1Ch 2:3

Author’s Note: Verses 1 through 23 were studied in connection with chapter 2, which see.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES.] Obscurity often arising from brevity conspicuous in this passage. Yet we discern an order in it, indicated in first verse. It contains descendants of Shobal, Hur, Carmi, Hezron, and of Pharez. The section chiefly of local interest, intended to point out founders of some of the towns in the province of Judah [Murphy]. Reaiah conjectured to be same as Haroeh, 1Ch. 2:52.

1Ch. 4:3-4. Descendants of Hur. Father, i.e., joint founders of Etam, a town on rocky hills of Judah (Jdg. 15:8; 2Ch. 11:6). Gedor, now Jedur (Jos. 15:58). Hushak, of unknown site, but indication of the place (2Sa. 23:7; 1Ch. 11:29).

1Ch. 4:5-10.Descendants of Ashur (Carmi), posthumous son of Hezron by Abia, called father or chief of Tekoa; with two wives, three children to one, and four to the other. Jabez, 1Ch. 4:9, son or maternal kinsman of Ashur, who names the town (1Ch. 2:55).

1Ch. 4:11-15.Descendants of Hezron. Chelub, brother of Shuah, to distinguish him from others. The group in 1Ch. 4:11-12, unknown. In 1Ch. 4:13-15 return to names not quite strange. Even (and) Kenas, 1Ch. 4:15, translate as marg. Uknas, or suppose a name (Jehaleel) to have fallen out after Elah.

1Ch. 4:16-20.Descendants of Pharez. From 1Ch. 4:17-18, difficult to come to any conclusions. And these, an interesting phrase, indicative of sojourn of these persons in Egypt, when Israel was free, prosperous, and respected. It was then as becoming for a sovereign of Egypt to give a daughter in marriage to Mered, as at a later period a sister-in-law to Hadad. This Pharaoh may have been the last of the dynasty that preceded the eighteenth [cf. Murphy].

1Ch. 4:21-23.Descendants of Judah. We have been ascending from Shobal to Hur, to Carmi, to Hezron, to Pharez; now we rise to Judah himself. A list of descendants of his son Shelah hero given [cf. Murphy]. Linen, a staple commodity of Egypt. Ashbea, a descendant of Shelah, had a factory there. 1Ch. 4:23, last of Judah, and leave the tribe in obscurity. Some of these potters, and others gardeners.

1Ch. 4:24-43.The sons of Simeon. Classed with Judah, because possessions partly in their territory (Jos. 19:1). Differences of particulars in list occasioned by some having more than one name (cf. Gen. 46:10; Exo. 6:15, and Num. 26:12-13). 1Ch. 4:27, Shimei distinguished from his brethren by a large family. Progeny of Simeon here traced to settlement in Canaan. 1Ch. 4:28-33, His territory. Eighteen cities given in Jos. 19:2-7. Changes in name took place in time between Joshua and David. 1Ch. 4:34-38, Subsequent increase of certain families of Simeon; princes, 1Ch. 4:38. The number of names is thirteen, corresponding to number of cities in first list (1Ch. 4:28-31), so that it may be suspected that the princes mentioned were registered chiefs of those cities in time of Hezekiah (see 1Ch. 4:41) [Speak. Com.]. 1Ch. 4:39-40, the first migration. Valley into which mountain streams ran to fertilise the land, suitable for Simeonites, quiet and peaceable on account of seclusion and long undisturbed inhabitants. Ham, 1Ch. 4:40, on their way to Africa induced by fertility of soil and abundance of water. 1Ch. 4:41-43, further migrations. Days of Hez., hence date of Simeonite expedition, before captivity of ten tribes (2Ki. 18:8). Rest, 1Ch. 4:43, remnant left by Sauls great slaughter (1Sa. 15:7-8), and by David (2Sa. 8:12).

HOMILETICS

THE CHIEFS OF JUDAH.1Ch. 4:1-23

Judah the most famous and most important of all tribes. A tribe which survived other tribes, and whose register was specially cared for.

I. Posterity of Shobal (1Ch. 4:1-4). From these came the Zorathites (ch. 1Ch. 2:53).

II. Posterity of Ashur (1Ch. 4:5-10). Ashur, posthumous son of Hezron (ch. 1Ch. 2:24), whose mother was probably a daughter of Carmi. If so, he is grandson of Carmi, hence introduction of this name in 1Ch. 4:1.

III. Posterity of Chelub (1Ch. 4:11-20). Men of Rechah as inhabitants of an unknown place of that name.

IV. Posterity of Shelah (1Ch. 4:21-23). Shelah, son of Judah, a family ingenious and industrious above others. Honest labourers are the salt of society; the healthy, luxurious and dissolute, the idle and predatory would corrupt it.

1. Craftsmen (1Ch. 4:14). A wise arrangement that men should be fitted for different employments.

2. Weavers (1Ch. 4:21). This an ancient and skilful labour. Children excelled and became famous in their business. He that handleth a matter wisely shall find good.

3. Rulers in Moab (1Ch. 4:22). Entrusted with power for many generations. But this long ago (ancient things). A great change. Fathers had dominion then, posterity in servitude now!

4. Potters, and

5. Gardeners (1Ch. 4:23). With the king, on the kings property; or preferring to stay with him in Babylon rather than return to their own country. Unworthy the name of Israelites are those who dwell among plants and hedges rather than go to Canaan.

JABEZ THE HONOURED NAME.1Ch. 4:9

This a strange description in a catalogue of names. The man worthy of remembrance, an honoured name deserving attention.

I. The circumstances of his birth. Born in sorrow.

1. Sorrow the lot of all (Gen. 3:16). Man born to sorrow as sparks fly upward (Job. 14:1).

2. This, perhaps, special sorrow, which the mother wished to perpetuate in name. O.T. names significant of qualities and circumstances of life. Benjamin (Ben-oni), son of my sorrow, by Rachael; son of my right hand, by the father.

I do beseech you,

Chiefly that I might set it on my prayers,
What is your name? [Shakespeare].

II. The dignity of his Character. More honourable. Not a title of position or office as The Hon. and The Right Hon., &c.

1. Honourable in himself, literally a man of weight. Jews say, a famous doctor of the law who had disciples and founded a city which took his name (ch. 1Ch. 2:55). But honourable and upright in personal character and conduct. A man of prayer and fervent piety, whose name is held in everlasting remembrance.

2. More honourable than others. Some think he was exalted above them as judge, signalised in war, or gained larger estates than his brethren. Not richer in material wealth, but in moral worth; more dignified in private life, more distinguished in action and public philanthropy. The righteous is more excellent than his neighbour. Seek this honour of character and life, not worldly honour which decays like a flower, but honour from God, perpetual and true.

THE REMARKABLE PRAYER.1Ch. 4:10

Many things deserving attention, which make it a model of thoughtful, earnest, and successful prayer.

I. Its spiritual characteristics. Devotion an expression of spirit, not lips.

1. Its view of God. Right views of God essential. He that cometh to God must believe that he is, &c. Not Jehovah, the Almighty, Self-existent, and Eternal; but God of Israel, the covenant God who keeps his word and never forgets his people.

2. Its humble tone, a kind of vow. If thou wilt bless me, thou shalt have my heart and service (Jacob. Gen. 28:20), but without thee undone, &c.

3. Its earnest spirit. Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed. Language of ardent feeling and intense desire, becoming and needful. O God, let me not fall from earnestness. Grant me to hate every false way, cried Thomas Chalmers.

II. Its worthy object. Most personal and direct, straight as an arrow to the point.

1. For personal blessing. Bless me indeed. This the beginning, the most needful of all.

2. For successful undertaking. Enlarge my coast. Expulsion of Canaanites, or special effort in which he desired to succeed. All success from God. Pray when you enter life, start business, begin some fresh pursuit, take a journey, or enter a new residence.

3. For preservation from danger. Thine hand with me. His undertaking risky. He wanted something beside reputation, shields, and soldiers. Wealth, friendship, and human aid, nothing without God. Uphold me with thy right hand.

4. For deliverance from evil. Evil of sorrow implied in his name. Deeply impressed with his mothers conduct. Let it not be. Desired to be joy and help to parents, not a grief. Evil of sin generally. In remembrance of Achan, perhaps. Sin ever brings sorrow, keep me from evil. Deliver me from its guilt and consequences. Let sin have no dominion over me.

III. Its gracious answer. God granted him that which he requested. God preserved in danger, gave success in enterprise, delivered from grief and sin, and exalted him to honour and position. This to magnify his grace, encourage piety and prayer.

In all thou dost, first let thy prayers ascend,
And to the gods thy labours first commend;
From them implore success, and hope

A prosperous end. [W. Fleming].

JABEZ THE HONOURABLE

According to a worldly standard, this list includes more hon. names than that of Jabez. But in the estimation of heaven, the only reputation that will live must have connection with God. The words we specially emphasise are, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast! Some analogies suggested by the sea-coast may teach the following lessons.

I. An enlarged coast suggests an expanded horizon. Carnal sympathies and lack of faith limit to narrow visions of divine truths and holy revelations. Our spiritual relations determine whether soul vision commands outlook from a small bay, or toward broad ocean. To the mother of Jabez his entrance into the world was associated with some special suffering, and she named him sorrowful. Years rolled on, God by his prophet knighted him and pronounced him more honourable than his brethren. Even so now according to our faith will be the significance of our individual history. Let our vision be bounded by time and sense only, and life will be a baptism of grief. Let faith widen our coast, expand our horizon, and all along the coast the lamps of hope shall hang, and a more honourable name be gained than those who refuse the faith, which is the substance of things not seen, and by which the elders obtained a good report.

II. An enlarged coast suggests a broader surface. The glory of a coast is its wide sweep of the ocean. There go ships, whose massive keels skim the surface of the waters. There floods lift up their voice, whose swelling waves declare the fulness of its strength. Such in figure is the human soul when possessed and enlarged by the Spirit of God. What sublime possibilities of divine enlargement belong to the heart of man! Sin circumscribes, hems in, and we are straitened in ourselves. But the coast may be enlarged; hills of difficulty be removed, and mountains of unbelief levelled, until an expanded horizon sheds calm and enlivening radiance all around, and the renewed soul takes up the language of a renewed earth (Isa. 60:4-5).

III. An enlarged coast suggests a more extended pathway. Sometimes a narrow strip of land forms the only path when walking on the sea-coast. Then we are in danger of falling, slipping over a precipice; and but for a helping hand many would have thus perished. These words are singularly applicable. Similar are those of the Psalmist, Psa. 18:35-36; Psa. 119:32 (Pro. 4:12). This enlarged pathway will secure two things.

(1) Safety. Kept by the divine hand. No other power to keep. In the kings highway alone is security. This a way of holiness. A highway shall be there, it shall be called the way of holiness.

(2) Peace. Jabez not only desires safety, but prays that sin may not grieve him. This a fine test of sincerity of prayer and the cleanness of heart. What various motives, prompt obedience to divine laws! What a great gulph of moral disparity between the sayings, Sin hurts me physically, and sin grieves me spiritually! [The Study, 1874].

HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

1Ch. 4:10. The Mighty Hand. Available, ever ready, and always sufficient. A hand of universal control and perpetual activity. Gods right hand doeth valiantly.

1Ch. 4:13. Othniels adventure (cf. Jos. 15:15-16; Jdg. 1:12-13; Jdg. 3:9). The brave man waits not for numbers and applause. Enough for him to know the cause is just, that danger threatens, that action is required.

Where duty bids, he confidently steers,
Faces a thousand dangers at her call,
And, trusting in his God, surmounts them all.

1Ch. 4:18. The Egyptian convert. Thin passage records a very interesting fact, the marriage of an Egyptian princess to a descendant of Caleb.

1. The marriage must have taken place in the wilderness.
2. The barriers of a different national language and national religion kept the Hebrews separate from the Egyptians; but they did not wholly prevent intimacies, and even occasional intermarriages between private individuals of the two nations.
3. Ere such unions, however, could be sanctioned, the Egyptian party must have renounced idolatry, and this daughter of Pharaoh, as appears from her name, had become a convert to the worship of the God of Israel [Jamieson].

HOMILETICS

THE POSTERITY OF SIMEON.1Ch. 4:24-43

The sons of Simeon are classed with those of Judah, because their possession was partly taken out of the extensive territory of Judah (Jos. 19:1).

I. The cities they possessed. The same list given (Jos. 19:2-6) with a little difference in spelling; eighteen given. Virtue and self-control better than taking a city (Pro. 16:32).

II. The conquests they made. In the days of Hezekiah a generation animated to conquests.

1. Some took Gedor (1Ch. 4:39). A place in Arabia, the entrance of Gedor, inhabited by Hams posterity.

2. Others took Mount Seir (1Ch. 4:42). Smote the remnant of devoted Amalekites and possessed the country. The curse pronounced on Ham and Amalek, though dormant, was not dead. To Simeon the curse (Gen. 49:5-7) was a blessing, to the others a terrible reality.

III. The prosperity they enjoyed.

1. Increase of numbers. They increased wonderfully, but not like the children of Judah (1Ch. 4:27).

2. Enlargement of boundaries. In possession of limited area, they were forced to seek accommodation elsewhere. They established themselves in the fertile pastures of Gedor (Gerar), which soon proved inadequate, and a new colony settled on Mount Seir. They enjoyed a land of peace and plenty, numerous flocks and quiet habitations. Thank God for fixed homes, but ever guard against the perils of prosperity.

SURVEY OF THE GENEALOGY.1Ch. 4:1-43

I. How great the obscurity of most men! Not many known and prominent here. But obscurity hides not God. We are great if the world gains by our life and example.

II. What folly to seek place and power only here! From place we shall be ejected, and of power we shall be deprived. A family of princes were captives in exile (1Ch. 4:22). Where will ye leave your glory?

III. How needful to secure renown hereafter! Better to have names written in heaven than rolled in lists of honour and published in daily papers. Rejoice that your names are written in heaven, said the dying Haller, when friends congratulated him on the honour of receiving a visit from the Emperor Joseph II.

ORIGIN AND USE OF ARTS AND INVENTIONS.1Ch. 4:14; 1Ch. 4:21-23

I. Useful arts emanate from the wisdom and goodness of God. In early history man taught of God in special callings. Human inventions had no existence save in the purpose of God. Proof from reason and scripture. This also cometh from the Lord of Hosts, who is wonderful in counsel and excellent in working.

II. Useful arts are beneficial in their tendency. They mitigate human toil and alleviate suffering; prolong human life, increase sources of comfort, and secure universal peace.

III. Therefore all engaged in useful arts promote the welfare of society. It is better to excel in trade than to gain dominions of territory. In the construction of the tabernacle an illustration of this principle. Let us be among the willing-hearted and the wise-hearted, and contribute our share. Produce! produce! were it but the pitifullest infinitesimal fraction of a product, produce it in Gods name! Tis the utmost thou hast in thee: out with it, then [Carlyle].

HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

1Ch. 4:32. These cities unto reign of David. In consequence of the sloth or cowardice of the Simeonites, some of the cities within their allotted territory were only nominally theirs, but were never taken from the Philistines until Davids time, when the Simeonites having forfeited all claim to them, he assigned them to his own tribe of Judah [Jamieson]. Hence danger of delay.

1Ch. 4:33. Habitations and genealogy; or Homes and Registers.

1Ch. 4:38. Princes in Families. Thirteen names corresponding with number of cities in first list (1Ch. 4:28-31), so that the princes mentioned were registered chiefs of those cities in the time of Hezekiah (see 1Ch. 4:41) [Speak. Com.].

1. Families and kingdoms of divine appointment.
2. Rulers of families and kingdoms represented God and order, justice and truth.
3. Hence subjection needful for order, happiness, and success.

1Ch. 4:40. Fat pastures.

1. Prepared by God, natural formation.
2. Discovered by Gods direction. They found, did not create. Application in comfortable homes, favourable situations and spiritual refreshment.

1Ch. 4:43. Doom of Amalek. Sin not forgotten, judgment not neglected nor fails in execution. Curses may be dormant but not dead. Preservation from the sword of Joshua (Exo. 17:13), of Saul (1Sa. 15:7), and of David (2Sa. 8:12) was but a reservation to this utter destruction, which God had solemnly sworn, with hand laid upon his own throne (Exo. 17:16) [Trapp].

1Ch. 4:39-43. A fragment of famous history. Learn from this chronicle of events

1. Expedition first, under thirteen leaders, with many followers, against Hamites and Mehurrim.

2. Expedition second, smaller, but more adventurous. Under four chiefs, a band of 500 smote powerful enemies and possessed their quarters. Be valiant for God spiritually.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 4

1Ch. 4:9. Honourable. Virtue and honour are such inseparable companions that the heathens would admit no man into the temple of honour who did not pass through the temple of virtue.

If it be of a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive

[Shakespeare].

1Ch. 4:10. Evil. The greatest evil is sin.

1. In the nature of it, as being contrary to the greatest good, even God.
2. In the effect and consequences of it here and hereafter.
3. Therefore to pray against sin is to pray against all other evils whatever; for the devil, the evil one, cannot hurt us but by sin [Bishop Hopkins].

Be with me. Ora et labora is the legend of the Christians faith, and the plan of his life. His fervent prayer begets honest, manly, unshrinking work; his work as it is faithful and it is faithful in proportion as he realises it is for God, throws him back upon prayer [Stevenson].

1Ch. 4:14; 1Ch. 4:21; 1Ch. 4:23. Craftsmen, potters, &c. If all men affected one and the same trade of life or pleasure of recreation, it were not possible they could live one by another; neither could there be any use of commerce, whereby life is maintained. It is good reason we should make a right use of this gracious dispensation of the Almighty, that we should improve our several dispositions and faculties to the advancing of the common stock, and that we should neither encroach upon each others profession nor be apt to censure each others recreation [Bishop Hall].

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

LESSON TWO 46

I. GENEALOGIES FROM ADAM TO DAVID (1Ch. 1:1 to 1Ch. 9:44)

3. THE DESCENDANTS OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH (1Ch. 2:1-55, 1Ch. 4:23)

INTRODUCTION

The sons of Judah were mothered by Canaanite women, however, Perez was destined to be very important in Gods plans. Several familiar names appear in chapters 46. The families of the Levites were to have their inheritance in the land of Palestine.

TEXT

1Ch. 2:1. These are the sons of Israel: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, 2. Dan, Joseph, and Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. 3. The sons of Judah: Er, and Onan, and Shelah; which three were born unto him of Shuas daughter the Canaanitess. And Er, Judahs first-born, was wicked in the sight of Jehovah; and he slew him. 4. And Tamar his daughter-in-law bare him Perez and Zerah. All the sons of Judah were five.

5. The sons of Perez: Hezron, and Hamul. 6. And the sons of Zerah: Zimri, and Ehan, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara; five of them in all. 7. And the sons of Carmi: Achar, the troubler of Israel, who committed a trespass in the devoted thing. 8. And the sons of Ethan: Azariah.
9. The sons also of Hezron, that were born unto him: Jerahmeel, and Ram, and Chelubai. 10. And Ram begat Amminadab, and Amminadab begat Nahshon, prince of the children of Judah: 11. and Nahshon begat Salma, and Salma begat Boaz. 12. and Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse; 13. and Jesse begat his first-born Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimea the third, 14. Nethanel the fourth, Raddai, the fifth, 15. Ozem the sixth, David the seventh; 16. and their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah: Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three. 17. And Abigail bare Amasa: and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite.
And Caleb the son of Hezron begat children of Azubah his wife, and of Jerioth; and these were her sons: Jesher, and Shobab, and Ardon. 19. And Azubah died, and Caleb took unto him Ephrath, who bare him Hur. 20. And Hur begat Uri, and Uri begat Bezalel. 21. And afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir the father of Gilead, whom he took to wife when he was threescore years old; and she bare him Segub. 22. And Segub begat Jair, who had three and twenty cities in the land of Gilead. 23. And Geshur and Aram took the towns of Jair from them, with Kenath, and the villages thereof, even threescore cities. All these were the sons of Machir the father of Gilead. 24. And after that Hezron was dead in Caleb-ephrathah, then Abijah Hezrons wife bare him Ashhur the father of Tekoa.
25. Add the sons of Jerahmeel the first-born of Hezron were Ram the first-born, and Bunah, and Oren, and Ozem, Ahijah. 26. And Jerahmeel had another wife, whose name was Atarah; she was the mother of Onam. 27. And the sons of Ram the first-born of Jerahmeel were Maaz, and Jamin, and Eker. 28. And the sons of Onam were Shammai, and Jada. And the sons of Shammai: Nadab, and Abishur. 29. And the name of the wife of Abishur was Abihail; and she bare him Ahban, and Molid. 30. And the sons of Nadab: Seled, and Appaim; but Seled died without children. 31. And the sons of Appaim: Ishi. And the sons of Ishi: Sheshan. And the sons of Sheshan: Ahlai. 32. And the sons of Jada the brother of Shammai: Jether, and Jonathan; and Jether died without children. 33. And the sons of Jonathan: Peleth, and Zaza. These were the sons of Jerahmeel. 34. Now Sheshan had no sons, but daughters. And Sheshan had a servant, an Egyptian, whose name was Jarha. 35. And Sheshan gave his daughter to Jarha his servant to wife; and she bare him Attai. 36. And Attai begat Nathan, and Nathan begat Zabad, 37. and Zabad begat Ephlal, and Ephlal begat Obed, 38. and Obed begat Jehu, and Jehu begat Azariah, 39. and Azariah begat Helez, and Helez begat Eleasah, 40. and Eleasah begat Sismai, and Sismai begat Shallum, 41. and Shallum begat Jekamiah, and Jekamiah begat Elishama.
And the sons of Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel were Mesha his first-born, who was the father of Ziph; and the sons of Mareshah the father of Hebron. 43. And the sons of Hebron: Korah, and Tappuah, and Rekem, and Shema. 44. And Shema begat Raham, the father of Jorkeam; and Rekem begat Shammai. 45. And the son of Shammai was Maon; and Maon was the father of Beth-zur. 46. And Ephah, Calebs concubine, bare Haran, and Moza, and Gazez; and Haran begat Gazez. 47. And the sons of Jahdai: Regem, and Jothan, Geshan, and Pelet, and Ephah, and Shaaph. 48. Maacah, Calebs concubine, bare Sheber and Tirhanah. 49. She bare also Shaaph the father of Madmannah, Sheva the father of Machbena, and the father of Gibea; and the daughter of Caleb was Achsah.
50. These were the sons of Caleb, the son of Hur, the first-born of Ephrathah: Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim, 51. Salma the father of Beth-lehem, Hareph the father of Beth-gader. 52. And Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim had sons: Haroeh, half of the Menuhoth. 53. And the families of Kiriath-jearim: the Ithrites, and the Puthites, and the Shumathites, and the Mishraites; of them came the Zorathites and the Eshtaolites. 54. The sons of Salma: Beth-lehem, and the Netophathites, Atroth-beth-joab, and half of the Manahathites, the Zorites. 55. And the families of scribes that dwelt at Jabez: the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, the Sucathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hammath, the father of the house of Rechab.

1Ch. 3:1. Now these were the sons of David, that were born unto him in Hebron: the first-born, Amnon, of Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; the second, Daniel, of Abigail the Carmelitess; 2. the third, Absalom the son of Maacah the daughter of Talmai king of Geshur; the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith; 3. the fifth, Shephatiah of Abital; the sixth, Ithream by Eglah his wife: 4. six were born unto him in Hebron; and there he reigned seven years and six months. And in Jerusalem he reigned thirty and three years; 5. and these were born unto him in Jerusalem: Shimea, and Shobab, and Nathan, and Solomon, four, of Bath-shua the daughter of Ammiel; 6. and Ibhar, and Elishama, and Eliphelet, 7. and Negah, and Nepheg, and Japhia, 8. and Elishama, and Eliada, and Eliphelet, nine. 9. All these were the sons of David, besides the sons of the concubines; and Tamar was their sister.

10. And Solomons son was Rehoboam, Abijah his son, Asa his son, Jehoshaphat his son, 11. Joram his sons, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, 12. Amaziah his son, Azariah his son, Jotham his son, 13. Ahaz his son, Hezekiah his son, Manasseh his son, 14. Amon his son, Josiah his son. 15. And the sons of Josiah: the first-born Johanan, the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum. 16, And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son. 17. And the sons of Jeconiah, the captive: Shealtiel his son, 18. and Malchiram, and Pedaiah, and Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama, and Nedabiah. 19. And the sons of Pedaiah: Zerubbabel, and Shimei. And the sons of Zerubbabel: Meshullam, and Hananiah; and Shelomith was their sister; 20. and Hashubah, and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasadiah, Jushab-hesed, five. 21. And the sons of Hananiah: Pelatiah, and Jeshaiah; the sons of Rephaiah, the sons of Arnan, the sons of Obadiah, the sons of Shecaniah. 22. And the sons of Shecaniah: Shemaiah. And the sons of Shemaiah: Hattush, and Igal, and Bariah, and Neariah, and Shaphat, six. 23. And the sons of Neariah: Elioenai, and Hizkiah, and Azrikam, three. 24. And the sons of Elioenai: Hodaviah, and Eliashib, and Pelaiah, and Akkub, and Johanan, and Delaiah, and Anani, seven.

1Ch. 4:1. The sons of Jusah: Perez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal. 2. And Reaiah the son of Shobal begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai and Lahad. These are the families of the Zorathites. 3. And these were the sons of the father of Etam: Jezreel, and Ishma, and Idbash; and the name of their sister was Hazzelelponi; 4. and Penuel the father of Gedor, and Ezer the father of Hushah. These are the sons of Hur, the first-born of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem. 5. And Ashhur the father of Tekoa had two wives, Helah and Naarah. 6. And Naarah bare him Ahuzzam, and Hepher, and Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah. 7. And the sons of Helah were Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan. 8. And Hakkoz begat Anub, and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel the son of Harum. 9. And Jabez was more honorable than his brethren: and his mother called his name Jabez, saying Because I bare him with sorrow. 10. And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my border, and that thy hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it be not to my sorrow! And God granted him that which he requested. 11. And Chelub, the brother of Shuhah begat Mehir, who was the father of Eshton. 12. And Eshton begat Beth-rapha, and Paseah, and Tehinnah the father of Irnahash. These are the men of Recah. 13. And the sons of Kenaz: Othniel, and Seraiah. And the sons of Othniel; Hathath. 14. And Meonothai begat Ophrah: and Seraiah begat Joab the father of Ge-harashim; for they were craftsmen. 15. And the sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the sons of Elah; and Kenaz. 16. And the sons of Jehallelel: Ziph, and Ziphah, Tiria, and Asarel. 17. And the sons of Ezrah: Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she bare Miriam, and Shammai, and Ishbah the father of Eshtemoa. 18. And his wife the Jewess bare Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah. And these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took. 19. And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, were the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maacathite. 20. And the sons of Shimon: Amnon, and Rinnan, Benhanan, and Tilon. And the sons of Ishi: Zoheth, and Ben-zoheth. 21. The sons of Shelah the son of Judah; Er the father of Lecah, and Laadah the father of Mareshah, and the families of the house of them that wrought fine linen, of the house of Ashbea; 22. and Jokjm, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who had dominion in Moab, and Jashubi-lehem. And the records are ancient. 23. These were the potters, and the inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah: there they dwelt with the king for his work.

PARAPHRASE

1Ch. 2:1. The sons of Israel were: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, Joseph, Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, Asher. 3. Judah had three sons by Bath-shua, a girl from Canaan: Er, Onan, and Shelah. But the oldest son, Er, was so wicked that the Lord killed him. 4. Then Ers widow, Tamar, and her father-in-law, Judah, became the parents of twin sons, Perez and Zerah. So Judah had five sons.

