original text seems to have been וּמִן הַלְּוִיִּם הָיוּ; comp. ver.14.
[7] Kethib: פְּטידִים. Keri: פְּטוּרִים.
[8]So the Keri. The Kethib is יְעוּאֵל.
[9]That Zebulun, in the times of Moses, and even David, sent into the field an army of 50,000 men (see 1Ch_12:33), is not in contradiction with its insignificance in the later times before and after the exile, and is historically quite conceivable.
[10]Thus J. fürst (Gesch. der bibl. Lit. i. p. 318) conjectures that the raid of Elad and Ezer, the sons of Ephraim, against Gath, narrated 1Ch_7:21, is probably taken from “the old accounts (דברים עתיקים) mentioned 1Ch_4:22, which the Chronist had before him,” but without adducing any direct proof for it.
[11]Palgrave, Central Arabia, i. p. 35: “Arab nationality is and always has been based on the divisions of families and clans. These clans were soon by the nature of the land itself divided each and every one into two branches, correlative indeed, but of unequal size and importance. The greater section remained as townsmen or peasants in the districts best susceptible of culture and permanent occupation, where they still kept up much of their original clannish denominations and forms, though often blended, and even at times obliterated, by the fusion inseparable from civil and social organization. The other and lesser portion devoted themselves to a pastoral life. They, too, retained their original clannish and family demarcations, but unsoftened by civilization, and unblended by the links of close-drawn society; so that in this point they have continued to be the faithful depositaries of primeval Arab tradition, and constitute a sort of standard rule for the whole nation. Hence, when genealogical doubts and questions of descent arise, as they often do among the fixed inhabitants, recourse is often had to the neighbouring beduins for a decision unattainable in the complicated records of the town life.” Wellhausen (De gentibus et familiis Jud., etc., p. 24 f.), setting out from the mainly correct presupposition, that these observations of Palgrave on the Arabs apply mutatis mutandis to the tribes of ancient Israel, has described the family of Celeb (1Ch_2:18 ff., 1Ch_2:42 ff.) as an example of a Jewish family dwelling in towns and tilling the ground, and therefore widely spread, but certainly difficult to reduce to a genealogy; and, on the contrary, that of his brother Jerahmeel, 1Ch_2:25-41, as an example of a nomad family, remaining certainly smaller and less renowned. but also provided with far more precise and correct genealogical recollections Etenim casu non factum est, he thinks, with reference to 1Ch_2:25-41, quod nusquam excultior invenitur articulatio corporis ethnologici, quam apud Jerachmeelem *immout mosille schemate genealogico depingendi res gentilicias fluxit primarie e tali societate, quæ magnæ familiæ erat similior quam artificiosæ an contortæ structuræ civilatis quæ recte dici potest, ita postea etiam ibi sine dubio maxime viguit. ubi antiqua patriarcharum fidelius servabatur vitæ consuetudo, sic quidem ut sanouinis vis jungens et dirimens ceteris omnibus causis, quibus homines solent conciliari et abalienari aut revera prævaleret aut certe secundum conscientiam popularem prævalere judicaretur, etc.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 1. they were written in the book] This book…
1. they were written in the book] This book is apparently referred to in 1Ch_5:17.
of Israel and Judah, who were carried away] R.V. of Israel: and Judah was carried away captive. The statement that Judah was led captive calls attention to the fact that the list which follows refers to post-exilic times.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies. The Hebrew…
So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies. The Hebrew verb (ycjytji) is sufficiently satisfied by the rendering were enrolled, or were registered. The book of the kings of Israel and Judah. The book referred to is often styled "The book of the kings of Israel"; (2Ch_20:34 2Ch_33:18) and it is more probable that that is the intended title here, and that the words should follow thus: And Judah were carried captive to Babylon because of their transgressions. This the Masoretic accenting dictates, though the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Luther have our Authorized Version order. The inconvenience to certain of not being able to find their registers is alluded to in Ezr_2:59.
HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON Ver. 1.
Read full note →
The far country.
The text speaks of those who were "carried away to Babylon for their transgression." In every age and land sin means exile. It is a fruitful source of division, of painful and hurtful separation. Sin, which is "the transgression of the Law," makes us go out into "a far country." It takes us
I TO A STATE OF SEPARATION FROM GOD: (Isa_59:2) from his conscious presence, his favour, his likeness, his dwelling-place.
II FAR FROM A TRUE, AN IDEAL MANHOOD. We sink a long way below the level of a pure, holy, estimable humanity.
III INTO THE DREARY REGION OF RESTLESSNESS, MISERY, DESPAIR.
IV To "THE FAR COUNTRY" OF INDIFFERENCE, HEARTLESSNESS, ("past feeling," Eph_4:19) UTTER UNBELIEF.
V To "THE OUTER DARKNESS" OF FINAL EXILE FROM THE CITY OF GOD. C.
HOMILIES BY F. WHITFIELD Vers. 1-44.
Genealogy of the returned exiles.