5. The sons of Perez were Hezron and Hamuel. 6. The sons of Zerah were: Zimri, Ethan, Heman, Calcol, and Dara. 7. (Achan, the son of Carmi, was the man who robbed God and was such a troublemaker for his nation.) 8. Ethans son was Azariah.
9. The sons of Hezron were Jerahmeel, Ram, and Chelubai. 10. Ram was the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab was the father of Nahshon, a leader of Israel. 11. Nahshon was the father of Salma, and Salma was the father of Boaz. 12. Boaz was the father of Obed, and Obed was the father of Jesse. 13. Jesses first son was Eliab, his second was Abinadab, his third was Shimea, his fourth was Nethanel, his fifth was Raddai, his sixth was Ozem, and his seventh was David. He also had two girls (by the same wife) named Zeruiah and Abigail. Zeruiahs sons were Abishai, Joab, and Asahel. 17. Abigail, whose husband was Jether from the land of Ishmael, had a son named Amasa.
18. Caleb (the sons of Hezron) had two wives, Azubah and Jerioth. These are the children of Azubah: Jesher, Shobab, and Ardon. 19. After Azubahs death, Caleb married Ephrath, who presented him with a son, Hur. 20. Hurs son was Uri, and Uris son was Bezalel. 21. Hezron married Machirs daughter at the age of sixty, and she presented him with a son Segub (Machir was also the father of Gilead.) 22. Segub was the father of Jair, who ruled twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. 23. But Geshur and Aram wrested these cities from him and also took Kenath and its sixty surrounding villages. 24. Soon after his father Hezrons death, Caleb married Ephrathah, his fathers widow, and she gave birth to Ashhur, the father of Tekoa.
25. These are the sons of Jerahmeel (the oldest son of Hezron): Ram (the oldest), Bunah, Oren, Ozem, and Ahijah. 26. Jerahmeels second wife Atarah was the mother of Onam. 27. The sons of Ram: Maaz, Jamin, and Eker. 28. Onams sons were Shammai and Jada. Shammais sons were Nadab and Abishur. 29. The sons of Abishur and his wife Abihail were Ahban and Molid. 30. Nadabs sons were Seled and Appa-im. Seled died without children, but Appa-im had a son named Ishi; Ishis son was Sheshan; and Sheshans son was Ahlai. 32. Shammais brother Jada had two sons, Jether and Jonathan. Jether died without children, but Jonathan had two sons named Peleth and Zaza. 34, 35. Sheshan had no sons, although he had several daughters. He gave one of his daughters to be the wife of Jarha, his Egyptian servant. And they had a son whom they named Attai. 36. Attais son was Nathan; Nathans son was Zabad; Zabads son was Ephlal; Ephlals son was Obed; 38. Obeds son was Jehu; Jehus son was Azariah; 39. Azariahs son was Helez; Helezs son was Ele-asah; 40. Ele-asahs son was Sismai; Sismais son was Shellum; 41. Shallums son was Jekamiah; Jekamiahs son was Elishama.
42. The oldest son of Caleb (Jerahmeels brother) was Mesha; he was the father of Ziph, who was father of Mareshah, who was the father of Hebron. 43. The sons of Hebron: Korah, Tappuah, Rekem, and Shema. 44. Shema was the father of Raham, who was the father of Jorke-am. Rekem was the father of Shammai. 45. Shammais son was Maon, the father of Bethzur, 46. Calebs concubine Ephah bore him Haran, Moza, and Gazez; Haran had a son named Gazez. 47. The sons of Jahdai: Regem, Jotham, Geshan, Pelet, Ephah, and Shaaph. 48, 49. Another of Calebs concubines, Maacah, bore him Sheber, Tirhanah, Shaaph (the father of Madmannah), and Sheva (the father of Machbenah and of Gibe-a). Caleb also had a daughter, whose name was Achsah.
50. The sons of Hur (who was the oldest son of Caleb and Ephrathah) were Shobal (the father of Kiriath-jearim), 51. Salma (the father of Bethlehem), and Hareph (the father of Beth-gader). 52. Shobals sons included Kiriath-jearim and Haroeh, the ancestor of half of the Menuhoth tribe. 53. The families of Kiriath-jearim were the Ithrites, the Puthites, the Shumathites, and the Mishraites (from whom descended the Zorathites and Eshtaolites). 54. The descendants of Salma were his son Bethlehem, the Netophathites, Atrothbeth-joab, half the Manahathites, and the Zorites; 55. they also included the families of the writers living at Jabezthe Tirathites, Shimeathites, and Sucathites. All these are Kenites who descended from Hammath, the founder of the family of Rechab.

1Ch. 3:1. King David oldest son was Amnon, who was born to his wife, Ahino-am of Jezreel. The second was Daniel, whose mother was Abigail from Carmel. 2. The third was Absalom, the sons of his wife Maacah, who was the daughter of King Talmai of Geshur. The fourth was Adonijah, the son of Haggith. 3. The fifth was Shephatiah, the son of Abital. The sixth was Ithream, the son of his wife Eglah. 4. These six were born to him in Hebron, where he reigned seven and one-half years. Then he moved the capital to Jerusalem, where he reigned another thirty-three years. 5. While he was in Jerusalem, his wife Bathsheba (the daughter of Ammi-el) became the mother of his sons Shime-a, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon. 68. David also had nine other sons: Ibhar, Elishama, Eliphelet, Nogah, Nepheg, Japhia, Elishama, Eliada, and Eliphelet. 9. (This list does not include the sons of his concubines.) David also had a daughter Tamar.

1014. These are the descendants of King Solomon: Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Joram, Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, Azariah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah. 15. The sons of Josiah were: Johanan, Jehoiakim, Zedekiah, Shallum. 16. The sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah, Zedekiah. 1718. These are the sons who were born to King Jeconiah during the years that he was under house arrest: She-altiel, Malchiram, Pedaiah, Shenazzar, Jekamiah, Hoshama, Nedabiah. 1920. Pedaiah was the father of Zerubbabel and Shime-i. Zerubbabels children were: Meshullam, Hananiah, Hashubah, Ohel, Berechiah, Hasadiah, Jushab-hesed, Shelomith (a daughter). 2122. Hananiahs sons were Pelatiah and jeshaiah; Jeshaiahs son was Rephaiah; Rephaiahs son was Arnan; Arnans son was Obadiah; Obadiahs son was Shecaniah. Shecaniahs son was Shemaiah; Shemaiah had six sons, including Hattush, Igal, Bariah, Neariah, and Shaphat. 23. Neariah had three sons: Eli-o-enai, Hizkiah, Azrikam. 24. Eli-o-enai had seven sons: Hodaviah, Eliashib, Pelaiah, Akkub, Johanan, Delaiah, Anani.

1Ch. 4:1. These are the sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, Carmi, Hur, Shobal. 2. Shobals son Re-aiah was the father of Jahath, the ancestor of Ahumai and Lahad. These were known as the Zorathite clans. 34. The descendants of Etam: Jezreel, Ishma, Idbash, Hazzelelponi (his daughter), Penuel (the ancestor of Gedor), Ezer (the ancestor of Hushah), The son of Hur, the oldest son of Ephrathah, who was the father of Bethlehem. 5. Ashhur, the father of Tekoa, had two wives-Helah, and Naarah. 6. Naarah bore him Ahuzzam, Nepher, Temeni, and Haahashtari; and Helah bore him Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan. 8. Koz was the father of Anub and Zobebah; he was also the ancestor of the clan named after Aharhel, the son of Harum. 9. Jabez was more distinguished than any of his brothers. His mother named him Jabez because she had such a hard time at his birth (Jabez means Distress). 10. He was the one who prayed to the God of Israel, Oh, that you would wonderfully bless me and help me in my work; please be with me in all that I do, and keep me from all evil and disaster! And God granted him his request. ll, 12. The descendants of Recah were: Chelub (the brother of Shuhah), whose son was Mahir, the father of Eshton; Eshton was the father of Bethrapha, Paseah, and Tehinnah; Tehinnah was the father of Irnahash. 13. The sons of Kenaz were Othni-el and Seraiah. Othni-els sons were Hathath and Meonothai; 14. Meonothai was the father of Ophrah; Seraiah was the father of Joab, the ancestor of the inhabitants of Craftsman Valley (called that because many craftsmen lived there). 15. The sons of Caleb (the son of Jephunneh): Iru, Elah, Naam. The sons of Elah included Kenaz. 16. Jehallelels sons were: Ziph, Ziphah, Tiri-a, Asarel. 17. Ezrahs sons were: Jether, Mered, Epher, Jalon. Mered married Bithi-ah, an Egyptian princess. She was the mother of Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbahan ancestor of Eshtemoa. 18. Eshtemoas wife was a Jewess; she was the mother of Jered, Heber, and Jekuthiel, who were, respectively, the ancestors of the Gedorites, Socoites, and Zanoahites. 19. Hodiahs wife was the sister of Naham. One of her sons was the father of Keilah the Garmite, and another was the father of Eshtemoa the Maacathite. 20. The sons of Shimon: Amnon, Rinnah, Ben-hanan, Tilon. The sons of Ishi: Zoheth, Ben-zoheth. 2122. The sons of Shelah (the son of Judah): Er (the father of Lecah), Laadah (the father of Nareshah), the families of the linen workers who worked at Beth-ashbea, Jokim, the clans of Cozeba, Joash, Saraph (who was a ruler in Moab before he returned to Lehem). These names all come from very ancient records. 23. These clans were noted for their pottery, gardening, and planting; they all worked for the king:

26. Mishmas sons included Hammu-el (the father of Zaccur and grandfather of Shime-i). 27. Shime-i had sixteen sons and six daughters, but none of his brothers had large familiesthey all had fewer children than was normal in Judah. 28. They lived at Beer-sheba, Moladah, Hazar-shual, 29. Bilhah, Ezem, Tolad, 30. Bethuel, Hormah, Ziklag, 31. Bethmar-caboth, Hazar-susim, Beth-biri, and Sha-araim. These cities were under their control until the time of David. 3233. Their descendants also lived in or near Etam, Ain, Rimmon, Tochen, and Ashan; some were as far away as Baal. (These facts are recorded in their genealogies.) 3439. These are the names of some of the princes of wealthy clans who traveled to the east side of Gedor Valley in search of pasture for their flocks: Meshobab, Jamlech, Joshah, Joel, Jehu, Eli-o-enai, Ja-akobah, Jeshohaiah, Asaiah, Adi-el, Jesimi-el, Benaiah, Ziza (the son of Shiphi, son of Allon, son of Jedaiah, son of Shimri, son of Shemaiah).

COMMENTARY

This account of the descendants of the tribe of Judah began in chapter 2 and continues through 1Ch. 4:23. Judahs descendants through Perez are listed in 1Ch. 4:1-23. Judah was the father of five sons. His son, Perez, was the one through whom the line of David passed. 1Ch. 4:1 lists five generations beginning with Perez. Many of these names in 1Ch. 2:1-23 are not mentioned elsewhere. Hur had been named in 1Ch. 2:19-20. There was a village in the tribe of Judah called Tekoa. This name appears in the genealogical table (1Ch. 2:5). Jabez is given some special attention (1Ch. 2:9-10). The experience of sorrow was associated with his birth. He did not want to lead a sorrowful life so he walked with God and he was kept from evil. Buried here in an ancient family record is the affirmation that any person who will trust God can master circumstances which otherwise would defeat him. Othniel (1Ch. 2:13) was Calebs nephew and Israels judge in delivering his people from Cushan-rishathaim and the Mesopotamians (Jdg. 3:9-10). Caleb (1Ch. 2:15) is well known to us. In the hill country of Judah there was a village named Eshtemoh (Jos. 15:50). This name is very similar to the Eshtemoa of 1Ch. 2:17. The names of Miriam and Shammai are familiar Hebrew names. This Miriam is not to be confused with Moses sister. A certain wOrnan (1Ch. 2:18) is called the Jewess. This is most likely nothing more than a translation of the proper name Hajehudijah. Another connection with Egypt is reflected in the reference to Bithiah, Pharaohs daughter, who became wife to Mered. Amnon (1Ch. 2:20) must be distinguished from Davids son by the same name. A brief reference is made to Shelahs sons in 1Ch. 2:21-23. There were among these people some highly skilled craftsmen in the manufacture of fine linen and pottery.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(1) The sons of Judah.Pharez only of these five was literally a son of Judah, 1Ch. 2:3-4. We have, however, seen that all these names, with the possible exception of Carmi, represent great tribal divisions or clans; and as such they are called sons of Judah. For Carmi it is proposed to read the more famous name of Chelubai (1Ch. 2:9). This would give a line of direct descendants from Judah to the fifth generation, according to the genealogical presentation of 1Ch. 2:4; 1Ch. 2:9; 1Ch. 2:18-19. But the result thus obtained is of no special value. It has no bearing on the remainder of the section. Moreover, Carmi is mentioned (1Ch. 2:7) among the great Judean houses, and might have been prominent in numbers and influence at the unknown period when the original of the present list was drafted.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

1Ch 4:1  The sons of Judah; Pharez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal.

1Ch 4:1 “The sons of Judah” – Comments – Comments – From 2Ch 2:3-4, the author explains that Judah had five sons, Er, Onan, Shelah and Pharez and Zerah. Therefore, the phrase in 1Ch 4:1, “sons of Judah,” is referring to the posterity of Judah in the line of Pharez . Pharez begat Hezron; Hezron begat Carmi (Chelubai or Caleb); Caleb begat Hur; Hur begat Caleb; Caleb begat Shobal.

1Ch 4:1 “Pharez” Comments – The Hebrew name “Pharez” ( ) (H6557) is also spelled Perez, or Phares in the KJV. He is the son of Judah (1Ch 2:4).

1Ch 2:4, “And Tamar his daughter in law bare him Pharez and Zerah. All the sons of Judah were five.”

1Ch 4:1 “Hezron” Comments – The Hebrew name “Hezron” ( ) (H2696) refers to the son of Pharez (1Ch 2:5).

1Ch 2:5, “The sons of Pharez; Hezron , and Hamul.”

1Ch 4:1 Word Study on “Carmi” Strong says the Hebrew name “Carmi” ( ) (H3756) means “gardener.” Scholars believe that Carmi is also called both Chelubai and Caleb. Since it was Caleb that begat Hur, Carmi must also be Caleb, who is in the lineage of Judah. The Scriptural evidence for this conclusion is:

1. Because Chelubai was the son of Hezron (1Ch 2:9).

1Ch 2:9, “The sons also of Hezron, that were born unto him; Jerahmeel, and Ram, and Chelubai .”

2. Because Caleb was the son of Hezron (1Ch 2:18).

1Ch 2:18, “And Caleb the son of Hezron begat children of Azubah his wife, and of Jerioth: her sons are these; Jesher, and Shobab, and Ardon.”

3. Because Caleb was the brother of Jerahmeel (1Ch 2:42).

1Ch 2:42, “Now the sons of Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel were, Mesha his firstborn, which was the father of Ziph; and the sons of Mareshah the father of Hebron.”

1Ch 4:1 “Hur” Comments – The Hebrew name “Hur” ( ) (H2354) refers to the son of Caleb (1Ch 2:19).

1Ch 2:19, “And when Azubah was dead, Caleb took unto him Ephrath, which bare him Hur .”

1Ch 4:1 “Shobal” Comments – The Hebrew name “Shobal” ( ) (H7732) refers to the son of the second Caleb, who was the son of Hur (1Ch 2:50).

1Ch 2:50, “These were the sons of Caleb the son of Hur, the firstborn of Ephratah; Shobal the father of Kirjathjearim,”

1Ch 4:2  And Reaiah the son of Shobal begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai, and Lahad. These are the families of the Zorathites.

1Ch 4:2 “Reaiah” – Comments – Reaiah is the same individual as Haroeh (1Ch 2:52).

1Ch 2:52, “And Shobal the father of Kirjathjearim had sons; Haroeh , and half of the Manahethites.”

1Ch 4:2 “ These are the families of the Zorathites” Scripture References – Note:

Jos 15:33, “And in the valley, Eshtaol, and Zoreah , and Ashnah,”

Jdg 13:25, “And the Spirit of the LORD began to move him at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol.”

1Ch 2:53-54, “And the families of Kirjathjearim; the Ithrites, and the Puhites, and the Shumathites, and the Mishraites; of them came the Zareathites, and the Eshtaulites. The sons of Salma; Bethlehem, and the Netophathites, Ataroth, the house of Joab, and half of the Manahethites, the Zorites .”

1Ch 4:3  And these were of the father of Etam; Jezreel, and Ishma, and Idbash: and the name of their sister was Hazelelponi:

1Ch 4:3 “Etam” – Comments – Etam was a place located in Judah (2Ch 11:10), not far from Zorah (Jdg 15:8).

2Ch 11:10, “And Zorah, and Aijalon, and Hebron, which are in Judah and in Benjamin fenced cities.”

Jdg 15:8, “And he smote them hip and thigh with a great slaughter: and he went down and dwelt in the top of the rock Etam.”

1Ch 4:3 “the name of their sister was Hazelelponi” – Comments – John Gill believes Hazelelponi was p erhaps a lady of great importance in those days, although now unknown. He cites evidence by saying the Jewish chronologer Juchasin tells us the mother of Samson was Hazalelponith, of the tribe of Judah. [22]

[22] John Gill, 1 Chronicles, in John Gill’s Expositor, in e-Sword, v. 7.7.7 [CD-ROM] (Franklin, Tennessee: e-Sword, 2000-2005), comments on 1 Chronicles 4:6.

1Ch 4:6  And Naarah bare him Ahuzam, and Hepher, and Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah.

1Ch 4:6 Comments – There is no other account in Scriptures of these names.

1Ch 4:7  And the sons of Helah were, Zereth, and Jezoar, and Ethnan.

1Ch 4:7 Comments – There is no other account in Scriptures of these names.

1Ch 4:9  And Jabez was more honourable than his brethren: and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow.

1Ch 4:9 “Jabez” Comments – PTW says the Hebrew name “Jabez” means, “sorrow.”

1Ch 4:9 “And Jabez was more honourable than his brethren” Comments – John Gill cites the Targum saying, “and wiser in the law than his brethren;” [23] Therefore, JFB says t he Jewish writers say that he was a well-known doctor in the law, whose reputation drew so many scribes around him that a town was called by his name (1Ch 2:55). It was to the city of Jabez the scribes sought, perhaps to learn under the skills of Jabez. [24]

[23] John Gill, 1 Chronicles, in John Gill’s Expositor, in e-Sword, v. 7.7.7 [CD-ROM] (Franklin, Tennessee: e-Sword, 2000-2005), comments on 1 Chronicles 4:9.

[24] Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, 1 Corinthians, in Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, Electronic Database (Seattle, WA: Hendrickson Publishers Inc., 1997), in P.C. Study Bible, v. 3.1 [CD-ROM] (Seattle, WA: Biblesoft Inc., 1993-2000), notes on 1 Chronicles 4:9.

1Ch 2:55, “And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez ; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.”

1Ch 4:10  And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that thine hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! And God granted him that which he requested.

1Ch 4:10 “Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed” Comments – As a child of Abraham, this was according to God’s will (Gen 12:2). Jacob wrestled with an angel all night for a blessing (Gen 32:26).

Gen 12:2, “And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:”

Gen 32:26, “And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.”

1Ch 4:10 “and enlarge my coast” – Comments – A greater inheritance of land.

1Ch 4:10 “and that thine hand might be with me” – Comments – For God’s presence and strength and protection.

1Ch 4:10 “and that thou wouldest keep me from evil” Comments – From the terrible curse and destruction of Satan.

1Ch 4:10 “that it may not grieve me” – Comments – We see here an illusion to the meaning of Jabez’ name, which means “sorrow.” ( PTW) Jabez prays that he may be delivered from the punishment of his name and from his sins that warrant that punishment.

Oh, that terrible grief that comes from sinning. For example, Peter wept after denying Jesus Christ three times (Mat 26:75, Joh 21:17, 2Co 2:7). Also, there is grief that comes from God’s rebuke and chastisement (Rev 3:19).

Mat 26:75, “And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.”

Joh 21:17, “He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.”

2Co 2:7, “So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.”

Rev 3:19, “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Genealogy of the Twelve Sons of Israel 1 Chronicles 4-8 gives a brief chronology of the twelve sons of Israel. However, there appears to be no certain order in listing these twelve children of Jacob, although a reference is made to Reuben’s genealogy being listed out of the order of birthright (1Ch 5:1).

1Ch 5:1, “Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (for he was the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel: and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright .”

The genealogies are listed in the following order:

Judah 1Ch 4:1-23

Simeon 1Ch 4:24-43

Reuben 1Ch 5:1-10

Gad 1Ch 5:11-22

Manasseh (east) 1Ch 5:23-26

Levi 1Ch 6:1-81

Issachar 1Ch 7:1-5

Benjamin 1Ch 7:6-12

Naphtali 1Ch 7:13

Manasseh (west) 1Ch 7:14-19

Ephraim 1Ch 7:20-28

Asher 1Ch 7:30-40

Note that the tribes of Dan and Zebulun are not listed in these chapters.

If we compare the order of their births, we find that these genealogies in 1 Chronicles were not listed by order of birth:

1. Leah Reuben

2. Leah Simeon

3. Leah Levi

4. Leah Judah

5. Bilhah Dan

6. Bilhah Naphtali

7. Zilpah Gad

8. Zilpah Asher

9. Leah Issachar

10. Leah Zebulun

11. Rachel Joseph (Manasseh and Ephraim)

12. Rachel Benjamin

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Posterity of Judah

v. 1. The sons, the principal descendants, of Judah, in a direct descending line: Pharez, Hezron, and Carmi (or Ohelubai, or Caleb), and Hur, and Shobal. Cf 1Ch 2:3-5; 1Ch 2:18; 1Ch 2:20-50.

v. 2. And Beaiah (or Haroeh), the son of Shobal, to whom the genealogical table had progressed in 1Ch 2:52, begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai and Lahad. These are the families of the Zorathites, those inhabiting the town of Zorah, 1Ch 2:50-53.

v. 3. And these were of the father of Etam: Jezreel, probably the founder of that mountain city in Judah, and Ishma, and Idbash; and the name of their sister was Hazelel-poni;

v. 4. and Penuel, the father of Gedor, who also founded a town of his name in the tribe of Judah, Jos 15:58, and Ezer, the father of Hushah, founded by him some time after the conquest. These are the sons of Hur, the first-born of Ephratah, the father of Bethlehem.

v. 5. And Ashur, the father, that is, the founder, of Tekoa, 1Ch 2:24, had two wives, Helah and Naarah.

v. 6. And Naarah bare him Ahuzam, and Hepher, from whom the district Hepher in the southern part of Judah probably received its name, 1Ki 4:10, and Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons. of Naarah.

v. 7. And the sons of Helah, named here in the second place, although first above, were Zereth, and Jezoar, and Ethnan.

v. 8. And Coz begat Anub, and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel, the son of Harum, the reason for this reference to the Levitical family at this point being unknown, 1Ch 24:10.

v. 9. And Jabez, whose city is mentioned 1Ch 2:55, was more honorable than His brethren, distinguished for his sincere and fervent piety as well as for his learning; and his mother called his name Jabez (“son of sorrow”), saying, Because I bare him with sorrow.

v. 10. And Jabez, uttering his prayer in the form of a vow as he was entering upon some important service, called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh, that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, extending his boundaries, and that Thine hand might be with me, and that Thou wouldest keep me from evil, literally, “put me from evil,” that it may not grieve me, literally, “that I may have no more sorrow! The rhetorical form of the sentence is a vow promising allegiance to the true God. And God granted him that which he requested, answering his prayer and prospering his endeavor, as He does in the case of all prayers made according to His will.

v. 11. And Chelub, the brother of Shuah, thereby distinguished from the more illustrious Caleb, begat Mehir, which was the father of Eshton.

v. 12. And Eshton begat Beth-rapha, and Paseah, and Tehinnah, the father of Irnahash, or the city of Nahash, from which Abigail, the stepsister of David, hailed, 2Sa 17:25. These are the men of Rechah.

v. 13. And the sons of Kenaz, the grandfather of Caleb, whose name was preserved in the family name Kenezite: Othniel, Jos 15:17, and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath.

v. 14. And Meonothai begat Ophrah; and Seraiah begat Joab, the father of the valley of Charashim; for they were craftsmen, carpenters living in a well-known community, as men of the same occupation occupy certain quarters of the Oriental cities to this day.

v. 15. And the sons of Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, such as were not mentioned in the other lists: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the sons of Elah, even Kenaz, who was given the name of his illustrious ancestor.

v. 16. And the sons of Jehaleleel, a man otherwise not mentioned: Ziph, and Ziphah, Tiria, and Asareel.

v. 17. And the sons of Ezra, who probably lived in Egypt or at the time of the exodus, were Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she bare Miriam, and Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa, a town of some note south of Hebron.

v. 18. And his wife Jehudijah, she being the Jewish wife of Mered, bare Jered, the father of Gedor, and Heber, the father of Socho, a city in the lowlands southwest of Jerusalem, and Jekuthiel, the father of Zanoah, another town in Judah, probably near Zorah. And these are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, which Mered took, namely, the Miriam, or Merom, Sharomai, and Ishbah mentioned above. So this was a case in which a descendant of Caleb married an Egyptian princess who had become a convert to the Jewish religion.

v. 19. And the sons of his wife Hodiah, or of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maachathite.

v. 20. And the sons of Shimon were Amnon, and Rinnah, Benhanan, and Tilon. And the sons of Ishi were Zoheth and Ben-zoheth. These men are otherwise unknown.

v. 21. The sons of Shelah, the son of Judah, were Er, the father of Lecah, and Laadah, the father of Mareshah, these two towns being located in the extreme southern part of Judah, and the families of the house of them that wrought fine linen, the manufacture of fine linen goods being a hereditary art in this family, from the time of the Egyptian sojourn, of the house of Ashbea,

v. 22. and Jokim, and the men of Chozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who had the dominion in Moab, having conquered the country, at least in part, at a very early date, and Jashubi-lehem. And these are ancient things, very ancient accounts brought to the notice of the readers in this connection.

v. 23. These were the potters, the reference being to all the children and descendants of Shelah, and those that dwell among plants and hedges, probably the gardeners of the royal gardens near Jerusalem and Bethlehem; there they dwelt with the king for his work, another indication that certain trades remained in the same family from one generation to the next. It seems that the old adage of being a master of one trade and not a jack of many has good Scriptural foundation.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

1Ch 4:1-23

After the large space given to the “sons of David,” of the tribe of Judah, in the previous chapter, this chapter returns for twenty-three verses to group together a few additional ramifications of the same tribe, whose registers were for some reasons, perhaps not very evident, preserved and known. The first verses follow in the direction already indicated in 1Ch 2:1-55; near the end of which we were left with Shobal and Haroeh, probably the same with Reaiah (the same name as Reaia, 1Ch 5:5, though not the same person).

1Ch 4:1, 1Ch 4:2

The Carrot of 1Ch 4:1 is considered to lie doubtful between the Carmi of 1Ch 2:7 or the Chelubai of 1Ch 2:9, in which last alternation the five names of this verse would repeat the line of descent with which chrii, had made us familiar. Even then the object or advantage of repeating the first four of these, so far as what follows is concerned, is not evident. We keep near the close of 1Ch 2:1-55. also in respect of another allusion to the Zorathites (1Ch 2:53), whose families were replenished by the two sons of Jahath, Ahumai and Lahad, of all of whom this is all we know.

1Ch 4:3, 1Ch 4:4

Etam is, with little doubt, the name of a place (2Ch 11:6) in Judah, south of Jerusalem. It was near Tekoah (1Ch 4:5, and 1Ch 2:24) and Bethlehem (next verse). The hiatus in the first clause may possibly be supplied by “the families of” from the last verse, or, more fitly, by “the sons of,” inasmuch as some manuscripts have it so. The Septuagint, however, and Vulgate displace “the father of” (i.e. chief of), replacing it by “the sons of.” The Syriac Version leaves out any notice of the sister, Hazelelponi, and gives the former part of the verse thus: “These are Amina-dab’s sons, Ahizareel, Nesma, and Dibas, Pheguel and Husia; These are the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephratha, who was the father,” etc. With this the Arabic Version is partly in agreement, but closes the verse with the words, “These are the sons of Hur, son of Ephratha, the father of whom [plural] was of Bethlehem.” The Chronicle Targum translates, “the rabbis dwelling at Etam.” This variety indicates the difficulty felt by each in turn. The verse, however, purports to give the names of three brothers and one sister (Hazelel-poni, i.e. the shadow looking at me, Gesenius) connected with Etam, as in the following verse Penuel with Gedor (1Ch 2:51) and Ezer with Hushah (1Ch 11:29; 2Sa 23:27). Of no one of these, in all six other descendants of Hur, additional to those found at the close of 1Ch 2:1-55; is anything distinct known. It is to be noted that Hut himself is here called father of Bethlehem, while (1Ch 2:51) his son Salma is so called.