This chapter records the genealogies of Israel when, as exiles, they had returned from Babylon. Almost all the names recur in Nehemiah (11). God"s people may be scattered and downtrodden and degraded in strange lands, but he has his eye on each, and their names are in the book of life. Not one shall be missing when the Lord shall gather his own again in that land where they shall return to go no more out. The servants of God had each their work apportioned. Some had the charge of pans; some had to number the vessels; some to carry them in and out. Some were porters at the door of the house of God; some porters at the king"s gate; some "keepers of the entry;" some to oversee the vessels; some makers of "the ointment of the spices;" and some had the more exalted office of rulers of the house of God. Thus the occupation of each was widely different, but each one had his place in the vineyard, some exalted, some humble. Oh to be able to say, in whatever position of life God may place us, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" Let each one fill his post, however humble it may be, and "do it heartily as unto the Lord." The reward will be given, not according to the dignity of the post, but according to the faithfulness of the servant. "Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." There is one service in this list which is worthy of note. It is that of the Levites who were singers. They were free because they were in the chambers of the house of God, and their work was to praise day and night (ver. 33). Surely praise is for all times, and is associated with freedom in the highest sense of the word. The soul that has been "made free" can sing; and praise, unlike prayer, will never end. "I will bless the Lord at all times: his praise shall continually be in my mouth." None can praise but those whom "the truth" has made "free," and they can sing, like Paul and Silas, even in a dungeon. These are the true Levites. They are indeed in "the chambers the secret places of God"s love. The service of praise is indeed upon them" (margin). They must praise. They cannot do otherwise. They know Jesus. They see him. And they look forward to that time when they shall praise him "as they ought." God hasten that glorious time, when heaven and earth shall be vocal with praise, and Jesus shall be the Object of it for ever! W.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain 1 Chronicles 9
TEACHING BY ANACHRONISM
1 Chronicles 9
Read full note →
"And David the king said Who then offereth willingly? And they gave for the service of the house of God ten thousand darics."- 1Ch_29:1; 1Ch_29:5; 1Ch_29:7
TEACHING by anachronism is a very common and effective form of religious instruction; and Chronicles, as the best Scriptural example of this method, affords a good opportunity for its discussion and illustration.
All history is more or less guilty of anachronism; every historian perforce imports some of the ideas and circumstances of his own time into his narratives and pictures of the past: but we may distinguish three degrees of anachronism. Some writers or speakers make little or no attempt at archaeological accuracy; others temper the generally anachronistic character of their compositions by occasional reference to the manners and customs of the period they are describing; and, again, there are a few trained students who succeed in drawing fairly accurate and consistent pictures of ancient life and history.
We will briefly consider the last two classes before returning to the first, in which we are chiefly interested.
Accurate archaeology is, of course, part of the ideal of the scientific historian. By long and careful study of literature and monuments and by the exercise of a lively and well-trained imagination, the student obtains a vision of ancient societies. Nineveh and Babylon, Thebes and Memphis, rise from their ashes and stand before him in all their former splendor; he walks their streets and mixes with the crowds in the market-place and the throng of worshippers at the temple, each "in his habit as he lived." Rameses and Sennacherib, Ptolemy and Antiochus, all play their proper parts in this drama of his fancy. He cannot only recall their costumes and features: he can even think their thoughts and feel their emotions; he actually lives in the past. In "Marius the Epicurean," in Eberss "Uarda," in Masperos "Sketches of Assyrian and Egyptian Life," and in other more serious works we have some of the fruits of this enlightened study of antiquity, and are enabled to see the visions at second hand and in some measure to live at once in the present and the past, to illustrate and interpret the one by the other, to measure progress and decay, and to understand the Divine meaning of all history. Our more recent histories and works on life and manners and even our historical romances, especially those of Walter Scott, have rendered a similar service to students of English history. And yet at its very best such realization of the past is imperfect; the gaps in our information are unconsciously filled in from experience, and the ideas of the present always color our reproduction of ancient thought and feeling. The most accurate history is only a rough approximation to exact truth; but, like many other rough approximations, it is exact enough for many important practical purposes.
But scholarly familiarity with the past has its drawbacks. The scholar may come to live so much amongst ancient memories that he loses touch with his own present. He may gain large stores of information about ancient Israelite life, and yet not know enough of his own generation to be able to make them sharers of his knowledge. Their living needs and circumstances lie outside his practical experience; he cannot explain the past to them because he does not sympathize with their present; he cannot apply its lessons to difficulties and dangers which he does not understand.
Nor is the usefulness of the archaeologist merely limited by his own lack of sympathy and experience. He may have both, and yet find that there are few of his contemporaries who can follow him in his excursions into bygone time. These limitations and drawbacks do not seriously diminish the value of archaeology, but they have to be taken into account in discussing teaching by anachronism, and they have an important bearing on the practical application of archaeological knowledge. We shall return to these points later on.
The second degree of anachronism is very common. We are constantly hearing and reading descriptions of Bible scenes and events in which the centuries before and after Christ are most oddly blended. Here and there will be a costume after an ancient monument, a Biblical description of Jewish customs, a few Scriptural phrases; but these are embedded in paragraphs which simply reproduce the social and religious ideas of the nineteenth century. For instance, in a recent work, amidst much display of archaeological knowledge, we have the very modern ideas that Joseph and Mary went up to Bethlehem at the census, because Joseph and perhaps Mary also had property in Bethlehem, and that when Joseph died "he left her a small but independent fortune." Many modern books might be named in which Patriarchs and Apostles hold the language and express the sentiments of the most recent schools of devotional Christianity; and yet an air of historical accuracy is assumed by occasional touches of archaeology. Similarly in mediaeval miracle-plays characters from the Bible appeared in the dress of the period, and uttered a grotesque mixture of Scriptural phrases and vernacular jargon. Much of such work as this may for all practical purposes be classed under the third degree of anachronism. Sometimes, however, the spiritual significance of a passage or an incident turns upon a simple explanation of some ancient custom, so that the archaeological detail makes a clear addition to its interest and instructiveness. But in other cases a little archaeology is a dangerous thing. Scattered fragments of learned information do not enable the reader in any way to revive the buried past; they only remove the whole subject further from his interest and sympathy. He is not reading about his own day, nor does he understand that the events and personages of the narrative ever had anything in common with himself and his experience. The antique garb, the strange custom, the unusual phrase-disguise that real humanity which the reader shares with these ancient worthies. They are no longer men of like passions with himself, and he finds neither warning nor encouragement in their story. He is like a spectator of a drama played by poor actors with a limited stock of properties. The scenery and dresses show that the play does not belong to his own time, but they fail to suggest that it ever belonged to any period. He has a languid interest in the performance as a spectacle, but his feelings are not touched, and he is never carried away by the acting.
We have laid so much stress on the drawbacks attaching to a little archaeology because they will emphasize what we have to say about the use of pure anachronism. Our last illustration, however, reminds us that these drawbacks detract but little from the influence of earnest men. If the acting be good, we forget the scenery and costumes; the genius of a great preacher, more than atones for poor archaeology, because, in spite of dress and custom, he makes his hearers feel that the characters of the Bible were instinct with rich and passionate life. We thus arrive at our third degree of pure anachronism.
Most people read their Bible without any reference to archaeology. If they dramatize the stories, they do so in terms of their own experience. The characters are dressed like the men and women they know: Nazareth is like their native village, and Jerusalem is like the county town; the conversations are carried on in the English of the Authorized Version. This reading of Scripture is well illustrated by the description in a recent writer of a modern prophet in Tennessee:
"There was naught in the scene to suggest to a mind familiar with the facts an Oriental landscape-naught akin to the hills of Judaea. It was essentially of the New World, essentially of the Great Smoky Mountains. Yet ignorance has its license. It never occurred to Teck Jepson that his Bible heroes had lived elsewhere. Their history had to him an intimate personal relation, as of the story of an ancestor, in the homestead ways and closely familiar. He brooded upon these narratives, instinct with dramatic interest, enriched with poetic color, and localized in his robust imagination, till he could trace Hagars wild wanderings in the fastnesses, could show where Jacob slept and piled his altar of stones, could distinguish the bush, of all others on the bald, that blazed with fire from heaven when the angel of the Lord stood within it. Somehow, even in their grotesque variation, they lost no dignity in their transmission to the modern conditions of his fancy. Did the facts lack significance because it was along the gullied red clay roads of Piomingo Cove that he saw David, the smiling stripling, running and holding high in his hand the bit of cloth cut from Sauls garments while the king had slept in a cave at the base of Chilhowie Mountain? And how was the splendid miracle of translation discredited because Jepson believed that the chariot of the Lord had rested in scarlet and purple clouds upon the towering summit of Thunderhead, that Elijah might thence ascend into heaven?"
Another and more familiar example of "singular alterations in date and circumstances" is the version in "Ivanhoe" of the war between Benjamin and the other tribes:-
"How long since in Palestine a deadly feud arose between the tribe of Benjamin and the rest of the Israelitish nation; and how they cut to pieces well-nigh all the chivalry of that tribe; and how they swore by our blessed Lady that they would not permit those who remained to marry in their lineage; and how they became grieved for their vow, and sent to consult his Holiness the Pope how they might be absolved from it; and how, by the advice of the Holy Father, the youth of the tribe of Benjamin carried off from a superb tournament all the ladies who were there present, and thus won them wives without the consent either of their brides or their brides families."
It is needless to say that the chronicler was not thus hopelessly at sea about the circumstances of ancient Hebrew history; but he wrote in the same simple, straightforward, childlike spirit. Israel had always been the Israel of his own experience, and it never occurred to him that its institutions under the kings had been other than those with which he was familiar. He had no more hesitation in filling up the gaps in the book of Kings from what he saw round about him than a painter would have in putting the white clouds and blue waters of today into a picture of skies and seas a thousand years ago. He attributes to the pious kings of Judah the observance of the ritual of his own times. Their prophets use phrases taken from post-Exilic writings. David is regarded as the author of the existing ecclesiastical system in almost all matters that do not date back to Moses, and especially as the organizer of the familiar music of the Temple. Davids choristers sing the hymns of the second Temple. Amongst the contributions of his nobles towards the building of the Temple, we read of ten thousand darics, the daric being a coin introduced by the Persian king Darius.