1Ch 4:5-7

Another before-mentioned person (1Ch 2:24) is brought forward, viz. Ashur, the posthumous son of Hezron by Abia, now again, as there, styled father, or chief, of Tekoa, a town, as above, near Etam, Bethlehem, etc. He is brought forward that the names of his two wives, with four children to the latter of them and three to the former, may be given. The Roman Septuagint unaccountably gives different names to the mothers, and reverses the groups of the four and three children. Nothing else is known of these nine persons. The last two names of the group of four more resemble in form the name of the head of a family than an individual name; and for Jezoar, the middle name of the group of three, the easy Keri of “and Zohar” is followed by the Septuagint, and was followed by our 1611 Authorized Version.

1Ch 4:8

The link of connection between the persons named in this verse and the tribe of Judah is utterly unknown. The introduction of them, abrupt as it is, is, however, paralleled by many others ira-mediately following in this chapter, as well as elsewhere. Nothing has yet been produced in elucidation of any one of the persons designated by these names, or of their relation to the context.

1Ch 4:9

This is not less true of the name of verses. 9, 10, which, however, has made its own mark amid the whole scene. The episode of these two verses, offering itself amid what should seem, superficially, a dry mass of dead names, is welcome and grateful as the oasis of the desert, and it warns us that life lies hidden at our every footfall on this ground, spread over though it is with monument and inscription, and hollow, as we thought, with the deadest of the dead. But the glimpse of old real life given us in this brief fragment of a biography is refreshing and is very suggestive. It seems an insufficient and unnatural method of accounting for the suddenness of the appearance of this episode to suppose (‘Speaker’s Commentary,’ in loc.) that the name of Jahez was well known, from any cause, to those for whom Chronicles may be supposed to have been primarily intended. We prefer by far one account of it, viz. that the work in our hands is not in its original complete state; or, variously put, that it is in its uncompleted original state. No root corresponding to the characters of this name in present order is known; it is possible that some euphonic reason makes the name out of the real word (future Kal) , i.e. he causes pains. We cannot suppose there would be any “play” appreciable on a transposition of alphabetical characters for mere play’s sake. The resemblance that almost each part of this brief and abruptly introduced narration bears to incidents recorded in Genesis (Gen 34:19; Gen 33:20; Gen 4:25; Gen 29:32; Gen 28:20) and Exodus speaks for itself, and strongly countenances the supposition that it is a genuine deposit of the genuinely olden history of Judah. The mother’s reason for the naming of the child; the language and matter and form (Gen 17:18-20; Exo 32:32) of the prayer of the child, when presumably he was no longer a child; and the discriminating use of the words Elohim (verse. 10) of Israel, as comps, red with the name Jehovah (1Ch 2:3; 1Ch 5:1-26 :41), generally found here,all help to produce this impression, although some of these particulars would carry little conviction by themselves; e.g. a mother’s reasons for assigning the name of her child long outlived the earlier times alone. Upon the whole, and regarding the passage in its present place, we may say that it must be very much misplaced, or else must be understood to connect Jabez with some branch of the family of Coz. There is the more room to assume this in the vagueness of the last preceding clause, “The families of Aharhel the son of Harum.” The origin of the theories of some of the older Jewish writers, to the effect that Jabez was a doctor in the law, with a school of scribes around him, is probably to be found in the desire to find a connection between his proper name, Jabez, and the place so named (1Ch 2:55), and where, as we are told, “families of scribes dwelt,” belonging to the Kenites. That these were connected with Bethlehem, through Salma, and that Jabez of our present passage was also of a family connected with Bethlehem, is worthy of notice, but is not enough by a long way to countenance the thought, in spite of Targum and Talmud (Smith’s ‘Bible Dictionary,’ sub vet.). The Targum, as well here as in 1Ch 2:55, identifies Jabez with Othniel “son of Keuaz” (Jos 15:17; Jdg 1:13; Jdg 3:9), or more probably “the Kenizzite” merely; but there is nothing to sustain such an identification. The description, he was more honourable than his brethren, finds a close parallel, so far as the word honourable goes, in Gen 34:19; although the honourableness of Shechem, the person there in question, does not come out to anything like the same advantage with that of Jabez, nor at all in the same direction. The word, however, is precisely the same, is often used elsewhere, and uniformly in a good sense, although the range of its application is wide. The essential idea of the root appears to be “weight.” The phrase may therefore be supposed to answer to our expressive phrase, a “man of weight”the weight being sometimes due chiefly to character, at other times to position and wealth in the first place, though not entirely divorced from considerations of character. We may safely judge, from what follows, that the intention in our present passage is to describe Jabez as a man of more ability and nobility than his brethren. It can scarcely be doubted that the meaning that lies on the surface is the correct interpretation, when it is said that his mother named him Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow. The sorrow refers to unusual pains of travail, not to any attendant circumstances of domestic trial, as e.g. that the time of his birth was coincident with her own widowhood, as happened to the wife of Phinehas, when she named her offspring “Ichabod” (1Sa 4:19-22).

1Ch 4:10

When Jabez grew to manhood he has learnt to estimate rightly the value of God’s blessing. He invokes it, and depends upon it. His language implies the confidence that he had in the reality of providential blessing. For the expression, enlarge my coast, see Deu 12:20 : Deu 19:8; and though we know nothing as matter of fact about the occasion of this prayer, we may assume that it was one when not selfishness and greed of larger territory, but just opportunity, had awakened a strong desire for enlargement of borders. It may have been a legitimate occasion of recovering his own, lost or wrongfully taken from him or his predecessors before him, or of expelling successfully from their hold upon it a portion of the original inhabitants of the promised land of God’s people. That thine hand might be with me. Many are the beautiful parallels to be culled from the Word of God for this expression, as e.g. Ezra 12:9; Psa 80:17; Psa 119:173; Psa 139:5, Psa 139:10; Isa 42:6. And that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! This, the last entreaty of the prayer, is the largest and most far-seeing. Warned by his own name, forewarned by his mother’s emphasizing of her own pains in him, he thus concludes. Having begun in the evil of pain and excessive sorrow, he prays that he and his career may not so determine and end. He does not necessarily pray to be preserved from all suffering, but from such baneful touch of evil itself, its principle, its tyrannous, merciless hold, as might bring him to real and irreparable grief. Thus closes the whole prayer, each succeeding clause of which has been under the rule of the initial “if,” translated with us, Oh that. This well-known Hebrew form of prayer supposes a solemn engagement, and that the answered prayer shall meet with the fulfilment of a vowed promise on the part of the suppliant, according to the pattern of Gen 28:20. In the absence of that engagement here, we may notice, with Keil, the greater grace of the passage, in that it closes with the statement of the readiness to hear, and the abounding readiness to answer, on the part of Divine beneficence: And God granted him that which he requested. Evidently the thing that he asked pleased the Lord (1Ki 3:10, 1Ki 3:12); although it was in this case some form of riches, and long life for self, and the life of his enemies, that he asked, and was not altogether and in so many words “a wise and understanding heart.” Perhaps, also there was in the way of asking, and in the exact occasion, unknown to us, something which quite justified the matter of the prayer, and which thus pleased the Lord. The remarkable and arresting episode could not have closed in more welcome or impressive way than when it is thus briefly but conclusively said, “And God granted him that which he requested.”

1Ch 4:11, 1Ch 4:12

Of the whole of the group of names, contained in these two verses, it must be said that we are in the dark. The suggestion of Grove, in his art. “Ir-enahash” (Smith’s ‘Bible Dictionary’), is worth notice, that possibly the versos may be a reminiscence of some Canaanitish graft on Judahthe Shuah () of verse. 11 pointing to the Shua ()of 1Ch 2:3; Gen 38:2. Beth-rapha (the house of the giant) looks more like the name of a place than of a person, though the text needs a person, and such may be covered possibly by this name, though it be of a place. Ir-nahash (the city of the serpent). Jerome, in his ‘Quaestiones Hebraicae in Parah,’ asserts or repeats the assertion of some one else that this is no other place than Bethlehem; taking Nahash as a synonym with Jesse. Unlikely as this is, no place of the name is known.

1Ch 4:13-15

We return here to the neighbourhood of names not quite strange. From comparison of the many passages in Numbers, Joshua, and Judges, which contain references to Othniel and Caleb (son of Jephunneh), the stronger conclusion to which we are led is that Othniel was younger brother of Caleb (probably not by both the same parents) and Kenaz a forefather, of course not literally father. The conclusion is not arrived at without difficulty, or with any real certainty. In the present instance, e.g; why should Othniel, if the younger brother and so expressly and repeatedly mentioned, be taken first? For the possible Kenaz of this passage, we might then refer to 1Ch 1:53; Gen 36:42. Hathath. The marginal reading, which joins Meonothai at once to Hathath, and then supplies “who” before “begat Ophrah,” is decidedly to be adopted. Joab son of Seraiah is not to be assumed to be one with Joab son of Zeruiah. The valley of the Charashim (see also Neh 11:35), i.e. smiths, or craftsmen, lay east of Jaffa, and behind the plain of Sharon; and is said by Jerome, in his ‘Quaestiones Hebraicae in Paral.,’ to have been, according to tradition, named so because the architects of the temple came thence. Iru. Perhaps the real name is It, and the final vau rather an initial for the next name. Elah. Probably another name is wanting after this, which the vau will then join to Kenaz; otherwise, as vau will not translate “even,” the following name will become, as in the margin, Uknaz. The wanting name might be the Jehalaleel of the next verse. This last name is in the Hebrew identical with the Jehalelel of our Authorized Version (2Ch 29:12).

1Ch 4:16

Of none of the characters of this verse can anything be said beyond what appears here.

1Ch 4:17, 1Ch 4:18

From the tangle of these verses it is hopeless to attempt any certain conclusions. The fact of the antithesis of the Jewess wife (by some assigned as wife to Ezra), and the presumably Egyptian wife mentioned in the latter verse, is perhaps just enough in the general obscurity to suggest that Mered, the asserted husband of the latter, is to be understood as the husband of the former also But to compass so much as this, we have to overlook omission in 1Ch 4:17 and inversion in 1Ch 4:18. There is a tone about the verses, due to names they contain, that might suggest to us the times of Egypt and Moses, and traditions in keeping do not fail to come to view in Jerome (‘Quaestiones,’ etc.; see also art. “Meted,” Smith’s ‘Bible Dictionary’). The four places, Eshtemoa, Gedor, Socho, Zanoah, may all with tolerable confidence be identified in Jos 15:48-58, as of the number of the cities “in the mountains,” though Zanoah and Socho are found also “in the valley” (Jos 15:33-36). In this passage the Septuagint gives us no help, but betrays its own perplexity, offering to make Jether the father of Miriam; while the Syriac and Arabic versions simply skip the verses as incoherent.

1Ch 4:19

The first clause of this verse in the Hebrew is, And the sons of the wife of Hodiah. The margin offers the Jewess again for Hodiah. Nothing is known explanatory of the descriptive word Garmite here. Its meaning, according to Gesenins, is “bony.” Eahtomoa is here distinguished from the same-spelt word in 1Ch 4:17 by the description the Maachathite, Maachad being a region at the foot of Hermon, bordering on and belonging to Syria.

1Ch 4:20

The names of this verse obtain no light from other passages. The Septuagint (Alexandrian), in loc; speaks of “Someion, the father of Jomam,” in the former verse which probably stands for this Shimon. Also the Septuagint for Vulgate, instead of counting Ben-hanan as the name of a third son, translate it, as of Rinnah “son of Hanan.” Ishi; not to be confused with 1Ch 2:31, son of Appaim. Our Authorized Version, following the Vulgate, does not translate Ben-zoheth, while the Hebrew would read naturally “Zoheth, and the son of Zoheth.”

1Ch 4:21-23

The first of these verses takes us back to 1Ch 2:3, where the first three of the patriarch Judah’s sons are introduced in the genealogy, as Er, Onan, and Shelah; where of Er it is said,” He was evil in the sight of the Lord; and he slew him;” and where nothing is added of Onan or Shelah. It would appear now that Shelah gave the name of the slain brother to his son. Respecting this Er of Lecahwith little doubt the name of a placeand Laadah, nothing else can be adduced; but Marebah (1Ch 2:42) is the name of a place in the Shefelah, given in the same passage with Kailah and Nezib (Jos 15:44; see also 2Ch 11:8; 2Ch 14:9). The fine linen () here spoken of is, according to Gesenius, equivalent in this passage and in the later Hebrew, to the byssus of the Egyptians (Exo 26:31; 2Ch 3:14), the , from which the Syrian byssus (Ez 1Ch 27:16), to which does more strictly apply, is distinguished in some other places.

It was of fine texture, costly, and used as the clothing of kings (1Ch 15:27), of priests (2Ch 5:12), and of the very wealthy (Est 1:6; Est 8:15). Gesenius says that, after long research and dispute, microscopic investigations in London have concluded that the threads of the cloth of byssus are linen, not cotton. Ashbea () is not yet recognized elsewhere. Jokim. Gesenius considers this name () as a contracted form of (Joiakim) of Neh 12:10. Chozeba. The meaning of this name is “lying;” not found elsewhere, it is probably the same as the , a town in the tribe of Judah (Gen 38:5), and that is probably the same as the , of the “valley” list of Judah cities (Jos 15:44) and of Mic 1:14, where it is mentioned in near connection with the Mareshah, which also accompanies it in the above “valley” list. Joash. This name appears in three forms: , as in the text and 2Ki 12:20; , as in 2Ki 12:1; and , as in 1Ch 7:8. Seraph. This is the word the plural of which gives us our seraphim (Isa 6:2), and is from a root of somewhat uncertain meaning. The different significations to which the root seems to lend itself in the substantive, according as it is used in the singular or plural, are startling (see Gesenius, ‘Lexicon,’ sub voce). The apparent meaning of this verse is that there was a time of old, when the above, of whom we can ascertain nothing elsewhere, ruled over Moab. Jerome, in the Vulgate, has made a strange rendering of this verse by translating some of the proper names, and reading at least one of them, the first, as though it were a form in the Hebrew (), which it is not: Et qui stare fecit solem, virique Mendacii et Securus et Tircendens, qui principes fuerunt in Moab et qui reversi sunt in Lahem; haec autem verba vetera. Thus Jokim is turned into Elimelech, and the men of Chozeba into Mahlon and Chillon of the Book of Ruth, and Jashubi-lehem into Naomi and Ruth; and the last clause of the verse is equivalent to citing the Book of Ruth. Barrington (‘Genealogies,’ 1:179) regards Jokim as Shelah’s third son in this enumeration; and ethers regard Jashubi-lehem as his fourth son. The preposition prefixed to and following the verb, is to be noted Verse 23 brings us to the last of Judah, and leaves us to part with the account of the tribe in the same obscurity which has lately involved it. The plants and hedges are probably an instance of inopportune translation of proper names, which should rather appear as Nelaira and Gedara, the former place or people not found elsewhere, but the latter possibly referred to. Jos 15:36. Again, who they were that were the potters, is not clearwhether all of the preceding verse, or the last mentioned. From the last clause it may be probably safely concluded, that those designated, whoever they were, were employed habitually in the service, not indeed of one king necessarily, but of the succession of royalty. Passages that may be taken to throw interesting light upon this subject are 1Ch 27:25-31; 2Ch 26:10; 2Ch 27:4; 2Ch 32:27-29.

1Ch 4:24-27

The second of the twelve tribes is now taken, and occupies but small space as compared with Judah preceding, or Levi and Benjamin when their turn comes. The comparison of the enumeration of the sons of Simeon here with that in Gen 46:10, Exo 6:15, is helpful in detaching the idea that the compiler of Chronicles copied direct from Genesis and Exodus, or that he depended exclusively on identical sources of information. That comparison shows six names in both of those passages for only five here, and it shows also difference in three of the names, viz. Jemuel, Zohar, and Jachin, for Nemuel, Zeta, and Jarib. On the other hand, the list of Num 26:12 is in exact agreement with our list here (the omission of Ohad in both being sufficiently accounted for by one and the same reason), with the exception of Jarib here for Jachin still there; and this solitary difference may justly be suspected to be nothing but an early corruption of resh for caph and beth for nun (see Kennicott, ‘Diss.,’ 1.178; Barrington’s ‘Genealogies,’ 1.55). Num 26:25 contains three descents from one of theseShaul. Of Shallum, the first, it may be noted that there are fourteen others of the same name in the Old Testament; and of Mibsam and Mishma (whom some call brothers, surely in error), that there were others of the same name (and certainly given as brothers), viz. the sons of Ishmael (Gen 25:13; Gen 1:29). Num 26:26 adds apparently another three descents, viz. from Mishma. Of the first-named of these, Hamuel, it may be noted that the name appears in many Hebrew manuscripts as Chammuel; of the second-named, Zacchur, that six others of the same name (though the Authorized Version gives them Zaccur) are found in Numbers, the First Book of Chronicles, and Nehemiah; while on the third, Shimei (of which name the Old Testament contains fifteen others), our attention is especially detained as father of sixteen sons and six daughters, though it is observed that his brethren (query Hammuel and Zacchur) had not large families. The smallness of the whole tribe relatively to Judah, was only saved from being smaller by him. With this agrees the census of Num 1:23, Num 1:27; Num 2:4, Num 2:13; Num 26:14. It is possible that this Shimei is the same with Shemaiah of Num 26:37.

1Ch 4:28-33

These “thirteen cities with their villages” and “five cities” are found, with some slight differences, in Jos 19:1-9 (comp. Jos 15:26-32, Jos 15:42). They were carved out of the “portion of Judah,” which had been found disproportioned during the interval that elapsed between the first settlements, viz. of Judah and the sons of Joseph, and the completion of the settlements westward of Jordan (Jos 18:1-6; comp. Jdg 1:3, Jdg 1:17). From the second of these groups, Tochen (see suggestion in’ Speaker’s Commentary,’ in loc.) is omitted in Jos 19:7, where only “four cities” are summed. The allusion (Jos 19:31) to the reign of David is sufficiently explained by the fact that during his persecuted wanderings he was often in the portion of Simeon, to three of the cities of which he sent presents from the spoils of the Amalekites (1Sa 30:26-31); and Ziklag became his own (1Sa 27:6), special mention being made of how it passed into the tribe of Judah. The fuller name of Baal (Jos 19:33) is given as Baalath-beer in Jos 19:8, where it is followed by the addition “Ramath [height] of the south.” It may be noted that this description of the allotment of Simeon begins with Beer-sheba and ends with Baalath-beer. The expression (Jos 19:33), and their genealogy” infinitive Hithp; used as a nounwill be more properly translated, their table of genealogy, or their registration. The following may then refer to “their habitations” rather than themselves, so that the clause, as a whole, would mean, “These were their dwellings, and their registration was correct to them.” Bertheau, however, takes the meaning to be, “And there was their family register to them,” i.e. “They had their own family register.”

1Ch 4:34-41

These verses record an organized and determined movement in quest of new and rich territory on the part of some of the tribe of Simeon. They were thirteen princes of the tribe of Simeon who led the movement, possibly representing respectively the “thirteen cities” given above. The movement took place in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah. That the house of their fathers had increased greatly is probably mentioned as some explanation of the cause of the movement. Though in one name out of the thirteen (verse. 35) the ancestors are traced to the third generation, and in another (1Ch 4:37) to the fifth, no name is reached of the sons of Simeon enumerated in verses. 24-27. These mentioned by names is to be translated strictly these coming by names; and it is open to question whether the word of 1Ch 4:41, , be not omitted after ; so that the passage would read, “These that came, written by names, were princes in their families.” Of the names, twenty-two in all, found in these verses, just so much is known as is here written.

1Ch 4:39

The place Gedor cannot be identified in this connection. There is a town of the name situated in the mountainous district of Judah between Halhul and Beth-zur, to the north of Hebron (Jos 15:58). It is evident that this cannot be the place we require here. There is another town of the name (1Ch 12:7), probably belonging to Benjamin, and which as little admits of being fitted in here. Both the Alexandrine and the Vatican Codex of the Septuagint, however, evidently read for . Now, Gerar of the Philistines would suit well for position and description, and also (Gen 10:14) for the allusion found here (1Ch 4:40) to the dwelling there “of old” of the people of Ham. The Hebrew word, however, generally applied to the valley of Gerar (, wady) is not the word used here of Gedor (, ravine). See Stanley’s ‘Syria and Palestine,’ p. 159, and note. Not only are references frequent to the fertility of Gerar, but the significance of that in 2Ch 14:14 speaks for itself. This alteration of reading, however, with acceptance of the Septuagint manuscripts, cannot be regarded as altogether satisfactory, and Keil (‘Comm.,’ in loc.) offers some suggestions of weight against those of Ewald, Bertheau, and others.

1Ch 4:41

The habitations that were found there. So the Authorized Version, which has mistakenly Englished a word which should have been left a proper name, “the Maon-ires,” i.e. the people elsewhere called in the Authorized Version the Mahunim. In doing this, our translators followed the Targum, copied by Luther and Junius. Unto this day, in this verse, as also in 1Ch 4:43, must not be understood to mark the date of the compiler of Chronicles, but that of the document or authority upon which he as a compiler drewanterior, of course, to the Captivity.

1Ch 4:42, 1Ch 4:43

These verses give the further exploits, with a view of settlement, of certain of the tribe of Simeon. And of them we should prefer to apply to those already mentioned (1Ch 4:34-41), did the expression stand alone. But the following clause in apposition, of the sons of Simeon, seems intended to prevent the supposition that they are the Simeonites to whom alone allusion is made. Keil again (‘Comm.,’ in loc.) refers those intended to 1Ch 4:27, because he reads, for Ishi, the Shimei of 1Ch 4:27, on very insufficient grounds. It is a question whether the movement of 1Ch 4:42 is to be understood as arising out of that other the account of which closes in 1Ch 4:41, or whether it were not a co-ordinate movement. It still would probably enough spring from the same intrinsic causes. The allotment of the tribe of Simeon carved out of that of Judah was found too small for their growing numbers, though Simeon was not of the most numerous. Nor is it necessary to supposeperhaps it is rather necessary to correct the impressionthat this expedition, issuing in a permanent settlement, lay at all near the conquests of the “thirteen princes.” It is, on the whole, most natural to consider that one event concludes with 1Ch 4:41, and that the following events (1Ch 4:42, 1Ch 4:43) are distinct and independent. All requisite light as to who these “smitten Amalekites” were, is for them too significantly furnished by comparison of 1Sa 27:8; 1Sa 30:1; 2Sa 8:12; with 1Sa 14:48; 1Sa 15:7. Of the names, five in number, found in this verse, just so much and no more is known.

HOMILETICS

1Ch 4:9.–A unique instance of the beneficent disappointments of human suffering’s cry.

The remarkable position of the brief episode, consisting of this and the following verse, does but draw our closer and more willing attention to it. Is it not like a spring in the dry land? Is it not like an oasis in the desert? Or again, in other figure, if the whole scene, in the very midst of which this brief narration is found, resemble some vast burying-place (and surely it does very much resemble this), crowded with tombstones which are worn with age and dishonoured by forgottenness and indifference, here the eye and the mind too are detained by an inscription worthy the notice and the thoughtful meditation. The inscription in question is not a long one. It is far from savouring of anything fulsome. But it is striking, and with the striking-ness of suggestion rather than of assertion; of what, unsaid, insists on coming to the thought, rather than of what, said, tasks unwilling thought. It must be called a Scripture providence which has preserved, and has in this way brought to the front, this interesting incident. We will for a moment shut off this verse from the following, and upon it, by itself, concentrate attention. It suddenly introduces to us one Jabez, grown presumably to years of manhood. And in designed, we may say manifestly designed, antithesis to the characteristic so “honourable” affixed to the mention of his name, a reminiscence of his christening furnishes us with the intelligence how he came by his name of sorrow. He has disappointed that name. The promise of its sadness he has not fulfilled. The exceeding pains of the mother seem to have led the way to a good and happy career for the son. And a dark morning’s outlook has grown to a bright day. Let us notice that

I. THERE IS A CERTAIN INSTRUCTIVE SUDDENNESS IN THE INTRODUCTION OF THE MATTER OF THIS VERSE. Abruptly as the name of Jabez here comes upon us, abrupt as is the introduction of the brief sketch of his history, it is nothing more abrupt than the case as it presents itself not unfrequently in real life, both then and now, and the facts of which are identical with those of the instance here presented to us. The very manner of Scripture history and biography harmonizes well with the matter of well-known life, and often reminds us of it. The surprises which Providence prepares or permits in the matter of human circumstance, character, career, have always been many; and though their number ceases not, they maintain the quality of their force.

II. THERE IS A CERTAIN SINGULARITY BROUGHT TO NOTICE IN THIS VERSE. A comparison is distinctly instituted. It is an invidious one. Happily, though invidious, it is a scriptural one. “Jabez was more honourable than his brethren.” It is a comparison the more pronounced in that it lies within the range of one family. The defence of it is:

(1) First and in part, that it was no doubt utterly trueprobably signally true. Further,

(2) that there was special, practical use in giving prominence to it. It was for the good of others, not for the satisfaction of individual pride or ostentation. And

(3) that the simplest statement of it, free from any flattery and any enlargement, was serviceable to gain a point of great moment. That point was one on a very different scale and of very different magnitude from any mere ordinary occasion. It brings into relief a contrast, and a very touching contrast, between the hasty verdict of present human feeling and experience, and the great, irresistible purposing and doings of the Divine mind in the midst of this lower scene of things. We are borne on a strong current, we are whirled round on many and frequent eddyings. The cry of anguish and of anger, the murmur of discontent and of doubt, often break from our lips and rise on high. This the reason thereofthat we thanklessly forget that very thing, viz. that we are borne on a strong current, that an irresistible hand is laid upon us, and a sovereign purpose is Lord over us. We are not told how or in what respects “Jabez was more honourable than his brethren.” Therefore that we are told the fact without the detail, argues that a general principle is offered to our notice, and we are invited to grasp and utilize it rather than linger amid the interest of mere detail.

III. THE SHORT–SIGHTEDNESS OF A MOTHER IS DELICATELY BUT SIGNIFICANTLY HINTED in the very verse which has stamped the honour of her son. The familyher familyis known, and known for good too, by one individual of it. But that individual is the child she marked evermore and signalized as the cause of special and exceeding suffering. But how soon was that suffering over! How soon was it obliterated! How little was it worthy to be compared with the exceeding joy, which, if she lived to see it, the “honourableness” of her son was sure to have given her! The suffering was that of the body, the joy was that of mind and heart. What a comment we have here upon the utterances of human lips, whether hasty or not, whether true to the moment or not, whether not to be wondered at or censured sternly, or the reverse, and the issues that lie with God, the event which we may live to see, and which shall be found to contrast so strangely, so sharply with our old feeling, impression, anticipation, or foreboding! The man who rescues that mother’s family from oblivion, and finds it a place on the page of the Divine Word for ever and ever, is the child named of oldJabez. This babe of old, of bitterer pains than usual, must needs therefore, by a loving mother’s own act, be chartered to tell to the ends of the earth the tale of her suffering, rather than to bear a testimony to the spirit of endurance and hope and trust that were in her. So Heaven disappoints human calculations, sometimes as much by its undeserved beneficence as at other times by its just visitations of punishment. So Divine strength avails itself of one method of showing its perfection in human weakness. So our Father’s generous eye overlooks and forgives the suspicion that lurks in our eye.

1Ch 4:10 (first part).-An example of earnest prayer for earthly things, to be imitated.