But we must be careful to recognize that the chronicler writes in perfect good faith. These views of the monarchy were common to all educated and thoughtful men of his time; they were embodied in current tradition, and were probably already to be met with in writing. To charge him with inventing them is absurd; they already existed, and did not need to be invented. He cannot have colored his narrative in the interests of the Temple and the priesthood. When he lived, these interests were guaranteed by ancient custom and by the authoritative sanction of the Pentateuchal Law. The chronicler does not write with the strong feeling of a man who maintains a doubtful cause; there is no hint of any alternative view which needs to be disproved and rejected in favor of his own. He expatiates on his favorite themes with happy, leisurely serenity, and is evidently confident that his treatment of them will meet with general and cordial approval.
And doubtless the author of Chronicles "served his own generation by the will of God," and served them in the way he intended. He made the history of the monarchy more real and living to them, and enabled them to understand better that the reforming kings of Judah were loyal servants of Jehovah and had been used by Him for the furtherance of true religion. The pictures drawn by Samuel and Kings of David and the best of his successors would not have enabled the Jews of his time to appreciate these facts. They had no idea of any piety that was not expressed in the current observances of the Law, and Samuel and Kings did not ascribe such observances to the earlier kings of Judah. But the chronicler and his authorities were able to discern in the ancient Scriptures the genuine piety of David and Hezekiah and other kings, and drew what seemed to them the obvious conclusion that these pious kings observed the Law. They then proceeded to rewrite the history in order that the true character of the kings arm their relation to Jehovah might be made intelligible to the people. The only piety which the chronicler could conceive was combined with observance of the Law; naturally therefore it was only thus that he could describe piety. His work would be read with eager interest, and would play a definite and useful part in the religious education of the people. It would bring home to them, as the older histories could not, the abiding presence of Jehovah with Israel and its leaders. Chronicles interpreted history to its own generation by translating older records into the circumstances and ideas of its own time.
And in this it remains our example. Chronicles may fall very far short of the ideal and yet be superior to more accurate histories which fail to make themselves intelligible to their own generation. The ideal history no doubt would tell the story with archaeological precision, and then interpret it by modern parallels; the historian would show us what we should actually have seen and heard if we had lived in the period he is describing; he would also help our weak imagination by pointing us to such modern events or persons as best illustrate those ancient times. No doubt Chronicles fails to bring before our eyes an accurate vision of the history of the monarchy; but, as we have said, all history fails somewhat in this respect. It is simply impossible to fulfill the demand for history that shall have the accuracy of an architects plans of a house or an astronomers diagrams of the orbit of a planet. Chronicles, however, fails more seriously than most history, and on the whole rather more than most commentaries and sermons.
But this lack of archaeological accuracy is far less serious than a failure to make it clear that the events of ancient history were as real and as interesting as those of modern times, and that its personages were actual men and women, with a full equipment of body, mind, and soul. There have been many teachers and preachers, innocent of archaeology, who have yet been able to apply Bible narratives with convincing power to the hearts and consciences of their hearers. They may have missed some points and misunderstood others, but they have brought out clearly the main, practical teaching of their subject; and we must not allow amusement at curious anachronisms to blind us to their great gifts in applying ancient history to modern circumstances. For instance, the little captive maid in the story of Naaman has been described by a local preacher as having illuminated texts hung up in her bedroom, and (perambulators not being then in use) as having constructed a go-cart for the baby out of an old tea-chest and four cotton reels. We feel inclined to smile; but, after all, such a picture would make children feel that the captive maid was a girl whom they could understand and might even imitate. A more correct version of the story, told with less human interest, might leave the impression that she was a mere animated doll in a quaint costume, who made impossibly pious remarks.
Enlightened and well-informed Christian teachers may still learn something from the example of the chronicler. The uncritical character of his age affords no excuse to them for shutting their eyes to the fuller light which God has given to their generation. But we are reminded that permanently significant stories have their parallels in every age. There are always prodigal sons, and foolish virgins, importunate widows, and good Samaritans. The ancient narratives are interesting as quaint and picturesque stories of former times; but it is our duty as teachers to discover the modern parallels of their eternal meaning: their lessons are often best enforced by telling them afresh as they would have been told if their authors had lived in our time, in other words by a frank use of anachronism.
It may be objected that the result in the case of Chronicles is not encouraging. Chronicles is far less interesting than Kings, and far less useful in furnishing materials for the historian. These facts, however, are not inconsistent with the usefulness of the book for its own age. Teaching by anachronism simply seeks to render a service to its own generation; its purpose is didactic, and not historical. How many people read the sermons of eighteenth-century divines? But each generation has a right to this special service. The first duty of the religious teacher is for the men and women that look to him for spiritual help and guidance. He may incidentally produce literary work of permanent value for posterity; but a Church whose ministry sacrificed practical usefulness in the attempt to be learned and literary would be false to its most sacred functions. The noblest self-denial of Christian service may often lie in putting aside all such ambition and devoting the ability which might have made a successful author to making Divine truth intelligible and interesting to the uncultured and the unimaginative. Authors themselves are sometimes led to make a similar sacrifice; they write to help the many today when they might have written to delight men of literary taste in all ages. Few things are so ephemeral as popular religious literature; it is as quickly and entirely forgotten as last years sunsets: but it is as necessary and as useful as the sunshine and the clouds, which are being always spent and always renewed. Chronicles is a specimen of this class of literature, and its presence in the canon testifies to the duty of providing a special application of the sacred truths of ancient history for each succeeding generation.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain CRITICAL NOTES.] In this chapter a list of inhabitants…
CRITICAL NOTES.] In this chapter a list of inhabitants in Jerusalem (1Ch_9:1-34); and genealogy of Saul repeated (1Ch_9:35-44).
1Ch_9:1-6.—Reckoned, registered in form of gen. First after captivity, 4 classes. Nethinims, root nathan, “to give,” a sort of hieroduli, or sacred slaves—persons given to Levites to perform lower and more laborious duties of sanctuary [Speak. Com.]. 1Ch_9:3. Eph. and Man., some attached themselves to David when a fugitive, and were citizens of Jerusalem when it became capital (2Ch_24:9). 1Ch_9:4-6. Sons of Judah. Uthai, chief of family called after his name and not same as Athaiah in Neh_11:4 [cf. Murphy]. 1Ch_9:5. Shilonites (Shelani), family of Shelah, third son of Judah (ch. 1Ch_4:21). Zerah, not mentioned after return, though an officer of this house was in Persian court (Neh_11:24).
Read full note →
1Ch_9:7-9.—Sons of Benjamin. Sallu’s gen. different from that in Neh_11:7-8. 1Ch_9:10-13. Three priests, heads of families in Jerusalem, origin of their names found in ch. 1Ch_24:7-17.
1Ch_9:14-16.—Levites. Shemaiah head (Neh_11:15). Nehemiah and author of Chronicles fairly agree. The principal differences are that Nehemiah contracts “Obadiah” into “Abda” (1Ch_9:17), gives Shemaiah an additional ancestor, Bunni (1Ch_9:15), and in gon. of Mataniah substitutes “Zabdi” for “Zichri” (1Ch_9:16) [Speak. Com.].
1Ch_9:17-27.—Porters, i.e., keepers of the temple gates (2Sa_17:26; Mar_13:3; Joh_10:3). 1Ch_9:18. Companies, orders or courses of service. 1Ch_9:19. Korahites occupied a higher position, their office more directly connected with sacred service than others. 1Ch_9:21. Porter, chief in reign of David (ch. 1Ch_27:1-2; 1Ch_27:2). Tabernacle, lit. tent of meeting (Exo_29:42), and points to tabernacle on Mount Zion in time of David. 1Ch_9:22. Seer, ancient popular term for prophet. 1Ch_9:23. Children, office hereditary; wards, according to watches in set time. 1Ch_9:24. Quarters (cf. 1Ch_9:18 and ch. 1Ch_26:14-16). 1Ch_9:25. Seven (2Ki_11:5), change of watch on Sabbath, which began at sunset. 1Ch_9:26. Chambers, for use of priests (1Ki_6:6; 1Ki_12:18; 1Ki_22:14). 1Ch_9:27. Lodged daring week of office.
1Ch_9:28-34.—Various other functions of Levites. Charge of vessels, “sacrificial bowls, trays for the shew-bread, and cups and flagons for the libations, vessels for holding stores not directly used in worship,” also 1Ch_9:29. Charge of ointment, compounding which of special service, 1Ch_9:30 (cf. Exo_30:23). Charge of baking, 1Ch_9:31. Charge of shew-bread, laid in order on table every Sabbath, 1Ch_9:32 (cf. Lev_24:8). Charge of singing, 1Ch_9:33, free from any special duty besides supervision, therefore could devote themselves night and day. 1Ch_9:34. Closes first part of chapter.
1Ch_9:35-44.—A repetition of ch. 1Ch_8:29-38. Some propose to cancel in one place or other. This unnecessary, fitly given in both places. In ch. 8 an account of subdivisions of tribe of Benjamin, and could not properly omit the most celebrated family of that tribe, that of Saul. Here bent on connecting the genealogical section of work with historical, and find it most convenient to effect the junction by re-introducing the gen. of the person with whose death his historical section opens [Speak. Com.].
HOMILETICS
RETURNED EXILES.—1Ch_9:2
First implies that others returned and settled afterwards in places not occupied by first. Numbers returned successively under Ezra, Nehemiah, and in later periods. Some who returned to the ancient inheritance had lived before time of captivity (Ezr_3:12; Hag_2:4-10). Four classes, representatives mentioned.