“And Jabez enlarge my coast.” No syllable nor whisper is heard by us of the child that cost the mother so much suffering in bringing into the world, from the time that he was named till he is now arrived at manhood. Then he is again introduced with this testimony, that he is “more honourable than his brethren.” The probability is that this expression does not refer exclusively to honourableness of moral and religious character. It is an equal probability, considering the remarkably uniform usage of the word in a favourable sense, and the balance of its use in even a high sense, that it does by no means exclude these elements. The intermediate time is left to our imagination to fill up. It was not like that intermediate time of our Saviour’s life, lit up only by the incident of the temple and the discussion with the doctors, when Jesus was but twelve years of age. We are warranted in permitting imagination to depict all that interval as one continuous growth of goodness and display of spotless bollness, and it is for quite other reasons that we there bid imagination learn reverence and caution, and chasten itself. Not so here; in the darkness and the silence of some twenty years or more, we are sure that there mingled error and imperfection and sin, with whatever else there was of redeeming feature in character and conduct. Still maturity finds Jabez an honoured man. Considering all things, that was not a little thing to say. But better and more to our purpose, it reveals him a man of prayera man who knew, who believed in, who practised prayer. Nay, there is something in the first opening of his mouth in this prayer which prepossesses us, and invites special consideration. Let us notice

I. THE TITLE UNDER WHICH JABEZ APPEALS TO THE OBJECT OF HIS PRAYER. He prays to the “God of Israel.” It is true that these words are not found here within the borders of the prayer itself, but it is also true that the historian says that it was to the “God of Israel’ that the prayer of Jabez was directed. This descriptive designation of God would mean at least three things with Jabez. The God of Israel is for him,

(1) the God of his fathers;

(2) the God who had often wrought wonderful works of interposition, of deliverance, of victory and conquest, on behalf of his people; and

(3) he is especially the God whose pronounced and most gracious covenant of truth and mercy was with Israel. The aids of memory are great aids for faith. A lively memory of long-past mercies also tends to kindle gratitude. He who comes with gratitude into the Divine presence wins fresh favour, gains fresh gifts. So also to have promises is one thing. These we all have. To take hold of them, avail ourselves of them, grasp them, is another and far greater thing. To live by the light, and in the strength and joy of the covenant, is the grandest privilege any man could possess.

II. THE DETERMINED AND EARNEST DIRECTNESS OF THIS PRAYER, It is the prayer of well-defined petition. Jabez wants a blessing, knows the blessing that he wants, asks it with fervour. He asks it with earnest emphasis. All argues his belief in the need of superhuman help, in the reality of such a thing as superhuman help, and in the availing power of prayer to obtain. This constitutes genuine prayer. It is not, indeed, any one of those high forms of spiritual exercise, the meditation of the unseen, the apprehension of Divine realities, the spirit’s communion with the Father of all spirit, and refreshment from his presence. But, on the other hand, it is the prayer which links on earth to heaven, and shows a human hand taking hold, with the free permission of mercy, of God. Jabez goes far on to say, “I will not let thee go, except thou bless me,” when he says, “Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed!” The emphasis “indeed” is the emphasis of importunity, not of distrust. The meaning, as every reader of the Hebrew knows at once, is “Oh that thou wouldest greatly bless me!” As though Jabez meant, “Unworthy as I am, oh that thou wouldest grant me a great blessing!” How often our posture is prayer, our language prayer, our tone prayer, yet the reality, the definiteness, the heart of prayer, is far from us! We ask and have not, because we really know not what our own asking is. In the midst of vague form and heartless performance, nothing is asked.

III. The instance we have here, and which we shall not do wrong in drawing into a precedent, of prayer offered, and acceptably offered, the burden of which is temporal good, family and private advantage, substance and possession. These all belong to the very structure and texture of our present human life and character. They much tend to make or mar our character. The way in which we get them, use them, give them again, is often the criterion, and very decisive criterion, of everything with us, for good or for harm. The great man of business and the man of great property are borne on a strong current, are tossed on deceitful, dangerous tides; but it may none the less be that, under certain conditions, they are fulfilling appointed and most important offices in the general scene of the world’s traffic. But how much securer that man must feel who has gained, and gained much, not by sharp practice, chicanery, unscrupulousness, but by clear views, determined wishes, diligent devotion, and the liberal “blessing,” the “great” blessing of God l Desire for earthly substance is not necessarily mere earthly desire. It is too true that it is too often this, but not always. Some of the greatest men of business in the world have been, and are to-day, the best men of business in the Church. By their liberality and charity, by their beneficence and philanthropy, the “cords have been lengthened, the stakes strengthened,” of the tabernacle of the Lord God of Israel. And their watchfulness, their prayerfulness, their sustained Christian consistency and humility, have been an example far and wide.

1Ch 4:10 -The prayer for the hand.

“And that thine hand might be with me.” This amplifying petition follows significantly upon the more definite and specific entreaty of the beginning of the verse. It also takes us into the ancient workshop of language. The countenances of us all, and their infinitely various expression, come from the different combinations of a very few features and other elements. All our words come from the immense number of combinations possible between and among twenty-six letters. And the amazing proportion of the whole vast mass of our language comes from the figurative and the analogic appropriations of what would otherwise be, and once was, a very scanty vocabulary. This is especially observable of our religious and devotional language, though none truer of it than of our ordinary language. The twenty-third psalm, and very many sentences of other psalms, give abundant illustrations of the way in which figurative language at once doubles, but in point of fact far more than doubles, language. And the sentence of the text is one of the most elementary and most plain of all illustrations of the kind. The first uses of a hand, the many uses of a hand, lend a wealth of imagery, and thereby of enrichment, to language. From the suggestion of the prayer of Jabez to the effect that “the hand” of God “might be with“ him, let us take opportunity to view some of the chief scriptural representations of the exercise of the Divine hand and of the effects thereof, and thus lead up again to the prayer before us. And we often read of

I. THE CREATIVE HAND. Man is spoken of as the work of God’s creative hands: “Thy hands have made me and fashioned me” (Psa 119:73). So also the heavens: “The heavens are the work of thy hands” (Psa 102:25). So, again, the earth and the sea: “The sea is his, and he made it: and his hands formed the dry land” (Psa 95:5). And all living things and things inanimate: “Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet: all sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; the fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas” (Psa 8:5-8). (See also glorious reminiscences to the same effect, Job 10:8; Job 14:15; Job 34:19; Isa 48:13; Isa 64:8.)

II. THE HAND OF THE SOVEREIGN, ABSOLUTE OWNER. (Job 5:18; Job 12:10; Dan 5:23; Ecc 9:1; 1Ch 29:12, 1Ch 29:16; Psa 31:15.)

III. THE HAND OF THE PERPETUAL, BOUNTIFUL GIVER. (Psa 95:7; Psa 104:28; Psa 145:16.)

IV. THE HAND OF ONE THAT DELIVERS, UPLIFTS, AND UPHOLDS. (Exo 32:11; Deu 5:15; Ezr 7:9; Neh 2:8; Psa 44:3; Psa 63:8; Psa 73:23; Isa 51:16.)

V. THE HAND OF THE CORRECTOR AND CHASTISER. (Jdg 2:15; Psa 32:4; Psa 38:2; Psa 39:10; Psa 106:26; Job 2:10; Job 19:21.)

VI. THE HAND OF WIDEST SWAY AND SOVEREIGN CONTROL, of power to rule and power to overrule. (Isa 40:12; Isa 48:13; Pro 21:1; Dan 4:35.)

VII. THE HAND THAT EXALTS TO REAL HONOUR. (See the splendid description of Isa 62:3; Psa 16:11.)

VIII. THE HAND THAT PLEDGES AND SECURES ABSOLUTE AND EVERLASTING SAFETY. See such passages as more than satisfy the soul; they go far even “to ravish it with the thoughts” of the glory signified. “I have graven thee on the palms of my hand” (Isa 49:16); “They shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand” (Joh 10:28, Joh 10:29). And, as during all our lifetime it had been the lesson to be learnt that our breath is in God’s hands, and all our ways and our times in his sovereign hand, so at last it is permitted us to breathe the spirit into that same mighty, merciful, safe hand: “Into thy hands I commit my spirit” (Psa 31:5). Perhaps it was not all of these powers of the Divine hand that could have been as familiar to Jabez as they may be to us; yet it is evident that he knew and had prized the meaning and the virtue of the hand of God. And he does not ask to know it in one particular way nor in another. He does not dictate or suggest-at least, not beyond a certain very wide margin. He prays that the Divine hand may be “with” himnow to help on, now to stop; now to uphold, now, if necessary, to cast down; now to put it on his lips, and to bid his mouth be dumb, and himself wait the sovereign will of a sovereign Godpatient, content, trustful; now to release those lips and open his mouth, that he might render grateful praise to the bountiful Giver of all good, or the loving and careful Protector of all those who put their trust in him. When Jabez says, “Oh that thine hand might be with me!” he puts himself into that vast and secure hand of God, and wishes nothing more, nothing better for himself, than as the little child, feeble, uncertain, and easily wearying, to take the strong hand of his Father. He had simple faith that the hand, the presence of which “with” him he entreated, would be under all events a “good hand upon” him. The surrender of dependence betokened by the prayer was justly as hopeful as it was trustful. We need nothing more than that the hand of God, in all its varied exercise, should be with us. But when we have thus prayed, we may not forget what our prayer has been. And in great variety of experience on our own partexperience of sorrow, and difficulty, and toil, and slowness, as well as in all the converse of these respectivelywe must remember to trace and acknowledge the tokens of that hand for which we prayed being with us, and not another hand, inferior in goodness and wisdom as well as power. For often the variety and contrasts and reverses of our own mutable state reflect the ever-varying and adapting presence and grace of One who is in himself the Unchanging. How often has our own hand misdone, how often has the hand of others misled or misdirected us! How blessed is he who can say that, for his prayer, God has “beset him behind and before, and has laid his hand upon him!”

1Ch 4:10 -The prayer of victory over evil

“And that thou wouldest.; may not grieve me.” This is the last petition of the prayer of Jabez. While the foregoing petition was very comprehensive and wide-reaching in one sense, this is comprehensive and farseeing in another. There could scarcely be a larger or a wiser intreaty than that God would vouchsafe the perpetual presence of his handthe hand that makes, that gives, that leads, that upholds, that shields, that at last saves with an everlasting salvation. Igor, on the other hand, could there easily be offered prayer that should more betoken self-knowledge, self-distrust, and a wise estimate of the constantly endangered position in which any man may justly describe himself as placed in this present world, than the prayer with which Jabez now sums up what he has to say: “And that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me!” Of the few petitions of our Lord’s Prayer, this forms one, and an emphatic one, “Deliver me from evil.” Evil is a large enemy. In one shape or another, it is ever threatening to attack. And if in anything we need superior help, it is in combating a foe so ubiquitous, so persevering, so subtle, and so essentially disastrous. We may observe here

I. THAT THERE ARE SIGNS OF A USEFUL LESSON HAVING BEEN LEARNT FROM PAIN. Pain is intrinsically evil in this world. It was no original part of it. It is now utilized in many a direction. It is now overruled to many and high advantages. But it is none the less to be noticed as foreign in itself to the nature of God, to the conception of a perfect creation, to the bliss of man. Yet as things are, and as we are, it is wise to learn from even bodily pain. It is often because we will not learn from other suggestions that we are compelled to learn from the actual experiences of pain. We may probably put down something higher to the credit of Jabez. We do not know as fact that he himself had been called to endure much pain, or any at all noteworthy. But he knew his own name. He knew what it meant, and how it had come to be given to him. He took the warning of it, and the forewarning of his mother’s method of emphasizing what were her opinions and convictions on the subject. It was not the mark of Cain that was on his open brow. But the name of a mother’s love and anguish mingled was named upon him. And he prays to the Mightier than he, to preserve him so from evil, that it might not bring him to fulfil in his nature what was confessedly his name. Two things may be ever well remembered respecting pain:

(1) that it must faithfully and honestly be ranked among the enemies of God and the antagonists of perfect nature; but

(2) that for a time, and for our present condition, it may be a timely lesson, a source of valuable suggestion, the adapted caution of the hour, the safeguard that may act with the quickness and the certainty of an instinct. Yet, whatever may be said justly and correctly respecting the acquired uses of pain, Jabez offers his petition deprecatory of that evil, the fruit and end of which is mere pain.

II. THAT THERE ARE SIGNS OF A CORRECT LESSON HAYING BEEN LEARNT ABOUT EVIL ITSELF. It is evident, from the very words of Jabez’s prayer, that he distinguishes between evil and gratuitous pain, or unrewarding “grief,” as it is here expressed. Evil, i.e. suffering, calamity, more or less of occasional adversity, disappointment, are the absolute lot of man here. It would be vain to shut the eyes to the fact, folly to deny it. But there are immense differences within the range and the limits of what is called evil. Jabez had learnt this. He does not pray to be kept from all suffering, vicissitude, adversity, disappointment, though doubtless he would fain be kept from as much of this as may be. But we are to understand that he earnestly deprecates the baneful touch of evil itself. He discerns what its essential principle is. He dreads its tyrannous rule, its merciless hold, its mocking treatment of those who have trusted it, and, if unstayed, its destructive results. He prays, accordingly, to be kept from the evil that would “assault and hurt the soul,” and prove the herald of irreparable grief. It is such intrinsic form of evil which the uncompromising petition of our Lord’s Prayer puts upon the lips of all his disciples. How certain and distinct this difference is! How much “evil” there is, through which we all are called to pass! But the deep water does not overflow us. How much disappointed hope and sorrow’s visit there is for the very best of men, by which in part they have been helped to become what they already are, right and excellent and devout, and by which the best of to-day become yet better to-morrow I This is the “evil we receive also at the hand of God, as well as” his good. It is chastening, purifying, elevating. But contrast with this the sorrow that worketh death. Contrast-with this the “wounded spirit.” Contrast with this the evil that hardens hearts, sears consciences, cradles remorse, and is fruitless of everything else but unavailing regret. And we shall be ready to join to pray, “That thou wouldest keep me from evil, that” its gratuitous “grief” may not be mine.

III. THAT A LESSON RESPECTING SELF‘S GREAT NEED OF SUPERIOR HELP IN THE PRESENCE OF SOME FOES HAD BEEN WELL LEARNT. There are some passages of life when the best and hardest work is the best and most earnest prayer. Not so here. It is said the sailor always has his enemy before him, and the battle ceases not till the haven is won. And men live in such a scene of evil, such surroundings of evil, such dispositions of evil, such a very atmosphere of evil, men are tossed upon such an ocean of evil, that the danger will prove overmastering in some direction, unless a man “pray always,” and pray this prayer of Jabez. No armour of one’s own, no self-knowledge, no vigilance, no pride of foreknowledge, no mere creed of distrust of the vain world, and the wicked heart, and the soul’s chief adversary, will suffice. This living, hearty, earnest prayer will alone command the sure victory in the most critical of warfare.

1Ch 4:10 -The gracious benignity of answer to prayer

“And God granted him that which he requested.” Abruptly as the name and the prayer of Jabez were introduced, with equal abruptness do they vanish from view. Favourably as they were introduced, so favourably do they seem to take leave of us. The naming of Jabez was indeed that of toilsome travail and tears, but therein was that saying fulfilled, that the going forth with weeping and with precious seed shall issue in a rejoicing return with golden sheaves. For that this was the case may be justly read between the lines, when we are informed that “God granted Jabez that which he requested.” The words of this prayer and the several petitions of it we have before us, and they speak for themselves, what they are and aim at. But whether the prayer conveys to us the “request” of Jabez, that one desire of his heart which was enwrapt in all the rest, is not quite plain. Probably it does, and if so it must have been “the enlarging of his coasts.” This would not be a request out of harmony with his time of day, or with what men of his position sometimes earnestly wished, and even with diviner instincts sought. To have a sure footing and an abundant footing in Canaan, or in whatsoever land most nearly corresponded to Canaan in the time of Jabez, meant very much more than the mere inheritance or purchase of ever so tempting an estate or property in our day. But if this were not the burden of the prayer, and its central subject, we are but relieved in this, as in all the rest of the context, from detail in favour of principles. In the absence of clear information as to what Jabez requested, we may make sure that he did not ask what was contrary to God’s glory to give or to his own good to receive, while on the other hand we are not in want of information as how he made his requests known. We have seen that manner to be characterized by simplicity and fervor, by strong conviction of dependence and by trustful reliance, and these were lighted up by hopefulness. And having watched the dependent suppliant, in sympathy with him, we are now invited to see the other sight. God sees his suppliant, and sees him with gracious eye. He hears his suppliant, and bends a willing ear. He approves his suppliant, and “grants him that which he requested.” We have here what we may justly regard in the first two particulars as leading instances, in the last as a fruitful suggestion.

I. OF THE EFFICACY OF PRAYER IS GENERAL. The tale is very short, very plain, and, if not true, is simply gratuitously false and misleading. It is the ease of the supplication of a righteous man availing much in its operative effect with God. The person who prayed probably exercised no very important and influential sway over society and his fellow-beings around. The thing for which he prayed probably stood in no very vital or active relation to the well-being of those around. Probably the time was no very critical moment, when great issues might depend on what should seem a very small matter, as affecting primarily but one individual. The person, the thing granted, and the time must have hadthey always do havetheir importance and their own inevitable significance; but this was all that they had now. But in the absence of knowledge of details and of surroundings, it is deemed sufficiently important for the Divine page to use this opportunity of showing us God answering the earnest, trusting prayer of his child and servant.

II. OF THE ANSWER OF A MAN‘S PRAYER, TRUE TO THE EXACT REQUEST OF IT.

This is a thing not always possible. We ask and have not, because we ask amiss. The ways of asking amiss are many, almost innumerable. They may be classified, however, under few heads. The amiss may consist in the thing not being good for us; not being for God’s glory to give. The “amiss” may consist in the thing asked not being good for us as yet. The “amiss” may consist in the thing asked not being the best thing for us. How often God withholds the literal answer to give a spiritual substitute I How often, in the very process of gift, short as it is, he substitutes a higher, better prize than that which we asked! How often the very highest mode of answer is found to consist in withholding the solid, material substance, which is what does not last, in order to give the unseen, spiritual substance, which is in its very nature eternal l Sometimes, again, the “amiss“ may consist in what we ask not being good for others as well as self. Each of us is part of a great whole, and an intrinsic part of it. Fellowship of joy, vicariousness of suffering, combination in toil and work, partnership on the largest scale, in the largest sense, and in the most searching detail, are all radical elements of our human nature and human life. And the clear vision of these, and the prompt recognition of them, are constantly obscured and eclipsed to us simply because we let self-regard slip into selfishness, forget the second great command, and try to famish on a lower principle in place of flourishing on charity. And it is in prayer that we may not unfrequently give the most subtle illustration of this subtle snare of our nature and life. Hence it may be rarely that God can give the answer of prayer true to the exact matter of it. But here we have a grateful and suggestive instance of the kind.

III. Of the fact that there is in the sovereign Giver the gracious inclination to give, when possible, according to this rule. His is the disposition full of grace as to the method of giving, as well as of bounty in the matter of what is given. We may often spoil what we give by the manner in which we give; not so he. We may often receive, spoiled by the manner of it, what is given; but never so when the gift is from him. These are some of the chief marks of the grace in giving which is so acceptable to those who ask, or who, without asking, stand in need; and they are all suggested by this history.

1. To give if possible just that which is asked.

2. To give it promptly, and make it thereby twice given.

3. To give it without any reflections on the past.

4. To give without imposing conditions on time to come.

5. Still to give, though it be on the part of the supreme, gracious Giver himself, without reminding there and then of the debt which it involves, of the bounty which it reveals, of the absence of claim, right, merit, in default of all of which nevertheless it is not withheld.

Most gratefully does that one sentence of the sacred page suggest all these thoughts to us, in which it is said, with effective brevity in reference to Jabez, “And God granted him that which he requested.”

HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON

1Ch 4:9, 1Ch 4:10 –Jabez

These two beautiful verses come in the midst of a dry and (to us) comparatively uninteresting genealogy, like an oasis in a desert. We know nothing at all of the person here mentioned except what is recorded in this passage. Yet there is so much of meaning in these brief sentences, that Jabez is certainly to the readers of this book more than a name.

I. Observe his NAME. Scripture names are often significant. This was given by the mother, in token and memory of the sorrow in which she bore her son. “In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children,” was the primeval sentence upon the mother of mankind. Yet, as Christ reminds us, it is usually the case that a mother “remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.” The mother of Jabez did not forget, and accordingly named the child in memory of her pains.

II. Observe his PRAYER. It is an interesting fact that we know some Scripture characters chiefly by their prayers. Thus we know Agur as having besought the Lord, “Give me neither poverty nor riches.” And we know Jabez by the comprehensive petition which he is recorded to have presented to Heaven.

1. It was a prayer to a covenant Godthe God of Israel.

2. It was a prayer for blessing; i.e. for good as the expression of Divine favour and approbation.

3. It was a prayer for prosperity; “Enlarge my coast.” We know nothing of Jabez’s way of life, whether he was a husbandman, or a warrior, or a ruler; but it is clear that he asked for enlargement of means, or authority, or territory, etc.

4. It was a prayer for strength: “That thy hand might be with me.”

5. It was a prayer for safety and purity. The evil from which this good man would fain be kept was, probably, both temporal and spiritual. How suitable a petition for us all!

6. It was a prayer for freedom from sorrow. If disasters should befall him, or if he should be tempted to apostasy or sin, such a fate would be fraught with grief to his heart.

III. Observe THE ANSWER to his prayer. The petition was large, but it was offered to a King, who was the rather pleased with its magnitude. There was no hesitation, no withholding. A lesson this as to God’s willingness to hear and answer the supplications of his people.

IV. Observe HIS HONOUR AMONGST MEN. Who the brethren of Jabez were we know not. The verse contains nothing in disparagement of their character or position. But Jabez was more honourable than they. The Lord is wont to honour those who honour him. Jabez acknowledged God as the Source of his prosperity, and God rewarded Jabez, by raising him to a position of authority and esteem in his family and amongst his countrymen.T.

1Ch 4:21, 1Ch 4:23 -Weavers, husbandmen, and potters

This portion of the book contains the record of the descendants of Shelah, one of the sons of Judah. The chronicler mentions incidentally the employments of several of these ancient families. Some were engaged in weaving byssus, or fine linen. Others were occupied in tilling the estates and tending the herds and flocks of the king. Others, again, pursued the calling of the potter. Now, there is no reason for surprise in meeting with such references in a book of the canonical Scriptures. There is a religious side to all such useful and respectable vocations. Those who follow them may not always be aware of the fact; but a fact it certainly is.

I. HANDICRAFTSMEN AND HUSBANDMEN MAKE USE OF MATERIALS WHICH A KIND PROVIDENCE HAS SUPPLIED. The soil which is tilled, the vegetable substances which that soil produces, the minerals which are dug from it, are all of God. “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.”

II. THE FACULTIES OF BODY AND MIND WHICH SUCH PERSONS EXERCISE AND EMPLOY ARE ENTRUSTED BY THE CREATOR. The limbs of the body, the strength of the muscles, the skill of the intelligent and designing mind, are all needed for the production of the results. Every artificer is himself a miracle of creative power and wisdom; and he who framed the workman is glorified in the handiwork.

III. THE WELFARE OF CIVILIZED HUMAN SOCIETY, WHICH IS THE CONSEQUENCE OF SUCH LABOURS, IS A PART OF THE DIVINE PLAN. The arts, useful and aesthetic, tend to the comfort and the development of humanity. All the conveniences of human life are instrumental in furthering the purposes of God.

IV. AMONG SUCH ARTIFICERS RELIGION OFTEN FINDS WARM ADHERENTS, SUPPORTERS, AND PROMULGATORS. The busy and useful classes of society furnish the largest proportion of strength to our Churches. These have often been the salt of society, when the wealthy, luxurious, and dissolute on the one hand, and the idle and predatory on the other, would have introduced corruption and death into the body politic.T.

1Ch 4:33 –Dwellings and genealogies.

In many instances the chronicler records not only the names of the families of Israel, but the places where they were settled in fixed habitations. When the land of Canaan was conquered, it was parcelled out among the several tribes. In this way family relationships and sentiment were closely connected with territorial possession. Even certain households were attached to estates and villages. And as the Hebrews were an agricultural and pastoral people, it was natural that they should cherish an hereditary regard for the lands tilled by their fathers. The sons of Simeon transmitted to their posterity certain cities and. villages. “These were their habitations, and their genealogy.”

I. A LOCAL HABITATION IS DIVINELY APPOINTED AND SANCTIONED. There are many who, as travellers and explorers, as soldiers and seamen, etc; may serve society without having any fixed abode; and homelessness may be profitable discipline in youth. But, generally speaking, a home is the best sphere of labour, the best pledge of diligence, the best guarantee of responsibility; and it is well for those who, from generation to generation, can retain the same feelings towards an ancestral abode.

II. FAMILY REGISTERS AND PEDIGREES, IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH DWELLING–PLACES, ARE OF UNDOUBTED SERVICE. The public census, the domestic register, the family tree, the civil and ecclesiastical registration of births, deaths, and marriages, are all valuable. They may be abused by pride, but they are more likely to foster humiliation. They are useful for civil purposes, contributive to family feeling, pro-motive of patriotism. The squire, the yeoman, the labourer, are all susceptible to the influence of hereditary feeling and local associations.

III. RELIGION DEALS WITH HOMES AND HOUSEHOLDS. Certain places and certain families have been noticeable and memorable for piety. And true religion is not content to deal with the individual; it seeks to leaven families with its influence, and to penetrate villages, cities, and nations with its light and spiritual power and grace.T.

1Ch 4:38. -Princes in their families.

Words transferred from one language, and one state of society to another, are often misleading. By “princes” here we are to understand head-men of certain towns which were in possession of families among the Simeonites. They were persons of importance, of consideration, and influence in their localities. The record of them hears witness to a settled state of society, and to the establishment of civil order and subordination.

I. HUMAN AUTHORITY IS OF DIVINE APPOINTMENT. That this is so in the family will be admitted by all who believe in a Creator, and in his interest in the human race. It is also admitted by thoughtful persons with regard to civil and national life. It does not follow that rulers are always righteous, or are even always to be tolerated and obeyed. It is an absurd inference to draw from the fact that sovereignty and submission in some form are of Divine appointmentthat kings have nothing to do but to command, and subjects nothing but to obey. The world has had enough of absolute monarchy, and theologians have too long inculcated “the right Divine of kings to govern wrong.” Still, “the powers that be are ordained of God;” it was divinely intended that men should live in civil society, and that order should be maintained and authority upheld, and justice administered between man and man.

II. As a consequence, SUBJECTION TO CIVIL AUTHORITY IS, WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITS, A HUMAN DUTY. In ordinary cases, where conscience does not enjoin the express contrary, men are bound to obey the laws of the land. Especially is this the case where, as in our own country, the government is constitutional, and the people have power to amend unjust and inexpedient laws, and to reform abuses in administration. The immoral character of lawful governors is no religious ground of resistance to their decrees.

III. RULERS, SMALL AND GREAT, ARE THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO HIM WHO IS “THE BLESSED AND ONLY POTENTATE, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.” Let them remember this, and be wise and just.T.

1Ch 4:40 –Fat pasture.

This passage relates an expedition of certain Simeonite chiefs and their followers, which took place in the days of Hezekiah. The tribe of Simeon was restless and warlike. This exploit was performed, apparently, from selfish, rapacious motives. The Simeonites wanted more pasture for their flocks; and, finding just what suited them in a territory possessed by their neighbours, they invaded their fertile and peaceful valley, slew the inhabitants, and seized their lands for their own use. What circumstances may have justified or extenuated such a proceeding we are not told.

I. PLENTY IS A DIVINE GIFT. The land itself is the gift of God. Its favourable situation, its chemical constituents, the sunshine and the moisture, which make up its fertility,all are from him, and are proofs of his creative wisdom and goodness. The flocks and herds, and their increase, are his, whose are “the cattle upon a thousand hills.” When the valleys are covered over with corn, when the sheep bleat in the pastures, when there is abundant provision for man and beast, then let our hearts ascend in gratitude to him who “openeth his hand, and satisfieth the desire of every living thing.”

II. PLENTY HAS MANY ADVANTAGES. In communities which are abundantly supplied with the necessities and comforts of life, there is opportunity and leisure for the cultivation of arts and learning, there is stimulus for commerce and manufactures, there is capacity for benevolence and for evangelization. If it is well used, plenty is a blessing. Only let all things be received as immediately from God’s hand, and be regarded as a sacred trust to be used for his glory and in his service.

III. PLENTY IS NOT WITHOUT ITS DANGERS. It was foreseen that when Israel quitted the wilderness, and entered upon possession of the land flowing with milk and honey, there would be a temptation to forget God, and to take credit for national prosperity and wealth. Against the perils of plenty and prosperity, let the fortunate and happy be ever on their guard.T.

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK

1Ch 4:9, 1Ch 4:10. -A model prayer.