1. Israelites. Laymen. The whole nation including Judah. The name “Jews” gradually supplanted the name “Israelites,” especially among foreigners.
2. Priests. Mediation essential idea of priesthood. Israel had representatives between them and Jehovah. The office typical, and a perpetual inheritance from father to Song of Solomon 3. Levites. A special order to aid priests in higher functions. The first-born performed priestly offices before the organised temple service. To prevent disorder in domestic relations, and secure greater efficiency, primogeniture conferred upon tribe of Levi, which was to give undivided attention to duties of the sanctuary (Num_3:11-13). They had to guard tabernacle and temple, take charge of vessels, and encamp round the tabernacle to form a partition between it and the people.
4. Nethinims. As Levites, so these were given to help. A great increase of them when Gibeonites submitted (Jos_9:23); enlargement made by David (Ezr_8:20). After return from captivity, their services most important on account of small number of Levites who returned (Ezr_2:40). These classes set forth different kinds of Christian work. “In the work of the service,” positions of trust and honour, duties lowly and menial, variety and unity. All appointed by God, calling forth ability and activity of man. “Who, then, is willing to consecrate himself?”
ABILITY FOR GOD’S SERVICE.—1Ch_9:13-24
The return was a critical time, exposing to danger, requiring courage and physical strength. “Able men for the work of the service.” This ability requires
I. Intelligence to understand the work. It must be received as a divine appointment, “ordained in their set office” (1Ch_9:22). No prosecution without comprehending its nature, design, and responsibilities. Porters and overseers, confectioners and singers, must train and cultivate gifts and power to work. Be well informed in the science of duty and of God. “Take your wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you.”
II. Perseverance to prosecute the work. They lodged all night (1Ch_9:25); attended a week in turn (1Ch_9:25); and were employed night and day. Many get tired, work half time, or leave entirely. The nobles bent not their necks to work, but Nehemiah continued at the wall (ch. 1Ch_5:16). Steady, patient, faithful service acceptable to God. “Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned.” “Pray and stay are two blessed monosyllables” [Donne].
ORDER IN GOD’S SERVICE.—1Ch_9:23-34
Extreme care taken to secure regularity and reverence in God’s house. “Order is heaven’s first law.”
I. In the appointment of officers to rule. Each his own place and authority. Priests at the altar, porters at the gate, and leaders in the choir. Times of duty and relief fixed. Many disorderly, unsympathetic, and fail. “For we sought him not after the due order” (1Ch_15:13).
II. In the regular method of worship. Variety but unity. In sacrifices to present, bread to lay out, and songs to arrange, “they waited on their office according to their order.” Order gives cheerfulness, alacrity, and success. Disorder produces aversion, resistance, and failure. “Let all things be done decently and in order.” “God is not the author of confusion” (1Co_14:33-40).
“The least confusion but in one, not all
That system only, but the whole must fall” [Pope].
PEDIGREE OF SAUL.—1Ch_9:35-44
To construct Saul’s genealogy, compare various statements in Scriptures (cf. 1Sa_9:1; 1Sa_14:51; 1Ch_7:6-8; 1Ch_8:29-33; 1Ch_9:35-39). In the choice, anointing, and pedigree of Saul, which enter the history of Israel, notice—
1. The condescension of God. Both to human weakness, in asking a king, and to smallest and apparently trivial events in life.
2. The sovereignty of God. Independent of earthly and human relations. Saul not notable, from a prominent family; but unknown, “from the smallest family of the smallest of the tribes.”
3. The providence of God. In preserving the record for the instruction of others. “How has God, the Holy Ghost, stooped to become a historian of the smallest, most contemptible affairs on earth, in order to reveal to man, in his own language, in his own business, in his own ways, the purposes, the secrets, and the ways of the Deity” [Hamann].
HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
1Ch_9:1-2. Carried away.
1. The sin.
2. The punishment.
3. The return, and
4. The restoration. Many remained in Babylon, others returned to possessions, privileges, and honour. This typical of spiritual conduct. “A wonderful providence that as the land kept her Sabbaths for those seventy years, so the country should be all that while kept empty, till the return of the natives; for we read not that any colonies were sent thither, nor any displaced to make room for these at their return” [Trapp].
1Ch_9:13. Very able men. Men of valour or men of work for the service; in either sense we get aptitude or fitness for service, bodily, mentally, and spiritually. “Able ministers of the New Testament” (2Co_3:6; cf. Eph_3:7; 1Ti_1:11-12).
1Ch_9:20. Phineas, highly favoured.
1. God’s presence a mark of time. In individual life and national history. “The object of this verse is to mark the time to which the writer refers in the verse preceding” [Speak. Com.].
2. God’s presence the source of honour. “The ruler over them.”
3. God’s presence the source of success in effort. “The Lord was with him” in his action at Baal-peor (Numbers 25).
1Ch_9:22. Samuel the seer a privileged person. One who receives dreams and visions, gets insight into divine revelation, and is consulted by the people. All teachers should be seers in opening the eyes and giving the light and knowledge of God (2Co_4:6).