Of the man Jabez we have only this brief record. He is only known by his prayer. Yet the prayer is a sufficient revelation of the man. His character is revealed in it, as is the character of every man to him who is able to read man’s prayers aright. His name means “He causes pain,” and it was attached to him on account of his mother’s sufferings at his birth; but it is designed to seal a certain gentleness, lack of vigour and self assertion, and almost melancholy tone, which characterized his whole life. From the occurrence of the same name in 1Ch 2:55, it has been assumed that this Jabez was the founder of the schools of colleges of the scribes. The date at which he lived cannot be fixed with certainty. Possibly the sorrow of Jabez’s birth was, that his mother lost her husband when she gained her son. If so, she might well name her fatherless boy “Sorrowful.” Yet he rose above the sadness of his birth; he belied his very name by becoming more honourable than his brethren. The shadow which had fallen upon his birth was dispelled by the uprightness, the nobility, the God-fearing, the prayerful spirit of his life. And God made to rest on him gracious signs of his acceptance. Regarding the prayer as giving indications of the character of Jabez, we may see

I. THAT JABEZ WAS HUMBLE. Estimate the tone of the prayer. He has such a sense of personal helplessness, and such a trembling fear of responsibility, that he asks for guidance and keeping, and the true enrichment of the Divine blessing. He prays for strength, preservation, success, and blessing, as though a very deep sense of his own weakness and insufficiency rested upon him. Such “humility” is the marked feature of every truly good and great and wise man; and it is sure to find its fullest expression when, for purposes of prayer, he goes into the presence of God. Illustrate from Abraham’s intercession for Sodom, Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple, and Daniel’s and Nehemiah’s prayers for their nation. And, combined with other characteristics, the same “humility” is found in our Lord’s great intercessory prayer; and we know that it was a marked and striking feature of his beautiful life. Such “humility” is a first and essential characteristic of acceptable prayer; and the attitude of kneeling is the bodily expression of it.

II. THAT JABEZ WAS INTELLIGENT AND THOUGHTFUL. The prayer shows that he had formed a sensible estimate of life. To him it was a scene of toil and struggle and evil; it seemed to be full of work, duties, responsibilities, cares, and trusts; and for it all he recognized the need of a guiding and upholding hand. Illustrate by our Lord’s figure of the man who proposed to build, sitting down first and counting the cost. The man may discover no need for prayer who rushes heedlessly into life, only intending to do the best he can under the various circumstances that may arise. But he who looks thoughtfully out over life, and intelligently anticipates its duties and cares, will be sure to feel the importance and helpfulness of prayer, and, with Jabez, will turn to God, saying, “Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed!” Compare Moses praying, “If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence;” and Joshua’s resolve, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

III. THAT JABEZ WAS, IN A GOOD SENSE, AMBITIOUS. His piety did not crush down the high imaginations and glowing hopes of his young heart. He prays God to help him “enlarge his coast,” or landed estate; to extend his possessions, to increase his wealth, and to advance his influence. Religion seeks to sanctify our ambitions, but not to crush them. We may pray to God about our plans and schemes for worldly advancement, if only we keep the spirit of full loyalty to God and submission to his will; and to pray freely and constantly about our common human affairs is the best way to ensure our winning and keeping the right spirit whatever we may attain.

IV. THAT JABEZ WAS HAPPY. In spite of the melancholy tone that was on him; in spite of the sorrow clinging to him from his birth. This ensures our happinessthe accomplishment of our life-aims, when those aims are right ones. “God granted Jabez that which he requested.” He had:

1. Success in life given him, so that he might add field to field, and become “more honourable than his brethren.”

2. Evil warded off from him. In “going out and coming in,” the preserving hand of God kept him safe.

3. God’s blessing sanctifying his successes; by that term meaning the satisfying and comforting sense of the Divine approval and acceptance. It may be impressed that such a prayer indicates the personal piety of Jabez, and suggests that he made a full consecration of himself to the God of his fathers in early life. Plead for such a wholehearted decision, and such a spirit of prayerfulness, on the very threshold of life. It is well if, before the foot falls on the first step of life, the heart goes up to God, saying, “Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed!”R.T.

1Ch 4:13 –Othniel’s adventure; or, the impulse of promised rewards

For the story, see Jos 15:16, Jos 15:17; Jdg 1:12, Jdg 1:13; Jdg 3:9. The point of the narrative, for the sake of which it is preserved, appears to be this: Othniel acted, vigorously and successfully, under the impulse of offered reward. The daughter of one so honoured as Caleb was a prize indeed worth winning, and she was to be given to the man who, by his valour and skill, could take the city of Kirjath-sepher. Compare the offer of reward which David made on the occasion of the siege of Jerusalem (1Ch 11:6). Some interest attaches to Kirjath-sepher as meaning the “Book-town,’ and suggesting the existence of a literature at that time among the Canaanites. Its earlier name (Debir, oracle) may indicate that it was a national sanctuary where the national records were preserved; and, if so, we may be sure that it was securely walled and stoutly defended. The incident may be used to introduce the consideration of the appropriateness of offering rewards, as an incentive to the doing of duty, and in the higher spheres of morals and religion, where all the quality of actions must depend on the motives for which they find expression. In relation to the education and training of the young, the subject of rewards is frequently discussed; some urging that childhood needs the help to effort and perseverance which may be found in the promise of reward; while others contend that a child is deteriorated, and led to adopt false sentiments for life, who is impelled to exertion by the hope of what is to be gained by it, and not to act or to abstain from acting because the thing required is right. It may, however, be fairly contended that, besides the proper and high motives of duty and right, we may thankfully accept the aid of auxiliary motives, and that among these may be set in a first place the promise and the hope of reward. But it would seem to settle the question, that we can show so fully how God has been pleasedin lesser spheres and in greater, in temporal affairs and in spiritual, throughout all the long agesto use the impulse of rewards. This may be fully and impressively illustrated in the Bible story; and of the character of the illustrations we give a few suggestive instances.

1. In the first trial of humanity it was distinctly understood that the maintenance of all that was gathered up in Paradise was the reward of obedience.

2. To Abraham God offered himself, in his personal favour, and in his power to guide and bless, as “his exceeding great Reward,” and even Abraham’s faith and loyalty were upheld by the promise that in his “seed all nations of the earth should be blessed.”

3. Israel was helped to endure the rigours of Egypt, and to make a great stand for liberty, under the assurance of a great reward, even the heritage of the land that flowed with milk and honey. And it has often been pointed out that temporal prosperity in Canaan was distinctly offered as the reward of obedience to the Law.

4. The prophetsas may be most impressively seen in Isaiahheld before the people most glowing visions of coming days as the sure reward of a full and hearty national return to Jehovah.

5. Our Lord himself fitted the impulse of reward into his most gracious invitation, “Come unto me and I will give you rest.”

6. The apostles urge the disciples to all earnestness in the Christian life and labour, by the assurance that we run for an “incorruptible crown,” and may hope to receive a “crown of glory, that fadeth not away.” Our last sight of Christ in the Word presents him as saying,” Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me.” We may, then, use the promise of rewards; they appeal to sentiments and feelings in us that are good and useful. We may magnify the grace of God in even thus helping us to win “the holy.” And we may reasonably expect present, and certainly look for future, gracious rewards of obedience and faithfulness.R.T.

1Ch 4:21-23 -The dignity of all work.

These verses set before us the interesting fact that God recognizes a man’s occupation, and knows precisely his sphere and his work. Another striking illustration of the precision of the Divine knowledge, and the observation even of a man’s handicraft, is found in Act 10:5, Act 10:6, where God gives these minute directions: “Send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter; he lodgeth with one Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the seaside.” In these verses different occupations are honourably mentioned; some wrought fine linen; others were potters and gardeners and hedgers; and so is suggested to us the honourableness and usefulness of all kinds of work. There was no such sentiment among the Jews as unhappily prevails in all so-called highly civilized countries, that there is a kind of degradation in having to work for your own living. Every Jewish boy was required to learn a trade, and the greatest rabbis preserved their dignity and learning along with service to the community in some humble occupation. Consider

I. WORK AS A CONDITION OF HUMAN LIFE ON THE EARTH. If there is one law more absolute for mankind than another, it is that they shall work. They are set in this earth-garden, as Adam was in Paradise, to win it, to use its forces, to dress it, to keep it. For “work’ man is endowed. He has muscles with the needed physical strength, and hands with the needed physical skill, and brains with the needed guidance and control. And he is in the midst of conditions that demand work; the earth will only yield her stores and her increase in response to man’s work. If a man “will not work,” then the law God has put into the very creation of the earth is, that, “he shall not eat.” And this work-condition is designed by God to bear directly on man’s moral training. Only by and through work can character grow and unfold. Toil is testing and trial, out of which alone can virtue be born. So all work is noble and holy.

II. WORK AS A CONDITION OF CIVILIZED LIFE. Here its simplicity is lost. It becomes a diversified and complicated thing. As men live together in cities a thousand fresh wants, real and fancied, become created, and trades are multiplied for the supply of the thousand wants. Work is divided and subdivided; sometimes it seems a higher kind, and sometimes a lower. While some must work by hand, others are called forth to work by voice, and pen, and brush, and chisel, and brain. Thousands must toil in various ways to supply the necessaries of life, and tens of thousands must toil to supply the ever-increasing demand for luxuries. And so, in civilized times, work seems too often to grow into man’s curse; and he toils at sweat of brain as well as of face; and spends strength and health and life in winning bread from those who “fare sumptuously every day, and are clothed in purple and fine linen;” and we cannot greatly wonder that men should grow hard, and lose the high and inspiring thought of the “dignity of work.”

III. THE ONE CONDITION THAT LIFTS ALL HUMAN TOIL INTO DIGNITY. Its usefulness to others. It must be done “not unto selL” And so God has “set the solitary in families,” and put fathers and mothers under the pressure of family responsibility, that in toiling for others they may win the joy of work. Illustrate from the artist, the poet, etc; and see how the condition may apply to all workers.

IV. THE YET HIGHER CONDITION WHICH SETS WORK IN ITS TRUE PLACE. It must be done as service to God. Then work bears upon the culture of religious character, and becomes a stepping-stone upward to the heavenly. Character is both exhibited and cultured by it; and no kind of occupation can be regarded as mean into which character can be put, and by which others may be served, and God may be glorified. Potters, gardeners, hedgers, and workers in fine linen may all win the “Well done, good and faithful.”R.T.

1Ch 4:39-41 –Might and right

The place named Gedor is not otherwise mentioned in Scripture. Ewald and Bertheau think Gerar is the true reading; and this is given in the Septuagint Version. Reference, then, is to a portion of the Philistine country, which was remarkable for its fertility (Gen 26:6-12; 2Ch 14:14,2Ch 14:15). We cannot tell whether these princes had any justifiable ground for their aggression. But we may dwell on this as an instance of “might” overmastering “right;” for the earlier occupiers may be fairly considered to have had the “right,” and the point of the story is that these princes grew strong, and when they had “might” they used it to drive out, and possess the lands of, those who had only “right.” The Eastern mode of keeping flocks by moving them to different parts of wide pasture-grounds should be explained, and the rivalry and the quarrelling which this too often entails may be illustrated in the relations of Abraham and Lot. And the way in which weakening and decaying tribes have to yield before strong and rising tribes and nations, may illustrate the modern doctrine of the “survival of the fittest;” and instances may be found in the story of the great nations, such as Persia, Greece, Rome, etc.

I. MAN‘S MIGHT IS OFTEN THOUGHT RIGHT. The two things are perfectly distinct. What we can do is not necessarily what we ought to do. And man’s power must ever be held down under the mastery of a will guided by good judgment, right principles, sweet charity, and tender consideration for the claims and rights of others. The Nasmyth steam-hammer affords a good illustration of splendid power held in full control. Yet in the commoner spheres of life, as well as by kings and great men, might is often mistaken for right. It is often one of the easiest pieces of self-deception. One of the master principles swaying men is the love of power. Therefore do men get large numbers of servants, retainers, and workmen; they increase wealth and possessions; push into places of position and influence; and in every possible way seek to gain sway over their fellow-men. And this becomes a peril, and, for many men, the severest test of virtue and charity. Every true-hearted man will feel the peril of confusing might with right; and will accept the fact that these two will often be in conflict, and that, for such conflict, the issue must always be the triumph of the right. Man’s might is a fatal force for the liberty of his fellow-man, unless it not only seems to be to him, but it actually is, the same as the right. So the practical question ever and again recurring in life is this: “I can, but may I? Will it be right?” Man’s nobility is full loyalty to the right.

II. GOD‘S RIGHT ALWAYS PROVES TO BE MIGHT. Always “in the long run,” We make many mistakes by only seeing pieces and parts of things; so we sometimes say, “The way of the Lord is not equal.” Yet right does always triumph, if we can properly discern the “right,” and properly appraise “triumph,” Right is invincible. Nature, all the good there is in the earth, all the long ages, and God himself, are on the side of the right. This is true for the individual man when, in all simplicity and loyalty, he does God’s right, whatever of seeming disabilities it may involve. He may have the most perfect confidence that God will make it might, and in the due time “bring forth his righteousness as the light, and his judgment as the noonday.” It may be practically enforced that man’s violence overreaches itself, as did Haman‘s.

And that all forcings of his way and will by man imply a failing of trust in God’s living love and lead. It is a spirit in striking contrast with that expressed in Jabez’s prayer (1Ch 4:10).R.T.

1Ch 4:43 -God’s ways with Amulet

The reference of the verse is to the remnant that had escaped the great slaughter under King Saul (1Sa 15:7, 1Sa 15:8). Indications of the existence of scattered portions of this people may be found in 1Sa 27:8; 1Sa 30:1; 2Sa 8:12. The Amalekites are first mentioned in connection with the aggressive expedition of Chedorlaomer (Gen 14:7). They occupied the country between Palestine, Idumaea, and Mount Sinai, on the elevated plateau now called Er-Rakhmah. They were a nomad people, and their towns were but collections of tents; they were rich in flocks and herds, and seem to have acquired a vast power by their bold predatory habits. They were consequently most dangerous neighbours for Israel to have so close upon their borders. For the Scripture references to the Amalekites, see Exo 17:8-16; Deu 25:17-19; Num 14:40-45; Num 24:20; Jdg 3:13; Jdg 6:3-5; Jdg 12:15.

I. THE SIN OF AMALEK. This is distinctly stated in 1Sa 15:2 : “I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.” The expressions used appear to indicate some peculiar treachery in the conduct of this tribe. Probably they regarded themselves as having the sole right to the pasture-grounds in the valleys and plains of the higher ranges of Sinai, and so thought to cut off the advancing hosts of Israel, by taking them in detail as they toiled through the several passes. It may also be urged that the knowledge of the deliverance through the Red Sea had spread among the tribes of the desert; it declared this people to be under Jehovah’s lead, and increased the responsibility of all who attempted to hinder their progress. Amalek added to its sin by incursions in the time of the judges, and by constant annoyance, which in part may explain the severe manner in which it was dealt with. The principle of the treatment of Amalek’s sin may be illustrated by our Lord’s words, “Whoso shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the sea.”

II. THE DIVINE JUDGMENT ON AMALEK. Remarkable for its severity. Explain that the form and degree of Divine judgments must fit into the customs and sentiments of each age, if they are to exert the proper moral influence upon the age. The extermination of a race was not regarded in Saul’s time as, with our Christian sentiments, we should regard it now. Human life is less valued in the East, and tribal, dynastic, and national changes have always been more sudden, frequent, and violent. Still, this would be, even in those days, so severe a judgment as to prove a solemn warning to the wilful who would try to force their own will against God.

III. MAN‘S EXECUTION OF THE DIVINE JUDGMENT. It is of the utmost importance, for the due understanding of Old Testament Scripture, that God may use any of his creatures as agents in carrying out his judicial sentences; and man may be his executioner as well as plague, famine, or tempest. In such case what the man has to do for God is right, and the man only comes under the judgments of God for the spirit and the way in which he does it. Saul is not judged for slaying the Amalekites, but for not executing his commission fully and faithfully.

IV. MAN‘S FAILURE IN EXECUTING THE DIVINE JUDGMENTS. Distinguish between man the agent, and man the individual God looks upon the man, and treats with him in both ways. Man’s trusts from God become tests of man for God. And it may be that the more complicated and difficult the trust is, the more satisfactory it may prove as a moral test. Man is honoured in being permitted to carry out God’s plans and purposes. He may even, from the gospel standpoint, be a “co-worker together with God.” But God will not fail to carry out his plans to perfection, even when men may seem to fail him.R.T.

HOMILIES BY R. GLOVER

1Ch 4:9, 1Ch 4:10 -The prayer of Jabez.

“Jabez was more honourable than his brethren: and his mother called him Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow. And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that thine hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! And God granted him that which he requested.” But little is known of this man; known in his generation as a man of prayer; famous for the directness and simplicity of his appeal to God and for the success attending it. Probably he gave his name to Jabez, the town mentioned in 1Ch 2:55, as Bethlehem, Ephratah, Tekoa, and many named in these genealogies did. If soand the identity of several names in the respective genealogies, and the singular eminence and honour of the man, give great weight to suppositionthen we know something of his ancestry and something of his descendants. Of his ancestry; for then 1Ch 2:55 makes him a Kenite, and a descendant of Jonadab the son of Rechab, one of the early sect described in Jer 35:1-19; who, probably called into existence by the testimony of Elijah, cultivated simplicity of creed, rejecting all idolatry; simplicity of life, dwelling in tents; simplicity of food, drinking neither wine nor strong drink. A sect ready to help Jehu in his reformation (2Ki 12:15,2Ki 12:16); respected by those who could not copy them; blessed and honoured by God. And we know something of his descendants; for he was in that case the founder of the school of scribes, who did so much in the later centuries of Jewish national history to revive and maintain the purer worship of God. A sect of married monks, whose only vow was simplicity of life, they seemed to exemplify all the advantages derivable from special callings, consecration, and brotherhood, while free from all their defects. Their earnest faith turned them to the Bible as the best preservative of a people from error. And their simple tent-life gave them leisure. Probably Jabez was a sort of William Tyndale of his generation, bent on giving his people the Bible in their homes. Tyndale by translation, Jabez merely by transcription, both gave the priceless treasure to multitudes who before had lacked it. Assuming these things, there are some lessons from his character and from his prayer that are worth observing.

I. FIRST, A GOOD SOIL HELPS TO MAKE A GOOD PLANT. In all self-denial there is advantage. Power of will, energy of purpose, security against temptation, are all furthered by it. These early total abstainers had some of the vigour marking the class in all ages. The poet had not in their case to lament that “the days of simple living and high thinking were no more.” But there they were. The John the Baptists of their time in simplicity of life and profundity of thought and faith. The home moulds the child. Let your children find in their parents’ life purity, brightness, love, and they will more easily copy it. Like as Milton and Cromwell rose among the Puritans, so Jabez rose among the Rechabites. Observe

II. SOME LIVES BEGIN IN GREAT SORROW THAT LEAVE BEHIND THEM GREAT JOY. What the mother’s grief was we do not know. It may have been unusual pain and danger at his birth. It may have been (the father is not mentioned) that she lost her husband before she bore her child. And the melancholy of her heart made her despair of any brightness, and give her boy (an unfair thing to do) a depressing name. It is possible, too, that some sorrow may have arisen out of this prayer. If it did, we may observe that a dull morning often opens into a bright day. The early life may be obscure, pressed with disadvantages, all uphill, and yet we may reach a stately usefulness and comfort.

“The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars,
But in ourselves.”

III. LOOK AT HIS PRAYER. There are many points about it worthy of remark.

1. That whatever touched his life he took it to his God.

2. That he blends in his prayer the requests for moral and the outward mercies which make up well-being. “That thou wouldest bless me indeed,” is probably a prayer for highest spiritual mercies; for God’s smile, God’s grace, forgiveness, peace. “And enlarge my coast.” This was prayer for outward advantage. Large lands not needed for their simple living; probably they were needed only for the increasing number of disciples. “That thy hand may be with me” seems again a spiritual petition; a prayer for guidance pre-eminently, and for God’s aid. The worldly don’t want God’s hand with them; it is apt to stop the flow of their purposes and schemes. But the devout want God to be a partner in all their business. “And to keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me.” Here is an illusion to his name. And probably the prayer means, “Disappoint a mother’s fears, and let not harm overtake me.” In estimating aright the worth of this prayer, the following suggestion may be of value:Only those prayers are vital and real which, like this, combine requests for outward and inward good. When you pray, say,” Give us daily bread, and forgive us our debts.” If you omit to ask for the bread, you may be pretty sure it is not the greatness of your spirituality that omits the request, but only the littleness of your faith, which makes you imagine God can do nothing so substantial as bless you in your common needs. What is wanted by all of us is goodness rather than spirituality, and a religion of common life rather than a strained, unnatural pietism. Jabez had grand faith that God ruled in common life, was lowly enough to bless him, and to help him in his work. Observe, lastly

IV. THE LORD‘S ANSWER. It came to him. Came so palpably that all could see it, that it was a matter of history, that it taught others that they had a Friend above, and led them to the throne of grace. Blessed is the circle in which somebody prays! Pray on. You will not need to proclaim the answers you receive; your neighbours will see it for themselves. And your prayer will thus be doubly blessed. It will secure for you the good you desire, and will guide many another to the throne of the heavenly grace, to get there the blessings which they require.G.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

1Ch 4:9, 1Ch 4:10 -A life and its lessons

Two verses only relate the life of Jabez, but they suffice to give us some idea of its nature and character; also to convey some lessons for our guidance as we pass through our own.

I. THREE FEATURES OF HIS LIFE. We learn that:

1. It was begun in special sorrow. His mother called him Jabez because she “bare him with sorrow.” Possibly his father had died before his birth, or their estate may have been so reduced as to make another child seem a burden rather than a blessing.

2. It was characterized by special piety. He made his future the subject of earnest prayer to God; he earnestly desired that God would bless him in all his doings, that the Divine hand might be upon him; he evidently believed and felt that all things were ruled and overruled by the Lord himself. He “committed his way unto the Lord.”

3. It was crowned with special peace and honour. “God granted him that which he requested” (1Ch 4:10). He was “more honourable than his brethren”had a larger estate, was held in higher esteem, attained to greater eminence. God did “keep him from the evil” from which he sought Divine deliverance, and it did “not grieve him.” He did “enlarge his coast.” Peace and honour were his portion in an unusual degree. His life must have had its shadow as well as its sunshine, but it was brighter with earthly honour and less clouded with worldly troubles than are the lives of most men.

II. THE LESSONS WE MAY GLEAN THEREFROM. We learn:

1. That that which has an unpromising beginning may stand among the best. How little did the mother of Jabez imagine that the child of her sorrow would have so honourable a career! The most successful and even glorious enterprise may be begun in weakness and in trembling of heart. That which was once only a small gathering in a back slum has grown into a magnificent and beneficent institution. They that sow in tears may reap in joy. If God prosper a human life or a good cause, its early insignificance will prove of small account. Many a time the widow’s child, for whom it has been hard to find food and education, has grown to be a man of weight and honour, filling a large space and doing a great work in the world.

2. That it is right to ask God for material blessings in the hope of obtaining them. These were earthly favours which Jabez asked for, and which he received of Godenlargement of his estate, immunity from trouble and loss, etc. We have no authority for asking God for wealth or immunity from sorrow with a positive assurance that we shall have those things. We do not know that they will suit us; it is quite possible, or even probable, that they would prove the very worst things we could have. But we may ask God for temporal blessings, in the hope of receiving them, if we ask in a subject spirit, desiring him to withhold from us what he knows it would be best to keep back. We are to pray for daily bread; that “his hand may be with us;” that he will be with us in our going out and our coming in.

3. That God is never served in vain. God granted Jabez that which he requested. He may not give us our heart’s desires in the form in which we cherish them. The “cup” did not “pass from” the Saviour, but he “was heard in that he feared” (Heb 5:7). God has ways of blessing us of which we have little thought when we are on our knees. But if we ask we shall haveif not sooner, later; if not in our way, in his better way.C.

1Ch 4:11-43–General truths from genealogical tables.

Reading lessons from this list of names, we gather

I. THAT OBSCURITY IS BETTER THAN PROMINENCE FOR MOST OF US. In this long table we have one or two celebrated men, such as Caleb (1Ch 4:15) and Othniei (1Ch 4:13), but most of them are men of no repute. We only know their names and their relationship to those that preceded and followed them. It is a mere truism to say that the generality of men must spend their lives in obscurity, that it is only a few who can be conspicuous. But it is a truth worth treasuring, that lowliness of position is far better for most of us than elevation would he. But few men can bear distinction without spiritual deterioration. The graces which the Master most loves to see (and those which are most acceptable to man also) flourish in the quiet valley far better than on the lofty mountain. If God ordain prominence, “Be not high-minded, but fear.” If obscurity be our portion, let us say with the psalmist, “Lord, my heart is not haughty, nor mine eyes lofty,” etc. (Psa 131:1). Let us not be envious of the exalted, but rather be thankful that we are not exposed to their peculiar perils.

“He that is down need fear no fall,
He that is low no pride.”

II. THAT GOD PUTS HONOUR ON THE USEFUL ARTS. It is specially mentioned of some “that they were craftsmen;” of others that they were members of the “house of them that wrought fine linen” (1Ch 4:21). It is significant enough that, in this brief recital, these two industries should have honourable mention. We should feel that when we cut and carve, when we spin and weave, when we are occupied in manufactures, when we are turning, by industry and knowledge, the materials around us into objects of service and of beauty, we are not only “making money,” enriching our nation, gratifying human tastes, we are also fulfilling the will of God concerning us, we are doing that for which he placed us here; and we should engage in all useful arts as in his sight, serving him in all our labour.

III. THAT CONTENTED INDUSTRY IS BETTER THAN SUCCESSFUL VIOLENCE. Two instances are given at the close of the chapter (1Ch 4:39-41, 1Ch 4:42, 1Ch 4:43) of appropriation by violence. The sons of Simeon took forcible possession of” fat pasture and good,” where “the land was wide, and quiet, and peaceable;” they established themselves there by “utterly destroying” the inhabitants. Others of them (1Ch 4:42) repeated the same deed of violence. Possibly they may have been justified in their act by commands which were binding, or by a permission which was sufficient. Probably they satisfied their own conscience, and wrought their work without compunction. But we read with far greater pleasure of the craftsmen who gave their name to the valley by their industry (1Ch 4:14) and of those who “wrought fine linen” and of those engaged in simple agriculture (1Ch 4:23), and thus gained a peaceful, houourable livelihood. Feats of arms are brilliant things in their way, but beneath the surface are heartrending injuries, and long after they are performed comes a series of sorrows. The industry and energy which work no injury to the conscience, and which carry benefit and comfort in their train, are immeasurably to be preferred to “the pomp and circumstance of war.”

IV. THAT IT IS WISE TO CONSIDER OURSELVES IN THE LIGHT IN WHICH WE LOOK AT OTHERS. The chronicler remarks, shortly but significantly, “These are ancient things” (1Ch 4:22). The events of his “modern” time are now very much more “ancient” to us than those old times of which he was writing were to his generation. We stand in the graveyard, and the sloping, timeworn tombstones speak to our hearts of the distant days in which once lived the generation beneath our feet. The day will come when we shall be separated by the same breadth of time from the living men that will then be walking where we sleep. We shall soon be nothing to the world but the people of a day that is passed.

1. How great is the folly of men who own no treasure but that of this transient time!

2. How true the wisdom of those whose portion no graveyard will hold, who in the far hereafter will live with God, and be rich with the wealth of Heaven (Rev 2:15-17)!C.

HOMILIES BY F. WHITFIELD

1Ch 4:9–Jabez: his history.

Supposed to be the son of Kenaz, and an eminent doctor of the law, whose reputation drew around him so many scribes and learned men that a town was called by his name (see 1Ch 2:55). We have seen the pre-eminence given to the tribe of Judah on account of its connection with the promised Christ. Before tracing further the genealogy of the sons of Israel, an entire chapter is devoted to the family of David. This is just as it should bestill further prominence being given to every one and everything that foreshadowed the true David, the Lord Jesus Christ. The line of David is drawn all through the third chapter, through a succession of good and bad monarchs. The Lord’s eye is on his beloved Son; and the stream that leads to him winds its way through wastes and stagnant pools and dark morasses lying on either sideeverything marked which in any way stands connected with it, but beyond this as unworthy of notice. We can now devote attention to one of God’s children in particular, and recorded in this chapterJabez. In the midst of a genealogy of some extent, the Spirit of God singles one out for notice, and lingers over it with delight. It is a bright gem on an apparently hard and uninteresting surface shining with brilliancy. It is a name, however, fully confirming all we have hitherto referred to. It would have no notice in the inspired Word but for what there is of God in it. We know much of God in Jabez, very little of who or what he was. Of what he was in relation to the world, in relation to his fellow-men, or to society, or to business, we know little. Of what he was to God there is much said and much known. What matters the rest? We may be sure that was all right. For if men are right towards Christ we may take the rest for granted. It is this that gave Jabez a name in heaven. This made him worthy of a record in the Book of God. But for this he would have been unnoticed and unknown. And what is said of him? “Jabez was more honourable than his brethren: and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow.” God’s sorrowing ones are generally God’s more honourable ones. It is through sorrow we reach our joys. “Ye now therefore have sorrow, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.” It is God’s ordersorrow the portal to joy. The darkness first, then the light; tribulation here, then the kingdom; discipline here, then the glory. God’s secret place is darkness. The pavilion round about him are “dark waters and thick clouds”the dark waters of sorrow, the thick clouds of baffling enigma and unfathomable mystery. But inside this pavilion of darkness and cloud there is always a brightness (Psa 18:11, Psa 18:12). This brightness is the unchanging love of him who is “the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the express image of his person.” Under his shadow the dark waters and thick clouds will all in due time disperse. Yes, every thick cloud and every dark waterflood will melt before his love, who is “the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.” Before the air can be cleared and the calm stillness of nature be felt, the thunder-clouds must gather and the lightning-flash be seen. The stillness of nature comes heralded by tokens of terror. It is the order of God, both in nature and grace. We see the darkness first, and call it “Jabez.” We meet with bereavement and write “Jabez” upon it, though God makes it a blessed means of drawing us to fix our affections on a world that can never pass away. We meet with disappointment and vexation and worry, and write “Jabez” upon one thing after another. Yet all these things come out, in the wonder-working of God’s providence, in the deep riches of his grace, as dealings “more honourable,” as blessings in disguise. They are the discipline of his hand, bringing glory to him and blessing to our own souls.

“Judge not the Lord by feeble sense,
But trust him for his grace;
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.”

And what is the prominent feature in the character of this man of God noticed by the Holy Spirit? It is prayer. “And Jabez called upon the God of Israel.” Jabez was a man of prayer. In this aspect he is first presented to us. Oh that this was the marked feature in us all! A man of prayer means a man blessed of God. A man of prayer means, in its truest sense, a man of God. It means a marked manone distinguished from others by communion with God, and carrying that mark about him in all his least and greatest acts. This is the man on whom the Holy Spirit loves to linger, and singles him out from a mere mass of genealogies that have nothing worthy of notice, and holds him before us for a moment as the one “whom the King delighteth to honour.” But on whom did Jabez call? 1%t on God; not on abstract deity; not on some “unknown God”some almighty abstraction whom we are for ever groping after, but whom we can never know. No; this is the atheist’s god, the Socinian’s god, the rationalist’s god, the god of all men who know not God in Christ. Jabez knew better. He “called on the God of Israel“the covenant God, the God of his .fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The saints of the Old Testament had one expression with regard to God which corresponded exactly with the expression used by the saints of the New Testament. The latter knew God as “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ;” the former knew God as the “God of Israel,” the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” And these two meant exactly the same. The God in covenant, and keeping that covenant for ever; the God who called his people out of the idolatry of heathenism; who” accounts” them righteous before him; who separates them from the world to be his people; who loves them, and keeps them, and causes them to inherit the land; and who does all this, not because of their deservings, but because of his own rich mercy. This is the “God of Israel,” the “God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” And Jabez knew this God. He addresses him as One with whom he is .familiar; he values his blessing above all others; he feels the need of his “hand,” his presence, continually; he feels the need of being “kept,” and feels that God only can keep him; he feels his own liability to evil, and casts himself, in the conviction of his weakness, upon him. Oh, surely Jabez was no ordinary child of God!W.

1Ch 4:10–Jabez’s prayer.

I. Mark the first line of his prayer: “Oh that thou wouldest BLESS ME INDEED!” He needs the blessing of his covenant God. He pleads for it. He pleads earnestly. It is real prayer. It is such prayer God bears, such prayer he loves to hear and to answer. But oh] there is many a blessing which may not be a blessing “indeed.” Of this Jabez is aware. He asks not for a blessing, but a blessing indeedfor that which will be a real blessing. He asks not for that which may come in the form of a blessing and in the end prove a curse. He asks for that to come which will be a real, permanent, abiding blessing. “Let it come in what shape it may. That, Lord, I leave to thee. Let it come in darkness or in light, in suffering and sorrow or in health and gladness, in the abundance of wealth or the desolation of povertyany way as best may seem to thee, Lord; only let it be a blessing to me, a blessing ‘indeed.'” Ah, this is prayer, and the right sort of prayer. There was something like it, only in an infinitely higher degree, in the Garden of Gethsemane: “Father, thy will be done.” There was just this difference between the Son of God in the bosom of the Father and those who are sons of God only by adoption. He did not need the strengthening angel from heaven to give him that submission of will. It was not till after that submission the angel appeared to strengthen him. The angel was sent, not to produce submission of spirit, but for the weakness of the body, and to carry out the work of redemption. His holy soul was always submissive. It was his nature to be so. With us, however, it is different. We need the strengthening angel to help us to submission to the Father’s will as well as to do the work of God. Our nature is essentially rebellious. We require the discipline of God’s hand to bring us to submit. His holy soul was submission itself. There is a passage in the New Testament which corresponds exactly with this distinction I have drawn in the prayer of Jabez between a blessing and a blessing “indeed.” Our Lord said to the Jews (Joh 8:31, Joh 8:32), “If ye continue in my Word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” It is one thing to be a “disciple,” it is another to be a “disciple indeed.” Many were “disciples” in our Lord’s time; how few were the “disciples indeed“! Many followed him, but from what motives? How few “continued in the Word,” “knew the truth” with that deeper knowledge of the heart, and were “made free” by that knowledge” free” from the bondage of guilt and sin, “free” from the power of sin over their lives, “free” from all that which they felt was contrary to the glory of God! Ah, how little of this freedom there may be with all our discipleship! This is what it is to be a “disciple indeed.” This is what it is to be “blessed indeed.” Reader, are you a “disciple indeed“?

II. Mark the next petition: “And wouldest ENLARGE MY COAST.” Probably the coast which he prays may be enlarged was some earthly possession. He speaks as one who had to recover from the hand of the enemy his portion of the promised land. For the recovery of this he was about to engage in war. And what a spiritual lesson we learn from it! It is by conflict the child of God obtains more and more of the blessings laid up for him in Christ. The Word of the Lord is to him what it was to Israel of old: “Go ye up and possess the land;” “There remaineth yet very much land to be possessed.” Oh, what blessings are laid up for us in Christ! Why do we not enter into our inheritance? God has indeed “blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ,” but have we possessed them? Have we drunk deep of these wells of living waters? Are our souls living upon the riches that are hid in Christ for us? Why do we not possess the land which Jesus has won for us? Because, dear reader, there is no conflict. We must fight to enjoy. We must know what it is, hour after hour, to engage in conflictyes, in a bloody conflictwith the world, the flesh, and the devil. We must grapple hour after hour with flesh and bloodwith “the lust of the eye, and the pride of life.” We must know keenly what it is to pluck out a right eye, and cut off a right hand or a right foot. We must know the struggle with sloth and indulgence, with natural inclinations and desires, with unholy dispositions, and harsh tempers, and unkind words, and a fault-finding spirit. Have we entered into, are we daily engaged in, a conflict like this? Ah, you will never be a “disciple indeed“ unless you know something of this agony. It is through conflict, through warring a good warfare, that God opens the floodgates of the soul for all the treasures of his grace to flow in. You may know them and talk about them; but have you possessed the good land? Is it not true that “there remaineth yet”yes, yet after all these years of Christian discipleship“very much land to be possessed”? Oh I no warfare, no conflict, no struggle; then no deep joy, no sweet peace, no uplifting communion with God, no realized sweetness of the Word, no real growth in grace, no likeness to Christ. Jabez’s coast would never have been enlarged without a deadly struggle with the foe. There will be no enlargement of coast with you, Christian, without this. It is thus we see it in the Lord’s address to the seven Churches. Every promise is made there not to the Christian as such, not to the disciple, but “to him that overcometh.” They are made to the “disciple indeed“to the one who knows something not only of what it is to fight, but to win. Yes, Christian, your soul has been saved by Christ’s finished work; but every inch of the ground beyond must be fought for. You will pass into God’s presence a naked souljust saved. Where are the laurels you have won? Where is the ground around you bedewed with your tears from struggling in prayer? Where is the inward struggle against indolence and sloth, against yielding to natural inclination, against a censorious spirit, against some unkind word at your fireside, against some light or frivolous thought? Where is the holy anxiety to redeem time for God? Where is the agony and bloody sweat against temptation and sin? Where is the soul’s inward yearning after God? Where is the surrender to him hour after hourthe full consecration of self and all things to his glory? Oh, this is the warfare with the foe; and the man who knows something of this alone knows what it is to have “enlargement of coast.” Precious prayer! Lord, “enlarge my coast”! Make more room in my heart, in my life, for thee! I am so narrow, so cramped, so straitened, so wretchedly little! Oh, enlarge this straitened soul of mine! Make more room for thyself in me and in everything about reel Yes, in my time, my pleasures, my duties, my cares, my aims, my household, my children, my servants,in all make more room for thyself! Come, Lord Jesus, “enlarge my coast.” And do it now! Let me not wait another day, another hour. Reader, are you ready for this? Will you to-day make this your prayer? Believe it, you will not be a stranger to the joy of the Lord any longer if you will. Oh, make this your prayer and your aim! “Go ye up and possess the land,” for “there remaineth yet very much land to be possessed.”

III. What is the next petition? “That THINE HAND MIGHT BE WITH ME.” The band of God is the presence of God. But it is more. It is God in activity. It is God in life and power. It is the psalmist’s holy longing: “My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God.” The hand of God is God in power on our behalf. What was the hand of Jesus? What mighty works were done by it! It touched the leper, and all disease fled. It touched the dead, and made it start into life again. It was laid on a sinking disciple, and held him amid the boiling water-floods. It was laid on a loving disciple who had fallen prostrate before the glory of the Son of man, and it raised him to his feet again, and enabled him to stand in the midst of all the unveiled glories of the Apocalypse. Oh, the hand of the God-man Jesus, what power there was in it!

Thus Jabez prays, “That thine hand may be with me.” Thus the child of God may ever pray. It is just what we needhim with us in all his glorious power; him to put away our leprous sin; him to raise our dead souls to life; him to uphold our sinking souls amid the storms and tempests of life; him to raise us out of the dust of grovelling earthliness, and make us look into the glory before us; him to bless us; him to do all. “That thine hand may be with me.” Reader, it is just what you needa living Jesus at your side from day to day, and hour to hour.

IV. Mark the concluding petition: “That thou wouldest KEEP ME FROM EVIL, that it may not grieve me.” Observe, reader, it is not a prayer to be kept from evil. It is a prayer to be kept from the effects of evil. “That it may not grieve me.” “Have we received good at the hand of the Lord, and shall we not receive evil?” “Shall there be evil in a city, and I have not done it?” The Christian cannot pray to be delivered from evil. He will have sorrow and suffering and trial here. The eye must often weep over sin; the heart must often mourn over its depravity. Temptation must be constantly endured. But this the soul may pray forthat the sin within us and the temptations around us may not grieve or hurt the soul. This he may pray forthat his evil heart may not draw him from God; that an evil nature may not be yielded to; that an evil spirit may not deaden his soul, and leave him cold and heartless to the Saviour and his glory. There is no exemption from evil here. It is in us and around us on every side. But, blessed be God, we have One dwelling within us, even the Holy Spirit, and through his mighty working evil may be turned into a blessing. It is for this we may pray, we must pray. Your danger is not in possessing an evil heart, but in yielding to it. Your danger is not being on the verge of a precipice, but in being unwatchful there. Oh, pray this prayer, Christian reader!W.

1Ch 4:31-43 -The Simeonites.

This tribe is classed with that of Judah, as their possessions were partly taken out of their extensive territory (see Jos 19:1). As Simeon had only a limited portion of the land of Judah, they were forced to seek accommodation elsewhere. In consequence of their sloth or cowardice, some of the cities within their allotted territory were only nominally theirs, and were never taken from the Philistines till David’s time, when, the Simeonites having forfeited all claim to them, he transferred them to the tribe of Judah (see 1Sa 27:6). Let us learn two lessons from this tribefirst, with reference to this transfer, and second, with reference to the sad results that followed the supineness or cowardice which characterized it.

1. We learn from Gen 49:5-7 that cruelty characterized this son of Jacob, and that righteous retribution followed. Also we see how one sin begets another. Cruelty has in its train cowardice. True bravery and magnanimity is the result of a nature ennobled by Divine grace. Wherever we find cruelty, there we may be certain to find cowardice and supineness. One strengthened grace strengthens every other in the man. One indulged sin weakens every grace, and begets sins which bear that sin’s “image and superscription” at every turn and throughout many generations. Simeon’s descendants, though not personally guilty of their father’s sin, have the brand upon them. Their sins are but the outward ripple on the stream where their father cast in the first stone of crime. Thus Simeon’s sin lived in his generations. Thus men live long after they are dead. All true living influence begins to be potent after we have disappeared from the scene. How solemn, then, how awfully responsible, is each one’s life!

2. Now look at the sad results of their supineness. Inasmuch as they did not fight the Philistines and gain possession of their cities, David took them from them and allotted them to Judah. What a remarkable confirmation of our Lord’s words, “To him that hath [Judah] shall more be given; and from him that hath not [Simeon] even that he hath shall be taken away”! See another consequence of this supineness. They sought larger territory, and found it in the pastures of Gederah. For a time all seemed bright and prosperous. But soon they were attacked by foes, and had to fly to Mount Seir. This would have been unnecessary had they been valiant, fought the Philistines, and become possessed in reality of what they had only nominal possession before. Reader, learn the solemn warning. “Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life;” “Make your calling and election sure.” Make that nominal possession of Christthat profession of religion you weara reality, a true and living possession. Thus will you, too, save yourself from similar results, and will reap your reward.W.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

3. Supplements to the Genealogy of the House of Judah (leading to the Genealogical Survey of the Twelve Tribes of Israel): 1Ch 4:1-23

1Ch 4:1.The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal.

2And Reaiah son of Shobal begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai and Lahad: these are the families of the Zorathite.

3And these were1 of the father of Etam: Jezreel, and Ishma, and Idbash; and the name of their sister was Hazelelponi. 4And Penuel the father of Gedor, and Ezer the father of Hushah: these are the sons of Hur the first-born of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem.

5And Ashur the father of Tekoah had two wives, Helah and Naarah. 6And Naarah bare him Ahuzzam, and Hepher, and Temeni, and the Ahashtari: these were the sons of Naarah. 7And the sons of Helah: Zereth, Izhar,2 and Ethnan.

8And Koz begat Anub and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel the son of Harum. 9And Jabez was honoured above his brethren; and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow. 10And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, If thou wilt bless me indeed, and enlarge my border, and thy hand be with me, and thou deal without evil, that it grieve me not! And God brought that which he had asked.

11And Celub the brother of Shuhah begat Mehir; he was the father of Eshton. 12And Eshton begat Beth-rapha, and Paseah, and Tehinnah the father of the city Nahash: these are the men of Rechah.

13And the sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah; and the sons of Othniel: Hathath. 14And Meonothai begat Ophrah: and Seraiah begat Joab father of the valley of the carpenters; for they were carpenters.

15And the sons of Caleb son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the sons of Elah and Kenaz.

16And the sons of Jehalelel: Ziph and Ziphah, Tiria and Asarel.

17And the Song of Solomon 3 of Ezrah: Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she conceived [and bare]4 Miriam, and Schammai, and Ishbah father of Eshtemoa. 18And his wife, the Jewess, bare Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Socho, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah: and these are the sons of Bithiah daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took.5

19And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham: the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa6 the Maachathite.

20And the sons of Shimon: Amnon and Rinnah, Benhanan and Tulon;7 and the sons of Ishi: Zoheth and Benzoheth.8

21The sons of Shelah son of Judah: Er the father of Lechah, and Ladah the father of Mareshah; and the families of the house of byssus work, of the house of Ashbea. 22And Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who 23ruled over Moab, and Jashubi-lehem9: and these are ancient things. These are the potters and the dwellers in Netaim and Gederah; with the king, in his service, they dwelt there.

EXEGETICAL

Preliminary Remark.This section, unusually rich in obscurities and difficulties, is characterized on the one hand as a supplement to the pedigree of Judah already communicated, embracing numerous fragments of old genealogies; on the other hand, as a transition and introduction to the genealogical and chorographical survey of the twelve tribes except Judah, contained in 1Ch 4:24-27. In common with the latter group of genealogies, it makes frequent reference to the places in the territory of each tribe, and inserts brief historical or archological notices, which are of considerable value on account of the antiquity of the events recorded (1Ch 4:9-10; 1Ch 4:14; 1Ch 4:21-23). We are reminded of the former notices of the families of Judah in 1 Chronicles 2, not only by the superscription connecting the introductory verse of this chapter, with its enumeration of some of the most eminent descendants of Judah (1Ch 4:1), but also by the abundance of the details communicated concerning many more or less celebrated Jewish families (at all events a proof that the tribe of Judah passed with the author for the most important of all, and that the most special notices concerning it lay before him); as well as by the loose order of the several fragments, in which a similar neglect of the formation of longer lines of generations standing in direct succession to one another betrays itself, as in those supplementary reports concerning various descendants of Caleb at the close of 1 Chronicles 2, and perhaps in the closing verses of 1 Chronicles 3. Nowhere is this fragmentary character of the genealogical notes of our author so striking as in the present section, which presents no less than ten or twelve isolated fragments of lines or genealogical notices, having no visible connection with that which precedes or follows. The whole, in fact, looks almost like a gathering of genealogical pebbles, rolled together from various quarters, and consisting of older and younger parts, that are kept together only by their common connection with the tribe of Judah. That anything here communicated refers to the state of things after the exile, is assumed by Bertheau (p. 36), perhaps without sufficient ground. Yet it cannot be positively asserted that the author (who in 1 Chronicles 3 traced the house of David down to his own late times) here describes only ancient relations, and purposely has not overstepped the limits of the exile.

1. The Superscription: 1Ch 4:1.The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal. These five are called sons of Judah, as appears from 1Ch 2:3 ff., only in a wider sense; for Perez only was an actual son of Judah (1Ch 2:5); Hezron was his grandson; Carmi, as the probable grandson of Zerah (1Ch 2:7), was his great-grandson; Hur the son of Caleb, son of Hezron, was his great-great-grandson (1Ch 2:18-19); and Shobal son of Hur was his grandsons great-grandson (1Ch 2:50). The putting together of these five descendants is highly peculiar, and cannot be satisfactorily explained in its historical grounds. Several of the families founded by them certainly became chief families in the tribe of Judah, but not all; in particular, the prominence of Carmi between names so celebrated as Hezron and Hur is so truly strange, as to justify the suspicion that this name is not genuine, and to favour the hypothesis of Wellhausen (p. 20), that for is to be read , Celubai=Caleb (see 1Ch 2:9). If this were the original reading, we should obtain a series of directly succeeding descendants of Judah (Comp. 1Ch 2:3; 1Ch 2:9; 1Ch 2:18 f., 50), and so far as our verse is a superscription for the following, it would merely indicate descendants of Hezron, who is also named in 1 Chronicles 2 as the ancestor of a widely-spread stock of Jewish families. This indication, however, would by no means correspond with the following verses. For only by uncertain conjecture do we think to find in 1Ch 4:5-7 descendants of Hur, in 1Ch 4:11-15 descendants of Caleb, in 1Ch 4:16-23 other Hezronites of different lines (comp. on the respective passages). On the whole, the several groups of our section are strung together without much connection; and that they form no continuous line of descent (by which the line started in 1Ch 4:1, if the proposed emendation be accepted, would be carried forward) is at all events clear and beyond a doubt. The matter, therefore, must rest with the remark of Bertheau: Why in our passage precisely these five sons of Judah are enumerated, while in Gen 45:1 and 1 Chronicles 2 other names occur in a different order, is a question we should only be able to answer if we could state the point of time in the history and development of the tribe of Judah to which our series refers, and were in a position to trace further from other sources the relations of the families of Judah here exhibited. As matters stand, we must be contented with the genera, remark, that the families designated by our five names were without doubt the prominent families in the time of the author of our series, and are therefore enumerated as sons of Judah. It is surprising, certainly, that in the following pedigree, 1Ch 4:2-20, this arrangement almost entirely disappears, and that in 1Ch 4:21-23 Shelah, sixth son of Judah, is introduced by way of appendix.

2. The Zorathites, a line of descent from Shobal: 1Ch 4:2.And Reaiah son of Shobal (the son who is probably latent under , 1Ch 2:52, on which see) begat Jahath. is no further mentioned as a descendant of Judah through Shobal, but occurs often as a Levite name; comp. 1Ch 6:5; 1Ch 6:28, 1Ch 23:10 ff., 1Ch 24:22, 2Ch 34:12.His sons also, Ahumai and Lahad, occur nowhere else. On the contrary, the closing notice, these are the families of the Zorathite, refers us to well-known ground, in so far as a descent of the inhabitants of Zorah from Shobal (the ancestor of Kiriath-jearim, the mother city of Zorah and Eshtaol) is manifest from 1Ch 2:50-53. The present verse therefore stands plainly in the relation of a supplement to that passage.

3. A Line of Descent from Hur: 1Ch 4:3-4.And these were of the father of Etam. So is it to be amended instead of the unmeaning and these were Abi Etam of the Masoretic text, or with the Sept. and Vulg.: And these were the children of Etam. , whether it be an element of a personal name , or itself denote an old patriarch or family, points at all events to the inhabitants of an old Jewish mountain city not far from Bethlehem and Tekoa (2Ch 11:6), which occurs in the history of Samson (Jdg 15:8). Jezreel also, the first-named son of Etam, occurs Jos 15:56 as a mountain city of Judah; comp. the nom. gentil. the Jezreelitess referring to this city, and applied to Ahinoam the wife of David, 1Ch 3:1. On the contrary, Ishma, Idbash, and their sister Hazelelponi are mentioned only here. Whether the name of the last is the name of a family or of an individual (comp. Ew. 273e) remains doubtful.

1Ch 4:4. And Penuel the father of Gedor. Penuel () is here the name of a patriarch of Jewish descent, but in 1Ch 8:25 of a Benjamite. With the city Penuel or Peniel, east of the Jordan and south of Jabbok (Gen 32:31 f., Jdg 8:8; Jdg 8:17, 1Ki 12:25), the name here has no connection. On the contrary, that of his son Gedor occurs also as a name of a town in the tribe of Judah (Jos 15:58; comp. 1Ch 4:39; 1Ch 13:7), and this town, preserved as a ruin in the present Jedur (Robins. ii. 592), is to be referred to the son of Penuel as its father or founder. We meet, indeed, in 1Ch 4:18 with a certain Jered as father of Gedor, whence we may conclude that the posterity of both formed the population of this Gedor.And Ezer the father of Hushah. occurs elsewhere as a mans name (1Ch 7:21, 1Ch 12:9), but not in the genealogies of the house of Judah. The site of the town Hushah founded by this Ezer is unknown; but the nom. gentil. occurs several times, namely, in the Davidic hero Sibbechai, 1Ch 11:28; 1Ch 20:4, 2Sa 23:27.These are the sons of Hur the firstborn of Ephrathath, the father of Bethlehem. Comp. 1Ch 2:19, and on Hurs relation to Bethlehem 1Ch 2:51, where more precisely than here Salma the son of Hur is called father of Bethlehem. The circumstance, moreover, that in our verses (3 and 4) other names and persons are enumerated as descendants of Hur than in 1Ch 2:50-55, betokens no difference; for there is no ground for the assumption that in the latter passage all his descendants are given (Keil). Our passage is thus, like 1Ch 4:2, supplementary to 1Ch 2:50-55, so far as it repeats and confirms some of the names and affinities there mentioned, and adds other new ones.

4. Ashur the father of Tekoa and his descendants: 1Ch 4:5-7. According to 1Ch 2:24, this Ashur was a posthumous son of Caleb [?Hezron] by Abiah. That he was properly a son of Caleb, and no other than Hur ( = , that is, , Ew. 273b), is a hypothesis of Wellhausen, grounded on several rather forced emendations of the text (p. 14 sq.; comp. above on the p.)

1Ch 4:6. And Naarah bare him Ahuzzam, a son mentioned nowhere else. Why Naarahs sons are enumerated first, while Helah was named 1Ch 4:5 as the first, and Naarah the second, wife of Ashur, remains uncertain. Hepher the second son of Naarah is at all events different from the Gileadite of this name mentioned 1Ch 11:36 and Num 26:32 f., but might possibly be the patriarch or founder of the district Hepher, 1Ki 4:10, in the south of Judah, not far from Tappuah, where a Canaanitish king resided in early times (Jos 2:17 ).Temeni () or Temani (Southern), the third son, will designate a neighbouring family of the tribe of Judah. Ahashtari, that is, the family of those from Ahashtar, is wholly unknown.

1Ch 4:7. And the sons of Helah: Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan. These names occur only here. The of the Keri, instead of the Kethib, occurs as the name of a son of Simeon, Gen 46:10, and of a Canaanitish king, Gen 23:8 ; but these names have obviously nothing to do with the son of Ashur and Helah.

5. Koz and his descendants, among whom is Jabez: 1Ch 4:8-10. This section wants all genealogical connection with the families already mentioned.And Koz begat Anub. A Koz (with the art. occurs afterwards, 1Ch 24:10, as a Levite, and also in Ezr 2:61 and Neh 3:4, in which latter passage, moreover, the Levitical descent is not expressed, so that possibly a Jew descended from this Koz might be meant. In what relation our Koz stands to those before named, whether he belonged to the sons of Ashur (as Glassius, Tremell., Piscator, Starke, etc., think), is quite uncertain. The name of his son appears, moreover, to he identical with that of the town , Jos 11:21; Jos 15:50 (a place not far from Debir in the south of Judah); for the Sept. (cod. Alex.) renders it by . If this identification be correct, , the grape, would be the product of , a thorn, and the present genealogical notice thus present an allegorical sense, reminding us of the fable of Jotham (Judges 9), and of Mat 7:16 (comp. Hiller, Hierophyt. i. p. 464).Zobebah and the families of Aharhel the son of Harum. These are quite unknown.

1Ch 4:9. And Jabez was honoured above his brethren. Jabez here is probably the name of another descendant of Koz; for the connects the notice of him closely with that which precedes. The town Jabez, the inhabitants of which are mentioned 1Ch 2:55, may perhaps have been founded by him; from which might be surmised a connection of himself and of those named, 1Ch 4:8, with Shobal the son of Hur (1Ch 2:50). But all this is very uncertain.I bare him with sorrow. This maternal utterance, discovering the fundamental meaning of the name = son of sorrow (comp. the root , the second and third radicals of which are here transposed), reminds us of similar exclamations of mothers in the patriarchal age as Gen 4:25; Gen 19:37 f., Gen 29:32-35, Gen 33:20. In like manner, the statement that Jabez was honoured above his brethren, reminds us of Gen 34:19 (Hamor the son of Shechem). And by the vow of this Jabez to the God of Israel (comp. Gen 28:20; Gen 33:20) recorded in 1Ch 4:10, as well as by the new explanation of the name, which is contained in the terms of this vow (a second reference of to the root , but with a new turn, , that thou grieve me not), we are carried back to the scenes of Genesis (comp. Gen 17:17 ff; Gen 18:12; Gen 21:6; Gen 26:8, etc.), so that we have here an undoubted primeval historical record. Even the rhetorical clothing of the vow, a mere antecedent clause, with wanting a consequent, but with clear emphasizing of the coming in at the end as the point of the whole, reminds us of the ancient style of the Pentateuch; comp. Gen 28:20 ff.; Num 21:2, etc.And God brought that which he had asked. This statement, occupying the place of consequent to the aposiopesis , serves to explain the above notice that Jabez was honoured above his brethren, and exhibit him as the lord of a wide domain, and the possessor of the divine blessing. Observe, moreover, the name used here (as in 1Ch 5:20; 1Ch 5:25-26) instead of , which occurs elsewhere in these genealogical sections (for example, 1Ch 2:3, 1Chr 5:41, etc.).