1Ch_9:26. Doorkeepers.
1. To open the doors of God’s house every morning and shut them at night (1Ch_9:27).
2. To keep off the unclean and hinder those from intruding who were forbidden by the law.
3. To direct and introduce into the courts those who came to worship and facilitate their safety and profit [cf. Henry]. This required zeal, to be there first; patience, to stay until the last; and care, to be exact and successful. A mean employment in the estimation of many. Nothing mean for God. “I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.”
“The trivial round, the Common task,
Would furnish all we ought to ask—
Room to deny ourselves—a road
To bring as daily nearer God” [Keble].
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain Genealogies (concluded)
Genealogies (concluded)
This chapter furnishes a record of the families and numbers of those who dwelt at Jerusalem after the captivity, and relates the ancestry and posterity of Saul.
Read full note →
1. In the book, etc.] RV 'in the book of the kings of Israel: and Judah was carried away.. to Babylon.'
2. Now the first inhabitants, etc.] This section (1Ch_9:2-34) relates to the reoccupation of Jerusalem after the return from the exile, and appears to be a defective duplicate of Neh_11:3 with some variations in the names.
The Israelites] i.e. the lay population as contrasted with the ecclesiastical orders.
Netliinims] These were persons selected from the people, in the ratio of one for every fifty, and given to the Levites as their servants in the times of Moses and David (Num_31:47; Ezr_8:20). From the mention of Mehunims among them (Ezr_2:60), who were doubtless descendants of the people of that name who were conquered by Uzziah (2Ch_26:7), it has been inferred that they included foreigners who were either prisoners of war, or who surrendered as the Gibeonites did: Jos_9:27.
5. Shilonites] better, 'Shelanites,' the descendants of Judah's son Shelah: Num_26:20.
11. The ruler of the house of God] applied in 2Ch_31:10, 2Ch_31:13 to the high priest, but in 2Ch_35:3 to others besides.
18. The king's gate] In pre-exilic times this communicated between the Temple and the royal palace (2Ki_16:18). The companies] RV 'the camp': the phrase is transferred from the time of the wanderings, certain positions in the Temple corresponding to similar positions in the camp of the wilderness.
33. These are the singers] a list of names has fallen out. Free] i.e. were exempt from other duties.
35. And in Gibeon, etc.] This account of Saul's ancestry and descendants is repeated from 1Ch_8:29-38 as an introduction to the narrative of his death given in 1 Chronicles 10.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain 7. The Record of the Inhabitants of Jerusalem after…
7. The Record of the Inhabitants of Jerusalem after the Return
CHAPTER 9
Read full note →
1. The restoration (1Ch 9:1-2)
2. Different residents in Jerusalem (1Ch 9:3-9)
3. The priests (1Ch 9:10-13)
4. The Levites (1Ch 9:14-16)
5. Porters and Levites; their duties (1Ch 9:17-34)
6. The house of Saul (1Ch 9:35-44)
All Israel was reckoned by genealogies, which means that from the beginning of the nation, public records were kept. The name of every individual and the family and tribe to which they belonged were carefully registered. This complete registry was contained in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, which does not mean the two books of Kings. The genealogies contained in the preceding chapters were condensed from the larger registry in the archives of Israel and Judah. Such genealogical registers were likewise kept during the captivity. The names registered in the rest of this chapter are the names of the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the exile. Almost all the names are also found in Nehemiah 11 with some marked differences. The genealogy of the house of Saul is repeated once more (1Ch 8:29-38), evidently, as the connecting link with the next chapter.
It is beyond the scope of our work to follow these genealogical registries at greater length, or to attempt the solution of many supposed difficulties.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain The Registration Lists of Israel
The Registration Lists of Israel
v. 1. So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies, their names were entered in the genealogical records; and, behold, they were written in the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah, who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression. The books referred to are the official lists as kept in the royal archives. These public records contained also much historical material, and from this the sacred writers, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, drew much of the contents of their books. Thus the entire account is distinguished for truth and correctness.
Read full note →
v. 2. Now, the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities, after the return from the Babylonian exile, were the Israelites, the members of the nation in general, the priests, Levites, and the Nethinims, chiefly members of the conquered heathen nations who were made servants in the Tabernacle and the Temple, performing the meaner tasks connected with the worship, Jos 9:27; 1 Samuel l, 11.
v. 3. And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim, and Manasseh, such Israelites as had fled to Judah at the time of the Assyrian invasion and were considered members of the southern kingdom;
v. 4. Uthai, the son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the son of Bani, of the children of Pharez, the son of Judah.
v. 5. And of the Shilonites, probably the descendants of Shelah, Num 26:20 : Asaiah, the first-born, and his sons.
v. 6. And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel and their brethren, namely, including the three chiefs mentioned in verse 4, six hundred and ninety.
v. 7. And of the sons of Benjamin: Sallu, the son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hasenuah, Neh 11:7,
v. 8. and Ibneiah, the son of Jeroham, and Elah, the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri, and Meshullam, the son of Shephathiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah;
v. 9. and their brethren, according to their generations, nine hundred and fifty and six. All these men were chief of the fathers in the house of their fathers, leaders in those divisions of the tribes known as father-houses.
v. 10. And of the priests: Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, and Jachin, these being the names of the three priestly classes dwelling in Jerusalem, Neh 11:10 ff.
v. 11. And Azariah (or Seraiah), the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, the ruler of the house of God, the prince, or president, of the Temple;
v. 12. and Adaiah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Pashur, the son of Malchijah, and Maasiai, the son of Adiel, the son of Jahzerah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Meshillemith, the son of Immer, Cf Neh 11:12; 1Ch 24:14;
v. 13. and their brethren, heads of the house of their fathers, a thousand and seven hundred and threescore; very able men, literally, "mighty men of valor," for the work of the service of the house of God, willing, energetic, effective in all the tasks falling to their lot in the priestly office.
v. 14. And of the Levites: Shemaiah, the son of Hasshub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, of the sons of Merari, one of the three great Levitical families;
v. 15. and Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal, and Mattaniah, the son of Micah, the son of Zichri, the son of Asaph;
v. 16. and Obadiah, the son of Shemaiah, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun (or Ethan), and Berechiah, the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, that dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites, not far from Bethlehem, Neh 7:26.
v. 17. And the porters, the captains of the four companies that guarded the four sides and the gates of the Temple, Cf Neh 11:19, were Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren. Shallum was the chief,
v. 18. who hitherto waited in the King’s Gate eastward, leading to the royal palace, which was reserved for the use of the king; they were porters in the companies of the children of Levi. There being no king in Judah after the return of the people, the King’s Gate was always locked, and no porter was needed there.
v. 19. And Shallum, the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, of the house of his father, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the gates of the Tabernacle, as briefly stated above; and their fathers, being over the host of the Lord, were keepers of the entry; the descendants of Korah, as a branch of the Kohathites, had been in charge of the entrance of the Tabernacle in the wilderness at the time of Moses, as their descendants, in turn, were in charge of the Temple gates.
v. 20. And Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, was the ruler over them in time past, Num 31:6; and the Lord was with him.
v. 21. And Zechariah, the son of Meshelemiah, was porter of the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation, he held this office at the time of David.
v. 22. All these which were chosen to be porters in the gates were two hundred and twelve, under the four captains named in verse 17. These were reckoned by their genealogy in their villages, they were registered. in their homes near Jerusalem, whom David and Samuel, the seer, did ordain in their set office, charging them with their official duty and making the office hereditary.
v. 23. So they and their children had the oversight of the gates of the house of the Lord, namely, the house of the Tabernacle, by wards.
v. 24. In four quarters were the porters, toward the east, west, north, and south; there they were stationed.
v. 25. And their brethren, which were in their villages, were to come after seven days from time to time with them, that is, the personnel of the groups, of the sections in charge of the gates, was changed every week, and on the Sabbath apparently all were on duty.
v. 26. For these Levites, the four chief porters, were in their set office, entrusted with the discharge of these duties, and were over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God, they were in the side-buildings of the Temple, over which the Levites presided. It is well-pleasing to the Lord if all things pertaining to the external parts of the Worship are done decently and in order, under the direction of men especially appointed for that work.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 all Israel was recorded in genealogies
all Israel was recorded in genealogies
This can be translated in active form. The reader should understand that the people who wrote the genealogies included the names of the people who had already died. AT: "The Israelites recorded all of themselves in genealogies" (See: Active or Passive)
Read full note →
genealogies
family records that name ancestors and descendants
They were recorded in the book ... Israel
This can be translated in active form. AT: "They wrote the names in the book ... Israel" (See: Active or Passive)
the book of the kings of Israel
This refers to a book that no longer exists.
they were carried away in exile
This can be translated in active form. AT: "The Babylonians carried them away in exile" (See: Active or Passive)
translationWords
kingdom of Israel
king
kingdom of Judah
exile
Babylon
sin
priest
Levi
temple
servant
descend
Judah
Benjamin
Ephraim
Manasseh
Jerusalem
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 9:1-34 The Chronicler shows how people and institutions who…
9:1-34 The Chronicler shows how people and institutions who returned from the Exile had continuity with the past. The Levites and the priests are prominent in this summary of Israel, expressing the Chronicler’s view that they were central to the organization of the nation. They were crucial to Israel’s function and success as a nation where God was the King. The Chronicler drew upon the records of ancient times as far back as Moses and David (9:19-22) to describe each group’s homeland and rank.
9:1 The statement that all Israel was listed in the genealogical records reveals the crux of the Chronicler’s thought, that all Israel was represented by the community of Judea in the time of the Chronicler, which had continuity with Israel’s past. • The Book of the Kings of Israel is a source document that the authors of both Kings and Chronicles used but has now been lost (see also study note on 1 Kgs 14:19-20). • The people of Judah were exiled for unfaithfulness, as the other tribes had been (1 Chr 5:25-26; 6:15; see 2 Chr 36:20-21).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.