6. The Men of Rechah: 1Ch 4:11-12.And Celub the brother of Shuhah begat Mehir. This Celub () bears indeed the same name as the famous hero Caleb or Celubai (1Ch 2:9), but is distinguished by the addition the brother of Shuhah from his more illustrious namesake, and cannot possibly have passed with our genealogist for the same person (as Wellhausen, p. 20, thinks). The choice of the form , which stands to as , 1Ch 4:8, to , while the famous Caleb the son of Jephunneh, 1Ch 4:15, is designated by his usual name, shows that in the view of the writer the owners of the two names are to be kept apart. It is doubtful whether be a mans or a womans name; its identification with , 1Ch 4:4, is not admitted (against Starke and other old writers). Mehir the son, and Eshton the grandson, of Celub occur nowhere else.

1Ch 4:12. And Eshton begat Bethrapha, that is, perhaps, the house or family of Rapha, who is otherwise unknown; for neither the Benjamite Rapha (1Ch 8:2) nor the offspring of Rapha (1Ch 20:4-8) can apply here. And the two following descendants of Eshton remain at least uncertain. Paseah might possibly be the ancestor of the sons of Paseah introduced among the Nethinim (Ezr 2:49; Neh 7:51); Tehinnah occurs not elsewhere, though perhaps the city Nahash, of which he is the father or founder, may be connected with Nahash the father of Abigail, the step-sister of David (see 1Ch 2:16; 2Sa 17:25).These are the men of Rechah, the inhabitants perhaps of the town Rechah, a place not elsewhere named.

7. The Descendants of Kenaz: 1Ch 4:13-14.And the sons of Kenaz: Othniel and Seraiah. That Kenaz (), the father of Othniel the judge (Jdg 1:13 ff; Jdg 3:9), sprang from Hezron the grandson of Judah, appears to follow from this, that Caleb the son of Jephunneh is several times designated a Kenizzite () and, so placed in a certain genealogical relation to Kenaz. It is to be observed, indeed, that Kenaz, if really father or grandfather, and not a more remote ancestor of Othniel, would have been younger than Caleb or a contemporary of nearly the same age. Caleb and Othniel are usually called brothers, on account of their common relation to Kenaz (Jos 15:17; Jdg 1:13); and, indeed, in the latter place Othniel is called the younger brother of Caleb (we must therefore translate, with Bachmann, the son of Kenaz, younger brother of Caleb, with which, however, Jos 15:17 would conflict; see Keil, p. 63). Hence appears the possibility that both the companion of Joshua, Caleb the son of Jephunneh (who was eighty-five years old at the conquest of Canaan, Jos 14:10 f.), and Othniel the judge, at least a generation younger (the conqueror of Cushan-rishathaim), stood in a common relation to an otherwise unknown patriarch Kenaz. Of what nature this relation was, whether it was that Caleb, by means of his father Jephunneh, was a grandson of Kenaz (as appears to have been the case, Num 32:12), and that Othniel, either through Jephunneh or some other, was likewise his grandson, or perhaps great-grandson, must remain uncertain. Possibly Kenaz is merely the name of a race external to Israel, belonging in fact to Edom, Gen 36:11, 1Ch 1:36; 1Ch 1:53, to which Caleb became somehow related in the march through the wilderness, and from which also Othniel was descended. Knobel (on Gen 36:11, p. 281) conceives the relationship thus: The Kenizzite is perhaps a surname of Caleb, originating from some Kenizzites having passed into his family during the journey of Moses. After Jephunnehs death, one of them appears to have married Calebs mother, and had by her Othniel. His name being afterwards for gotten, he was designated by the name of his tribe.Seraiah, Othniels brother, occurs only here; we meet with a later Jew of this name, who returned with Zerubbabel, Ezr 2:2.And the sons of Othniel: Hathath. On the phrase before only one name, see 1Ch 2:7. Yet the plural might here possibly refer also to Meonothai as brother of Hathath (1Ch 4:14), if a had fallen out at the end of our verse, or if the genealogist had presupposed that Meonothai was brother to Hathath, and therefore hastened at once to the statement of his descendants. Othniels sons occur nowhere else. The name Meonothai might also be connected with the town Maon (Jos 15:55), or with the Meunim (Ezr 2:50; Neh 7:52).

1Ch 4:14. And Meonothai begat Ophrah. We can scarcely think of Ophrah as the Benjamite town of this name (Jos 18:23; 1Sa 13:17), or even of the home of Gideon in the tribe of Manasseh (Jdg 6:11).And Seraiah begat Joab father of the valley of the carpenters. This occurs here as a place founded by Joab son of Seraiah (1Ch 4:13), called the Valley of the carpenters or the craftsmen (), and in Neh 11:35; and, indeed, as a place not far from Jerusalem, on the north side. Whether it had received its name after the exile, and whether Joab, the founder of the colony, is to pass for one of those Joabs in Zerubbabels time who are mentioned Ezr 2:6, Neh 7:11 (to which hypothesis Berth. seems inclined), must remain doubtful.

8. The Descendants of Caleb the Son of Jephunneh: 1Ch 4:15.That this Jephunnite Caleb is probably the same with him whose genealogy is given 1Ch 2:46-49 (and therefore with the Caleb of Num., Josh., and. Judg.), and different from the Hezronite Celubai or Caleb (1Chr 2:9, 18, 42 ff., 50 ff., perhaps his ancestor [rather descendant]), has been fully shown on 1Ch 2:49.Iru, Elah, and Naam. These three sons of Caleb occur nowhere else; for the second, Elah, must have been combined with the Edomite prince of the same name mentioned 1Ch 1:52, as Kenaz might be identical with the Kenaz named there, 1 Chronicles 4:53. This Calebite Kenaz cannot be the same as the father of Othniel (1Ch 4:13); rather as grandson or great-grandson, he bore the same name as his ancestor. Why the sons of Elah are set down between this Kenaz and Naam in the series of the sons of Caleb we can no longer explain. It is inadmissible, at all events, to translate, with a number of older expositors (including Starke): and the sons of Elah were (also) Kenaz, as if before could be anything but the copula. As the words run, Kenaz is appended to the aforementioned descendants of Caleb, of whom the sons of Elah take the fourth place, as the fifth and last; only if a name were fallen out before (as Keil supposes), could Kenaz be regarded as belonging to the sons of Elah.

9. Jehalelels Sons: 1Ch 4:16.Ziph and Ziphah, Tiriah and Asarel. Only the first of these is known, and, indeed, as the supposed father of one of those towns in Judah which are named in Jos 15:24; Jos 15:55. Even of Jehalelel we know nothing more. A quite arbitrary hypothesis of some older scholars makes out of him rather a woman, the supposed second wife of Kenaz, ver 13, whose first wife was (?) Jephunneh.

10. Ezrahs Posterity: 1Ch 4:17-18.And the sons of Ezrah: Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she conceived, etc. If the sing. is to be retained, we may compare such cases as 1Ch 3:19; 1Ch 3:21; 1Ch 3:23, etc.; but see Crit. Note. The here-named Ezrah occurs nowhere else ; he belongs, at all events, to a grey antiquity, as the father of old Jewish towns like Eshtemoa, Socho, Zanoah, etc. It is not clear how he is connected with the foregoing or following families of Judah. Of his four sons, the last, Jalon, occurs only here even in name; the names Jether and Epher occur elsewhere, but in other families (Jether, 1Ch 2:32, comp. 53; and Epher, 1Ch 11:33 and 1Ch 5:24); further notices of them are wanting. On the contrary, the closing sentence of 1Ch 4:18 shows, with respect, to Mered, that probably all the names from 1Ch 4:17 b (and she conceived, etc.) denote descendants of this man by two wives, a Jewess and a daughter of Pharaoh. And as the words , standing as they now do after the name of the fourth son of Ezrah, and wanting a feminine subject, yield no rational sense, the removal (proposed by Bertheau, and adopted by Kamph., Keil, and others) of that closing sentence: and these are the sons of Bithiah daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took, to our passage after , commends itself as a very suitable amendment; comp. the Crit. Note. is then to be taken as a synonym of (which is given by the Sept. and the Vulg.), and the names Miriam (, for which, perhaps, , as in Sept. cod. Vat. or the like, is to be read, as we expect to find a mans name in the first place), Shammai, and Ishbah then denote the sons born to Mered by Pharaohs daughter; whereupon in 1Ch 4:18 the names of those descended from the Jewess are added. We obtain here, accordingly, two lines descending from Meredone Egyptian, from which (and in particular from Ishbah the third son of Pharaohs daughter) the inhabitants of the town Eshtemoa (Sept. or ), on the mountains of Judah, the present Samua, south of Hebron, drew their origin (comp. Jos 15:15; Jos 21:14, and 1Ch 4:19), and one Jewish, from which three towns of Judah are derived:1. Gedor, comp. on 1Ch 4:4; 1 Chronicles 2. Socho, perhaps the present Suweikeh, in the lowland south west of Jerusalem, comp. Jos 15:35, 1Sa 17:1, etc.; 3. Zanoah, perhaps the present Sanuah, in the lowland near Zorah, comp. Jos 15:34 (though the other Zanoah on the mountains of Judah, Jos 15:36, the site of which we do not know, might be meant). Of the names of the three fathers or founders of these towns, Jekuthiel (, probably fear of God) occurs nowhere else; while Jered (comp. Gen 5:15) and occur elsewhere, the latter pretty often (Gen 46:17; Num 26:45; Jdg 4:11; Jdg 4:17; 1Ch 8:17).And these are the sons of Bithiah, etc. These words, in the position which we have assigned to them, are not a subscription for the preceding, but rather an introduction to the following words . We know nothing more of this daughter of Pharaoh. may be merely a general phrase for , an Egyptian; so thinks Hitzig, Gesch. d. V. Isr. p. 64, who, indeed, without right, might thus degrade the Pharaohs daughter of the Exodus, the foster-mother of Moses, into a common Egyptian. No less arbitrary is the opposite conjecture of the older Rabbins, and recently of Frst (Gesch. d. bibl. Liter. i. 319), that this same kings daughter Thermuthis, the protectress of Moses, is here meant. The name Miriam, at the head of the descendants of this Egyptian, seems to have given rise to this identification with Thermuthis (comp. Wagenseil, Sota, p. 271). The opinion of Osiander, Hiller, J. H. Michaelis, Starke, etc., that we are not to think of an Egyptian here, as Bithiah is a Hebrew name, and Pharaoh the name of a Jew, is also arbitrary, and directly against the phrase (comp. 2Ch 8:11; 1Ki 9:24).

11. The Sons of the Wife of Hodiah: 1Ch 4:19.And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham. Hodiah (). as the present St. constr., and its occurrence as the name of several Levites after the exile, in the book of Nehemiah (Neh 8:7; Neh 9:5; Neh 10:11), show, is not a womans, but a mans name. We know neither the name of Hodiahs wife nor her relation to the foregoing; for that , whose sister she is said to be, is the same as , Calebs son, 1Ch 4:15, no one will seriously assert.The father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa (or perhaps the father of Eshtemoa; see Crit. Note) the Maachathite. The two designations, the Garmite and the Maachathite, are to us equally obscure and unintelligible; the latter may, perhaps, contain an allusion to Maachah the third wife of Caleb, 1Ch 2:48. The situation of Keilah (), a town in the lowland of Judah (Jos 15:44), has not yet been ascertained. On Eshtemoa, see 1Ch 4:17.

12. Descendants of Shimon and Ishi: 1Ch 4:20.And the sons of Shimon: Amnon, etc. We know not otherwise either Shimon or his four sons, and therefore cannot indicate his place in the genealogy of Judah. That he was a Hezronite, like all the foregoing, is a mere conjecture of Wellhausen (p. 20).And the sons of Ishi: Zoheth and Benzoheth. The name Ishi was also borne by a Jerahmeelite (1Ch 2:31), the son of Appaim, and by a Simeonite, 1Ch 4:42. Neither, can be meant here, especially as a son Zoheth, not there mentioned, and an anonymous grandson of this Zoheth, are added as descendants.

13. Descendants of Shelah, third son of Judah: 1Ch 4:21-23.The sons of Shelah son of Judah. On this third son of Judah by the Canaanitess Bathshua, see 1Ch 2:3; Gen 38:5. The absence of the copula before (as before , 1Ch 4:1) marks the beginning of a new genealogical series; and, indeed, a series that is of the more importance, because the posterity of Shelah is entirely omitted in 1 Chronicles 2.Er the father of Lechah, and Ladah the father of Mareshah. This Er is not to be confounded with Shelahs brother, the first – born of Judah (as Bertheau thinks); rather is this a similar case of uncle and nephew having the same name, as in Ram, for example, 1Ch 2:9; comp. 1Ch 4:25. We know no more of the town Lechah () founded by this younger Er; but Mareshah, founded by his brother Ladah, is no doubt the present Marash in the Shephelah; see on 1Ch 2:42.And the families of the house of byssus work, of the house of Ashbea. This house of byssus work (cotton factory) may have been situated in Egypt, or possibly in Palestine. We know as little of its situation as of the house of Ashbea ( ,) rendered by Jerome: domus juramenti). For the cultivation of cotton (, here defectively ) also in Syria and Palestine, comp. Eze 27:16; Pausan. v. 5. 2; Pococke, Morgenl. ii. 88; Robinson, ii. 612, 628, iii. 432.

1Ch 4:22. And Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, etc. The strange rendering of these and the following words in the Vulg. (see Crit. Note) seems to have been occasioned by an old Rabbinical combination of the words with the narrative of the book of Ruth; the = qui stare fecit solem are accordingly Elimelech, the viri mendacii his sons Mahlon and Chilion, who removed with him to Moab, and married daughters of this land; and in is indicated their return to Bethlehem, etc. Our passage in reality states a total or partial conquest of Moab, effected in ancient times by several descendants of Shelah, whose names are not otherwise known to us. appears contracted from . The men of might be the inhabitants of , Gen 38:5 (= , Jos 15:44), the birthplace of Shelah, in the lowland of Judah. An altogether strange and now inexplicable name occurs at the end, , which the punctuators would scarcely have so pronounced, if the pronunciation had not been so handed down to them (Berth.).And these are ancient things, that is, not merely before the exile, in the period of the kings, as Bertheau thinks (p. 46), who endeavours to convert this notice into an indirect support of his hypothesis, that in 1Ch 4:7-20 the generations and families of Judah after the exile are reported, while 1Ch 4:21-23 form an appendix referring to the period of kings, but certainly without warrant; the words merely bespeak a high age, belonging to the grey foretime, for the traditions concerning Jokim, the men of Cozeba, etc. (comp. Wellhausen, p. 23, n. 1).

1Ch 4:23. These are the potters and the dwellers in Netaim and Gederah. these, appear to refer to the whole descendants of Shelah (with the natural exception of those byssus workers, 1Ch 4:21, that could not well be at the same time potters), and not merely those named in 1Ch 4:22 (as Berth.); for this verse has its closing notice in . It is not known where Netaim (, plantings) was; perhaps it means royal gardens near Jerusalem, or near those pleasure gardens of Solomon in the Wady Urtus at Bethlehem (see on Son 1:1, vol. 13. p. 29 of Bibelw.); comp. also Uzziahs gardens, 2Ch 26:10. Gederah (, fence) is perhaps the town mentioned Jos 15:36 in the lowland of Judah (the present village Gedera, about an hour south-west of Jabneh; see Keil on 1Ch 12:4).With the king, in his service, they dwelt there. To what king this alludes is uncertain; probably no single king (as Uzziah, or David, or Solomon) is meant: but the phrase applies to the kings of the house of David in general, who, from the beginning, inherited extensive private domains, where not merely cattle-breeding, tillage, and gardening were pursued, but also handicrafts, as the pottery here mentioned, the cotton-weaving, 1Ch 4:21, and perhaps carpentry, ver 14.10

It has been already remarked that Bertheaus assumption, that 1Ch 4:1-20 of our chapter presented a description of the generations and families of the tribe of Judah which were living soon after the exile (the time of Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah), but 1Ch 4:21-23 formed an appendix relating to earlier times, was not well founded, and finds no sufficient support in the assertion, and these are ancient things. Comp. the full refutation which Keil (p. 66 ff., note 2) has given to this hypothesis. Neither is the concomitant assumption tenable, that there are exactly twelve families of the house of Judah in 1Ch 4:1-29, and of Judah, too, after the exile, in the days of Zerubbabel; for the families mentioned are not arranged according to the sons and grandsons of Judah in 1Ch 4:1, but are strung together loosely, and without any mark of connection. Instead of twelve, also, a smaller number of families may be brought out by another mode of reckoning; as, for example, Ewald, in a far more arbitrary way indeed than Bertheau, has found twelve families in the whole of our section, including Shelah and his descendants in 1Ch 4:21-23 (Gesch. i. p. 471). Both appear to be merely accidentalthe number twelve of the families named, according to Bertheaus reckoning, and the circumstance that many of the persons and places in our section recur in Ezra and Nehemiah. To the latter circumstance, strongly urged by Bertheau, Keil has justly opposed the no less undeniable fact, that most of the places already occur in Joshua, and very many of the persons in Samuel and Kings, and that, with respect to the geographical coincidences with Ezra and Nehemiah, the historical contents of these books, that were almost exclusively enacted on the soil of Judah, and among Israelites of Jewish extraction, should in great part be taken into account in explanation of this. Comp. also what has been urged above in the Preliminary Remark, p. 53.

c. The Families of Simeon, and the Transjordanic Tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half-Manasseh (till the Deportation of the latter by the Assyrians).1Ch 4:24 to 1Ch 5:26

1. The Families of Simeon: 1Ch 4:24-43

1Ch 4:24.The sons of Simeon were Nemuel, and Jamin, Jarib, Zerah, Shaul. 25Shallum his son, Mibsam his son, Mishma his son. 26And the sons of Mishma: 27Hamuel his son, Zaccur his son, Shimi his son. And Shimi had sixteen sons and six daughters; but his brethren had not many sons: and all their family did not multiply, like the sons of Judah.

28, 29And they dwelt at Beer-sheba, and Moladah, and Hazar-shual. And at Bilhah, and at Ezem, and at Tolad. 30And at Bethuel, and at Hormah, and at 31Ziklag. And at Beth-marcaboth, and at Hazar-susim, and at Beth-biri, and 32at Shaaraim: these were their towns until the reign of David. And their villages, Etam, and Ain, Rimmon, and Tochen, and Ashan, five towns. 33And all their villages that were round these towns unto Baal. This was their habitation, and they had their own genealogy.

34, 35And Meshobab, and Jamlech, and Joshah the son of Amaziah. And Joel, and Jehu the son of Josibiah, the son of Seraiah, the son of Asiel. 36And Elioenai, and Jaakobah, and Jeshohaiah, and Asaiah, and Adiel, and Jesimiel, and Benaiah. 37And Ziza the son of Shiphi, the son of Allon, the son of Jedaiah, 38the son of Shimri, the son of Shemaiah. These are they that entered by name princes in their families; and their father-houses spread greatly. 39And they went to the entrance of Gedor,11 to the east of the valley, to seek pasturefor their flocks. 40And they found fat and good pasture, and the land was wide on all sides, and quiet, and peaceful; for they were of Ham who dwelt there before. 41And these written by name came in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and smote their tents, and the Meunites12 that were found there, and destroyed them unto this day, and dwelt in their stead; for there42was pasture there for their flocks. And of them, of the sons of Simeon, five hundred men went to mount Seir; and Pelatiah, and Neariah, and Rephaiah, and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi, were at their head. 43And they smote the remnant that had escaped of Amalek, and dwelt there unto this day.

EXEGETICAL

Preliminary Remark.This account of the tribe of Simeon includes in it a genealogical, a geographical, and a historical section. The first (1Ch 4:24-27) gives the five sons of Simeon, and traces the posterity of the last, Shaul, through a series of generations; the second (1Ch 4:28-33) recounts their dwelling-places till the time of David ; the third (1Ch 4:34-43) contains two migrations or conquests of Simeonite families, one in the time of Hezekiah into a region previously inhabited by Hamites, another without a date to Mount Seir, into a district previously Amalekite. These accounts partake of the same fragmentary character as the sections referring to the following tribes. Comp. moreover, K. H. Graf, Der Stamm Simeon, a contribution to the History of Israel, Meissen 1866, and, with respect to the geography, the great work of the Englishmen E. H. Palmer and T. Drake, The Desert of the Exodus, etc., Cambridge 1871, one of the most valuable publications of the Palestine Exploration Fund, with specially valuable contributions to the geography of the south of Palestine. With the conclusion of these inquirers, that the south border of Palestine, in particular of the tribe of Simeon, must be extended much farther than is usually supposed, agrees also Consul Wetzstein, Ueber Kadesh und Palstinas Sdgrenze (Excursus III. in Delitzschs Comment on Genesis , 4 th edit.).

1. The Five Sons of Simeon, and the Descendants of Shaul: 1Ch 4:25-27.Nemuel, and Jamin, Jarib, Zerah, Shaul. The list in Num 26:12-14 also names five sons of Simeon, and quite the same as here, except Jarib, who is there Jakin (), of which it appears to be a corruption. On the contrary, in the older parallels, Gen 46:10, Exo 6:15, six sons of Simeon are enumerated, among whom an Ohad stands in the third place, who is wanting here and in Numbers, perhaps because his posterity had died out so soon as to form no distinct family; and in the first place a Jemuel, who corresponds to the Nemuel of our passage, and in the last a Zohar, instead of the Zerah here before the last. It is plain that we have here equivalent names, as , candor, is not very remote from , ortus solis (comp. Mal. 3:20; Luk 1:78), and also (with whom Hitzig on Pro 30:31, perhaps too boldly, identifies the conjectural king Lemuel of Massa) appears only a by-form of , day of God. It is uncertain whether we are to regard the forms given in Genesis and Exodus at once as original. It is at least plain, from the agreement of Num 26:12-14 with our passage, that the Chronist has not adopted an arbitrary form of the names, as Gramberg assumes.

1Ch 4:25. Shallum his son, etc. Only of Shaul, the last (perhaps the youngest) of the sons of Simeon, whose mother is called a Canaanitess in the parallel accounts of Genesis and Exodus, are further descendants reported in six succeeding generations, Shallum, Mibsam, Mishma, Hamuel, Zaccur, and Shimi. By the words, and the sons of Mishma, at the beginning of 1Ch 4:27, these six generations are divided into two groups, of which, however, the second, only lineal, without any collateral descendants; comp. the plur. in like cases, as 1Ch 1:41, 1Ch 2:31, 1Ch 3:16; 1Ch 3:22, etc.

1Ch 4:27. And Shimi had sixteen sons and six daughters. This father of a very large and flourishing family is brought into prominence, like Elioenai, 1Ch 3:24; comp. the descendants of Jacob, Jesse, David, Job, and Psa 127:3; Psa 128:3.But his brethren (the remaining Simeonites, not merely Shimis immediate brothers) had not many sons. This is the reason that their whole family did not multiply like that of Judah. With this agrees the comparatively small number of the Simeonites in the census under Moses (Num 1:-4), and the way in which this smaller tribe was included in the stronger tribe of Judah in the division of the land, Jos 19:1.

2. The original Dwelling-Places of the Simeonites in the Southern Part of the Land of Judah: 1Ch 4:28-33; comp. Jos 19:2-8.With the names of the Simeonite dwelling-places reported in this old parallel, those here named agree in the main, and in particular with respect to the separation into two groups, one of thirteen, the other of five towns. Only the second group consists there of only four towns (see on 1Ch 4:32), and in the first group, notwithstanding the statement that thirteen towns are reported, 1Ch 4:6, fourteen are actually named; between Beer-sheba and Moladah a Sheba is inserted, a name () which appears to be a repetition of the second component of , occasioned by negligence in copying, but possibly also = , a town named, Jos 15:26, before Moladah (of the latter opinion is, for example, Keil, on Jos 19:2 and our passage). There are several unessential differences of form or orthography between our passage and Joshua 19, as in the latter for , 1Ch 4:29, for , for , for , (house of lions) for , and (pleasant harbour) for (two gates). It cannot be shown which of these forms is the more original: some of the deviations may rest on mere errors of transcription, as might so easily happen in places that scarcely ever occur again. Moreover, the book of Joshua (1Ch 15:26-29) repeats the most of them as belonging to the towns of the south of Judah, and certainly with some variations of form (for example, for Bilhah, for Bethul, for Shaaraim, Madmannah for Beth-marcaboth, Sansannah for Hazar – susim). Most of these places are still undiscovered; Beer-sheba survives in Bir-es-Seba ; Moladah probably in the ruins Tel Milh, south of Hebron, on the road to Aila;13 Hormah, the older name of which was Shephath, in the ruin Sepata, two and a half hours south of Khalasa; Ziklag in Kasluj, east of this Sepata; and Shaaraim in Tell Sheriah, between Beer-sheba and Gaza.These were their towns until the reign of David, and their villages. With almost all recent expositors, is certainly to be attached to 1Ch 4:31, for the parallel, Jos 19:6, speaks of towns and their villages, and all that are named in 1Ch 4:32 are expressly named towns. Moreover, the separation of from the foregoing, occasioned by the date until the reign of David, is already very old; for the old translators agree with the Masoretic text in transferring the word to the following verse. The reason why the date until the reign of David was inserted here, and not in 1Ch 4:33 (where it would be less surprising), appears to be this, that the changes occurring from the time of David in the habitations of the Simeonites, consisting in their partial removal by the Jews (comp. 1Ch 4:34 ff.), applied only to the thirteen towns already named, whereas the five towns, with their villages to be named in the following verse, remained still an undiminished possession of the Simeonites. So, justly, Keil, following Rashi and Kimchi, and partly against Bertheau, who assumes as the object of the subscription merely an allusion to Ziklag (comp. 1Sa 27:6), or perhaps to others of the forementioned towns, as belonging from the time of David no longer to the tribe of Simeon, whereas such a limitation of the sense is foreign to the words; and, moreover, Ziklag was severed from Simeon by the Philistines before the reign of David (1Sa 27:6).

1Ch 4:32. Etam, and Ain, Rimmon, and Tochen, and Ashen, five towns. After the thirteen towns, the parallel, Jos 19:7, gives a second group, not a pentapolis, but only a tetrapolis, with the omission of Tochen, and the change of Etam () into Ether (). It is hard to say where the original is to be sought. We are scarcely entitled, with Movers (p. 73) and Bertheau, to charge both texts with inaccuracy, and to affirm that the series of these towns originally ran thus: , , ,, so that by an oversight two cities were made out of one En-rimmon (which occurs in Neh 11:29), and by another oversight Tochen fell out of the text of Joshua, and by a third the name , which is proved to be original by the subsequent mention of such a town in Jos 15:43, has in Chronicles been supplanted by the better known . Against this conjecture Keil has justly urged: 1. The and are counted as separate cities not merely in Jos 19:7, but also in Jos 15:32, and the union of the two names into an En-rimmon in Nehemiah may be explained simply from the contiguity of the two places (of which Rimmon is discovered in Rum er Rummanin, four hours north of Beer-sheba, and Ain appears to have been the name of an old well lying near it), or possibly by a coalescence of the two at a later period; 2. Etam, if it actually came into the text by exchange with the original Ether, should have been, not at the head of the list, but the last but one (where stands in Jos 19:7); and 3. There were notoriously two Etams, one in the mountains of Judah south of Bethlehem, 2Ch 11:6, and one in the Negeb of Judah on the border of Simeon, which occurs in the history of Samson, Jdg 15:8; Jdg 15:11, and must be the place here meant, where a locality near Ain and Rimmon is intended. This leaves nothing unsolved but the difference of the number, being only four in Joshua, and five here. The hypothesis of Keil, that is only another name for , is not well grounded.

1Ch 4:33. And all their villages that were round these towns unto Baal. The parallel, Jos 19:8, is more full: and all the villages that were round these towns, unto Baalath-beer, Ramath-negeb. Hence appears to be an abbreviation of the fuller name and the group of villages extending to this Baalath-beer (or Bealoth, as it is called Jos 15:24) bore the name Ramath-negeb or Ramah of the south, with which Ramoth-negeb, 1Sa 30:27, is manifestly identical. An attempt has been recently made to determine the situation of this place, in doing which it is to be observed that Baal or Baalath-beer is not to be counted among the towns of Simeon; for it is only said that the villages of the last-named towns extend to Baal, that is, in the direction and perhaps very near to Baal, so that we are warranted in seeking our Baal in a region somewhat more remote from the towns, if it had otherwise a peculiar character and adaptation to denote the direction in which the territory of Simeon extended. Now Walkott found near Ramet el Khulil, about an hour north of Hebron, a second Ramah, called Ramet el Amleh, and also two heights with old sites. A whole group of places on hills, which can be observed at one glance, and present a grand and peculiar aspect, is here found: there is no doubt that the Ramoth-negeb, 1Sa 30:27, is to be sought here. As there is a remarkable well in Ramet el Khulil, the conjecture arises that here is a Baalath-beer, a well-town; and a confirmation of this conjecture presents itself in the designation of this place by the addition Ramoth-negeb. So Bertheau, after Roediger (review of Robinsons Bibl. Sacra, Hallesche Literaturztg. 1843, No. 111); whereas Keil on Jos 19:8 is inclined to seek Baalath-beer and Ramoth-negeb in a more southerly situation than Ramet el Khulil, which is not far from Hebron; and the best chartographers of the day (Menke in 1 Chronicles 3 of his Bible Atlas, Gotha 1868) place the localities in question south-west of the Dead Sea, on the caravan road leading to Hebron.This was their habitation, and they had their own genealogy, that is, their own register of families as a separate independent tribe, though they dwelt in the territory of Judah, and were much less in number and extent than this contiguous tribe. On the substantively used infin. , genealogy (properly, entrance in the register), comp. Introd. 5.

3. History of the Two Migrations or Conquests of the Simeonites: 1Ch 4:34-43.a. First expedition, in the time of Hezekiah: 1Ch 4:34-41.And Meshobab, and Jamlech, and Joshah, etc. These thirteen princes of the tribe of Simeon are only made prominent because they were the leaders of the present expedition, not because the former genealogical series (1Ch 4:24-26) was continued by them. For although of some of them (Joshah, Jehu, and Ziza) the descent for several generations is given, yet the connection of these small genealogical lines with that earlier series is wanting. With the remarkable form , to Jacob (reckoned to him), comp. the analogous form , 1Ch 25:14, and other examples in Ewald, Lehrb. p. 670, n. 1, 7th edit.

1Ch 4:38. These are they that entered by name princes in their families (not: these were famous, celebrated princes, as Luther). A phrase essentially the same occurs in 1Ch 4:41; comp. also 1Ch 12:31; Num 1:17; Ezr 8:25. Princes of families are, moreover, not heads of families, but heads of the houses into which the families were divided (Keil).And their father-houses spread greatly, unfolded and branched out into a great multitude. On , plural of the compound , comp. Ewald, 270, p. 657, where the same plural is cited from 2Ch 35:5, Num 1:2; Num 1:18; Num 1:20; Num 7:2, etc., and the similar , high houses, from 1Ki 12:31, 2Ki 17:29; 2Ki 17:32.And they went to the entrance of Gedor (scarcely to the west of Gedor, as Keil, for this would have required the addition of to , to the east of the valley. What valley is uncertain, as the definite article only points to some known valley near Gedor, a place that cannot itself be determined; but the identification of this with the valley of the Dead Sea is a very precarious conjecture of Ewald and Bertheau, for the valley of the Dead Sea with its southern continuation bears in the O. T. the standing name of . Equally uncertain is the conjecture of the same inquirers, and of Kamph., Graf, Mhlau (also of Menke in 1 Chronicles 3. of his Bible Atlas), that is an error of transcription for ( in Sept.; see Crit. Note). A place so far west as Gerar (now Kirbet el Gerar) on the river Gerar can scarcely have been used to mark the border of the Simeonite pasture lands; and the mode of expression is not fitted to indicate the west and east bounding points of the region occupied by the Simeonites (comp. also on 1Ch 4:41). On the other hand, to identify Gedor with the town named in Jos 15:58, situated on the mountains of Judah, has its difficulties. for it must also be presumed that the Meunim named in 1Ch 4:41 were the inhabitants of the adjacent hill-town Maon, Jos 15:55; and the region of this hill-town of Judah cannot be that intended here, as the latter is described, 1Ch 4:40, as On all sides (literally on both sides; , as in Gen 34:21) open, and therefore clearly as a plain.

1Ch 4:40. For they were of Ham who dwelt there before. For the phrase, comp. Jdg 18:7; Jdg 18:28. These men of Ham, whom the Simeonites found as inhabitants, peaceable and harmless inhabitants of the country in question, and subdued, may have been Egyptians, Cushites, or Canaanites; most probably they belonged to the last branch of the Hamites, as the region in question is contiguous to Palestine. Hitzig (The Kingdom of Massa in Zellers Theolog. Jahrbchern, 1844, p. 269 ff., and on Prov. p. 312) gratuitously supposes the Amalekites to be designated by the men of Ham (likewise Hoffmann, Blicke in die frheste Geschichte des heiligen Landes, p. 73): for the history of the second expedition of the Simeonites refers to the Amalekites, 1Ch 4:42-43, and it is a question whether the Amalekites were Hamites (Knobel on Gen 10:13; Gen 10:23, and comp. above on 1Ch 1:36 f.); and the circumstance that these Hamites were nomades does not compel us to think of Amalekites (Ludim, Hyksos?), since many Canaanitish tribes lived as nomades; for example, those of Laish, Judges 18.

1Ch 4:41. Came in the days of Hezekiah. Here is a quite definite chronological date, that shows still more positively than the reference to the reign of David in 1Ch 4:31, the high age and the certainty of these notices.And smote their (the Hamites) tents, and the Meunites that were found there. The smiting refers first to the tents or dwellings of the Hamites; and then to the Meunites found there, who are therefore foreigners who had come to dwell among the Hamites. (for which the Kethib has and the Sept. ) are here, as in 2Ch 16:7 (comp. 1Ch 20:1), probably inhabitants of the town Maon near Petra, east of the Wady Musa (Robinson, iii. 127). Their being involved in the fate of the Hamites implies that the scene of the present event lay to the east, though it cannot be further defined. Against the reading proposed by some old expositors (Luther, Starke), , and the fixed habitations, in contrast with the forementioned tents, see Bochart, Geogr. Sacra, p. 138.And destroyed them unto this day, and dwelt in their stead.ad internecionem usque eos exciderunt (J. H. Mich.), deleverunt (Vulg.). Comp. ban, extirpate, in 2Ch 20:23; 2Ch 32:14, 2Ki 19:11, Isa 37:11. The term unto this day points to the time of composition, not by the Chronist, but by the old historical sources at least before the exile employed by him.

b. Second expedition of the Simeonites against Mount Seir: 1Ch 4:42-43.And of them, of the sons of Simeon, five hundred men went to Mount Seir. Nothing more precise is stated regarding the time of this expedition; it may have been before or alter that in the time of Hezekiah. And the statement, of them, of the sons of Simeon, is quite general, and sets no limit either to the Simeonites named 1Ch 4:34-37 or to those before enumerated, 1Ch 4:24-27. Keil, who exchanges the Ishi of our verse with Shimi, 1Ch 4:27, is arbitrary in thinking only of the latter; and no less so is Bertheau, who refers the words to the part of the Simeonites described 1Ch 4:34 ff. Of the surmise, that the event of our verse is somehow connected with that referred, 1Ch 4:34-41, to the time of Hezekiah, and is to be regarded as in some measure a continuation of it (Ew., Berth., Kamph.), there is not the slightest hint in the text, even if the valley of the present expedition to Mount Seir could be situated in the same direction from the tribe of Simeon as that of the former; see on 1Ch 4:39-40.

1Ch 4:43. And they smote the remnant that had escaped ofAmalek, that is, those Amalekites who escaped annihilation in the victories of Saul and David over this hereditary foe of the Israelites (who were formerly settled, Jdg 5:14; Jdg 12:15, comp. Num 13:29, chiefly in Paran or half-Manasseh east of Jordan; comp. Hitzig, Gesch. d. V. Isr. pp. 26, 104); comp. 1Sa 14:48; 1Sa 15:7; 2Sa 8:12. These who thus escaped had retired into the Idumean mountains, and there intermingled partly with the Edomites (comp. 1Ch 1:36 f.). Here they were now sought out and extirpated by the Simeonites under the sons of Ishi, while the conquerors occupied their seats. From a comparison of the present passage with Mic 1:15; Mic 2:8-10, Isa 21:11; Isa 28:12, etc., which appear to indicate an advance of the Israelites who believed in Jehovah far into the south and south-east in the times of Hezekiah and Isaiah, Hitzig (Das Knigreich Massa) has, with the concurrence of Bunsen, Bertheau, etc., developed his hypothesis of the founding of an Israelitish kingdom of Massa east or south-east of Seir (not far from Dumah; comp. Gen. 25:44; 1Ch 1:30) by the colony of Simeonites here mentioned, and has assigned to it as kings, Agur and Lemuel, the authors of the two appendices to the book of Proverbs. Comp. our substantially concurring judgment concerning this hypothesis on Pro 30:1 ff., vol. 12. p. 208 of the Bibelw. The objections urged against this hypothesis by Graf (Der Stamm Simeon, p. 12 ff.) and Mhlau (De prov. Aguri, etc., orig. p. 24 f.) certainly point out much that is not and cannot be proved in it, but are not sufficient to show that it is a mere fancy picture. At all events, the traditions, that in accordance with our passage part of the tribe of Simeon penetrated far into Arabia and founded there an Israelitish colony, are as widespread as they are ancient. Arabian legends even make the tribe of Simeon found the city and the temple of Mecca. See Hoffmann, Blicke, etc., p. 124.

Footnotes:

[1]For , which gives no tolerable sense, read with some mss. , or with the Sept., Vulg., and some other mss. .

[2]So () in the Kethib. The Keri is designed to gain a name better known (comp. Gen 13:8; Gen 46:10).

[3]For some mss. have , which is perhaps to be preferred, as in 1Ch 4:13; 1Ch 4:16; 1Ch 4:19-20.

[4]For , and she conceived, the Sept., following perhaps another reading, give (Vulg.: genuitque Mariam). For they exhibit (cod. Vat. ).

[5]This closing sentence stands here probably in the wrong place, and is to be placed after , 1Ch 4:17; see Exeg. Expos.

[6]Before (which the Sept. here renders by , whereas in 1Ch 4:17 it has [cod. vat. ] seems to have fallen out, as the parallel indicates.

[7] Kethib: ; Keri: .

[8]Before , which (not as, for example, immediately before) is not a nom. propr., but denotes son of Zoheth, the name of this son seems to have fallen out.

[9]Jerome (perhaps on the ground of a somewhat different text, but more probably only following the arbitrary interpretation of an old Jewish Midrash) renders the words from : et qui stare fecit solem, virique mendacii et securus et incendens, qui principes fuerunt in Moab, et qui reversi sunt in Lachem.

[10]Moreover, the engineer of the Palestine Exploration Fund, Captain Warren, has recently discovered remain of the pottery of these royal factories in Jerusalem. See our Work in Palestine, London 1873, p. 149.

[11]The Sept gives here , whence might possibly be an error of transcription for .

[12]So () the Keri, whereas the Kethib gives , and the Sept. accordingly .

[13]So also Palmer and Drake, p. 303.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The history of the genealogy is prosecuted in this Chapter. Here is the posterity of Judah registered, which forms the most illustrious, as well as the most numerous, of all the tribes of Israel. There is an interruption in the register to introduce the prayer of Jabez, which though forming a chasm in the genealogy, yet makes the Chapter itself the more interesting.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

The tribe of Judah was, on several accounts, the most illustrious in Israel. It formed a separate kingdom, including Levi, Simeon and Benjamin. And when the other tribes appeared to have been scattered, and almost lost, in the Assyrian conquests, this of Judah, when returning from captivity, became conspicuously great and flourishing. But Judah derived its eminence still more from the appointment that our Lord should spring from it. And hence we find Judah placed first in point of rank, in the list of Israel’s sons, when blessed. See Rev 7:5 ; Heb 7:14 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

The Prayer of Jabez. The Man

1Ch 4:10

Here we have a very short biography of a very notable, character; there is no long preface to it, no long drawn-out description of what sort of man Jabez was, no flowery description of wonderful virtues and attainments, as are many biographies of Christian men which are too much shorn of the infirmities of the creature, and therefore too much dressed with human wisdom to be of very much use, although they seem to be very taking at times.

I. His mother called his name Jabez, or ‘Sorrowful,’ for special reasons; ‘I bare him with sorrow,’ that is, the circumstances connected with his birth were of an afflictive kind. The Lord’s representation compels me to say that Jabez beginning in sorrow is typical or representative of the true breathings of the soul after the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Don’t think I mean that religious people ought to go about with long-drawn faces; nothing of the sort. I would not discourage some soul that manifests its inward grief by the look of the countenance, but the principle of the thing remains the same, we do not believe in affecting an exterior which has not corresponding reality in spirit.

II. We read of him that he was ‘a more honourable man than his brethren’. The best thing to do is to define the word ‘honourable’ by noticing what Jabez’s real principle was as expressed in this prayer so acceptable to God. I should say of him that he was a man separated unto the service of God; a man that could not walk with the men of his generation; could find no consolation with them in his spirit in their idolatry and half-hearted practices; he turned his back on that idolatry and pride which was so predominant in the service of God.

The Prayer of Jabez The Prayer

1Ch 4:10

Prayer must be more or less a matter of continual exercise with godly souls, because it is the attainment of the latter part of the verse we are after, God’s granting of our request. Saying prayers can never satisfy a living soul, however rightly they are said; telling out the needs of the soul can never satisfy a hungry or thirsty spirit after God, whatever liberty may be granted in the telling out of the need. It is God’s answer, God’s response, which is needed.

I. The Person Jabez prays unto. To whom does he direct this simple, heartfelt supplication? The God of Israel. It is very important that we be asking our hearts: To whom do we direct our prayers? Have we an intelligent apprehension of the Person we address? or is our religion mere idolatry? A most important question is this: To whom do we direct our prayers?

( a ) It is a personal Being we address if we are alive from the dead. Certainly an unsearchable Being, whose existence we cannot penetrate, whose glorious attributes strike us dumb, and blind us if we look upon them in their brightness, and yet, one has said ‘A known God none the less’ although incomprehensible.

( b ) We worship the Three One God of Israel as One possessed of eternal attributes and perfections; and when we think of His holiness and His majesty what a great God He becomes to us! How we desire to put off the shoes of carnality and lightness, and stand in awe of Him!

( c ) But the God of Israel Whom Jabez worshipped is also represented to us as our Benefactor, our Friend and Counsellor, Who not only loves His people to trust Him, but has asked them to put Him to the test

II. Let us look at the prayer itself a little.

( a ) First, it is a heartfelt, fervent utterance, and because it is a heartfelt, fervent utterance it is not a long string of human sentences. It is for the want of heart-feeling our prayers are so long at times. The more of awe and reverence of God there is, the more careful will be the speech.

( b ) Then it is a very pointed direct appeal. Now, that is the beginning of real worship. It does not end there. If you have been brought thus before the living God to worship Him as if you are the only needy sinner on earth, presently when you have obtained His mercy, having proved Him, you will be anxious about others; you will want them brought into the same favoured position as you have been yourself blessed to occupy.

III. Jabez wanted blessing from God. What do we conceive to be blessing?

( a ) We cannot get along without some witness of the forgiveness of our sins. Until we get some witness of that in our souls we are afraid to ask God for anything. Because our sin comes up between; continual iniquities prevail against the poor coming sinner.

( b ) Some of us feel desirous of asking the God of Israel to give us constancy. All our religion has to be tried and tested, and has to go through the fire.

( c ) We conceive a spiritual blessing to be the chastening of the Lord. We are made to know very much of the deceitfulness of our hearts, the perils and the dangers and the seductive influences of this dying world which lieth in wickedness; and we feel it would be a dreadful thing to be left without Divine correction.

References. IV. 17. J. M. Neale, Occasional Sermons, p. 116. IV. 22. Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 33.

The Royal Kinship of Service

1Ch 4:23

Work is the law of life, whether for king or for peasant.

I. Service links men with kings. In the story of our text we find potters and gardeners and people who trimmed the hedges all associated with the king. They dwelt with him for his work. So Christian service links us with God and Christ. ‘We are workers together with God.’ If we are associated with Christ in service, then we catch His spirit, and the things which most interest Him become of most importance to us. The Christian’s business life must of necessity be mastered and controlled by Christ. The presence of the king must dominate his business as well as every other department of his life.

II. Fellowship with Christ strengthens us for service, rescues us from selfishness, and gives us the broader horizon. Selfishness is the most fruitful cause of discouragement and discomfort. The most disagreeable and unpleasant tasks which duty thrusts upon us, if entered upon with a sincere love for Christ and a desire to help on His kingdom and forward His cause, will be transfigured and ere long become beautiful to us, and be to us a source of joy for their own sake.

III. It is only by dwelling with the King and sharing His service that we may be sure that at the end we shall have light and peace. The men or the women who give themselves up to the mere worldly pleasures which appeal to the senses and minister to their gratification are preparing for an old age which will be utterly empty and miserable, when once the senses have lost their capacity to be stimulated into action. The man who thinks he will have peace because he has laid by great stores of wealth has his answer in the Rich Fool of Christ’s Gospel. He who gives himself to self-indulgence is hatching out a brood of scorpions that in the end will sting him with remorse.

L. A. Banks, Sermons which have Won Souls, p. 41.

References. IV. 23. J. M. Neale, Occasional Sermons, p. 73. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxii. No. 1400. Ibid. Morning by Morning, p. 155. IV. 38. J. Thomas, Myrtle Street Pulpit, vol. iii. p. 61.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Some Familiar Names Jabez Caleb

1Ch 4

In this chapter we find a compilation of scattered and broken notices, relating to the families or clans of Judah, with references to their settlements and increase at a time which is not specifically determined; this section is first of all a supplement to the account of Judah already given in the first, second, and third chapters, and is also an instalment of the similar survey of the other tribes, which is given in the fourth chapter, from the twenty-fourth to the twenty-seventh verses. The remainder of the chapter is occupied with similar notices relating to the tribe of Simeon.

The ninth verse contains a reference to Jabez; the whole history is brief:

“And Jabez was more honourable than his brethren; and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow. And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that thine hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! And God granted him that which he requested.” ( 1Ch 4:9-10 ).

Nothing more is known of this Jabez or of his brethren. The Speaker’s Commentary regards it as remarkable that Jabez should be introduced without description or patronymic, as if a well-known personage, and supposes that he was known to those for whom the Book of Chronicles was written, either by tradition, or by writings which have perished. The word Jabez signifies sorrowful. Jabez was distinguished in some way above his brethren. By this distinction we are not to infer the exercise of an undue partiality in the spirit of his parents. Account for it as we may, some men appear to be born with what may be called a larger religiousness of nature than other men; it is easy for them to pray; it is a delight to them to peruse all sacred writings; it is a positive pain to them to be deprived of religious privileges. We must leave this mystery as insoluble. It is a very pleasant mystery to those who are gifted with religious intuition, but a most appalling mystery, on the other hand, to those who seem to be what we cannot better describe than by calling them natural atheists. The name which Jabez bore, was a memorial of his mother’s sorrow, not a prophecy of his own. Yet Jabez was animated by that inexplicable superstition which discovers in names and circumstances omens and predictions, which the imagination can never treat with disregard. Jabez might intellectually know that his name did but represent what his mother had endured, yet a subtle feeling took possession of him, as if he himself would in some way be involved in the same sorrow Nor was this an irrational conclusion. As a matter of fact some men are born to more sorrow than others, as certainly as by constitution some men are more religious than others. Here again is a dark and painful mystery. We see the operation of this mystery even in the same family, where one of the children may be full of sunlight, and hope, and music, and another may be doomed to walk in darkness throughout a lifetime, unable to discern between summer and winter, loaded with trouble and oppressed with undefinable apprehensions.

Jabez is known to history, as pre-eminently a man of prayer. Although it has been considered that the prayer of Jabez was uttered in view of some imminent battle, or other dreaded experience, yet by common consent Jabez has been regarded by Christian students as a typical man of prayer. Judging the case within the narrow limits of the history given in verses nine and ten, it would seem as if Jabez started life in an act of prayer. The image is at once graphic and beautiful; think of a young man standing at the door of his house, looking abroad at the unknown and unmeasured world, listening to the conflicting voices which troubled his native air, and then turning his eyes to heaven and asking divine direction, before he would take a single step from the threshold of his home. Nothing of the nature of mere romance attaches itself to this picture. This indeed is what every young man ought to do, before going out to battle or labour. My son, in all thy ways acknowledge God, and he shall direct thy paths. It would appear from instances which have come under our view, that God condescends to receive from men promises of religious life on certain providential conditions. We cannot understand this now, but it is perfectly clear from such instances as Jacob and Jabez, that God was willing to respond to propositions of obedience founded upon the realisation of specified blessings. The prayer of Jabez must be judged to be good, for the sufficient reason that it was answered; “and God granted him that which he requested.” Is the conduct of life then open to regulation upon such high and sacred lines? May a young man come before the Almighty, and speak out all his heart, and receive promises of continual guidance and defence from the Living One? If we could realise the certainty of this holy commerce as between earth and heaven, our whole life would be lifted to a noble level, our spirit would be released from the dominion of fear, and instead of labouring in toilsome prayer, we should be filled with the spirit of triumphant thankfulness and praise. What privileges are open to the young! It lies within their power to give a whole lifetime to God. Those who have advanced considerably in life, can now but give a fraction of their days, but the young soul can give God the brightness of the morning, the glory of noonday, and the tranquillity of evening. Let the young think of this, and give themselves diligently to the study of such instances as that of Jabez, knowing that if they remember their Creator in the days of their youth, increasing age will only mean increasing joy.

In the fifteenth verse we come upon the familiar name of Caleb. We have seen that Caleb obtained a part among the children of Judah, because that he wholly followed the Lord God of Israel ( Jos 14:9 ). The memory of the righteous is blessed. Come upon their honoured names where and how we may, there can be no mistake as to the reality of the blessing which testifies their divine acceptance. Are there not some faces which we are always glad to recognise in preference to all others? When we see them in the distance we take heart again, because we are sure of the hand of friendship, the smile of love, and the word of encouragement. Blessed, surely, are they, who enjoy this reputation in the hearts of their friends! Some persons we admire, some we fear, some we approach only on great occasions; but others we would have always with us, because of the tenderness of their hearts. Caleb was one of those sweet yet heroic natures that bless the world. We feel that whilst such men are in it, the world is not left without promise of restoration, and that every good cause has a friend in every Caleb. There was nothing boisterous in the courage of this son of Jephunneh. He spoke with the dignity of strength, with the ease of conscious power. Within his soft hand there lay a sinew of iron. Had he been violent, we should have trusted him less; being gentle we had no doubt of his ability. As in every other truly great man there was in Caleb a distinct vein of womanliness. Never can he be called effeminate; but never can it be denied that his great courage had about it the bloom which distinguishes motherly love from all other affection. In verse twenty-two we come upon the expression, “And these are ancient things”; and verse twenty-three reads “These were the potters, and those that dwelt among plants and hedges: there they dwelt with the king for his work.” By ancient things understand things old and obsolete. We must not think of the antiquity, dating from our own times; it was Ezra who wrote this, and he lived before Socrates taught in Athens, and before any Chronicles now extant Think then of the great antiquity of Holy Scripture. Verse twenty-three has been regarded as showing the humiliating aspect of human nature. An ancient writer has called those that dwelt among plants and hedges hedge-rogues; the base brood of their forefathers, poor-spirited, mean wretches, who chose rather to abide under the hedges of Babylon, to plant gardens, make fences and flower-pots for the king than return to their own country, though liberty for them so to do had been proclaimed by Cyrus. Is it not so under Gospel proclamations? Has not Christ proclaimed a year of Jubilee, and offered freedom to all men, yet are there not some who are so accustomed to the yoke of sin as to choose it, rather than accept the glorious liberty of Christ? Let every man answer on his own account.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

1Ch 4:1 The sons of Judah; Pharez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal.

Ver. 1. Carmi. ] Alias Chelubai, or Caleb. 1Ch 2:9 ; 1Ch 2:18

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1 Chronicles Chapter 4

The 4th chapter begins a somewhat new section, not that we have not had Judah before. And this is another peculiar feature of Chronicles – we have occasional repetition even where nothing is complete, but never a mere repetition. In the former section, Judah is introduced in order to bring in David and the royal line. Here Judah is brought forward because he is a leader among the tribes of Israel. And this section is not a question of David. We have had that. That closes with 1Ch 3 . Here we have Judah again merely in his place among the different tribes. Hence we have his line in a general way carried on as before, only with a view to the people, and not the kingdom. This is the 1Ch 4 , with some strikingly encouraging words of the Spirit of God interspersed, on which I need not dwell now. After Judah there is Simeon (v. 24).

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

sons = descendants.

Hur, and Shobal. These were sons of Caleb, the son of Hezron (1Ch 2:18, 1Ch 2:20, 1Ch 2:50, 1Ch 2:52).

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 4

In chapter four, we follow another line from Caleb through one of his sons called Er. And you get a different line of Caleb from that which was earlier given. Now in this particular line in verse nine, as we’ve been listing a lot of names, suddenly he pauses on one fellow who stands out. Now in all of these names, suddenly you get a man and he stands out. Now why does one stand out above the other?

Jabez was more honourable than his brothers: and his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bore him with sorrow ( 1Ch 4:9 ).

Now the word Jabez means sorrow, and thus, why a parent would tag a name like that upon a child, I really don’t know. It is rather, to me, unfortunate name to place upon a child. It would seem to me that it could cause some psychic problems. She bore him with sorrow, whether or not it was a difficult pregnancy, or whether or not some deformity existed in the child when he was born that created sorrow. It could be that he was blind. It could be that he was impaired some way physically. And so rather than the great joy of having a son, because of a physical impairment it would create sorrow. Oh, Jabez, you know, sorrow. And so they named him sorrow for whatever cause or reason. But that is… The name isn’t the thing that makes him outstanding. It’s his character that makes him outstanding.

And Jabez called upon the God of Israel ( 1Ch 4:10 ),

He was outstanding because he was a man of prayer. There are far too few men of prayer. And yet, the men of prayer are the men who really do accomplish things for the glory of God. There is a book called Power through Prayer that I would like to recommend for excellent reading by E.M. Bounds. Andrew Murray has also written a beautiful book on prayer. There is a biography of Hyde; it’s called Praying Hyde. Whenever I read of these men of prayer, I long in my heart to be a man of prayer. I really don’t consider myself a man of prayer. I know that I don’t pray enough. These men of prayer, these men that were capable of spending hours in prayer. Praying Hyde would spend up to eight hours a day. Now that I call a man of prayer.

And the things that were wrought for God. You know, we think we got to be out there, you know, hustling for the Lord. And we find ourselves always so deeply involved in activities for God, as though we can accomplish so much by our activities. But I am convinced that we can accomplish more for God through prayer than any of our efforts that we get involved in, especially if those efforts are not backed by prayer.

Now you say, “If you’re not a man of prayer then how come the Lord has done so much through your ministry?” ‘Cause I got so many people praying for me. And I appreciate your prayers. And the work that is wrought here is wrought as a result of prayer. God has blessed the ministry of Calvary Chapel because of prayer. And years ago when we were just twenty-five people, I said to them, “Alright now.”

Because it is interesting, we made a survey in the summer camp that I was conducting one time. We sought to sort of get the spiritual tenor of the children, you know. And how often do you read your Bible, and how often do you pray? And on that little question, most of them put three times a day. And immediately of course, we figured out for breakfast, lunch and dinner. And realizing that people usually pray for their breakfast, lunch and dinner, we suggested that they put a little sort of a postscript on their breakfast, lunch and dinner prayers as they asked the Lord to bless the food and give thanks for the food, we told them to put a little addition to their prayer, “And Lord, please bless Calvary Chapel.”

And fourteen-and-a-half years ago, we began praying, “And Lord, please bless Calvary Chapel.” And He has. Now, of course, I think that’s one of the great sources of power in the church. And this is the thing that the people who come to analyze and to study and to find, you know, the program and so forth, this is the thing that they never see. Nor do they take into consideration, and that is the place of prayer in the ministry of Calvary Chapel. You see, they don’t come all night and see the light on in the Prayer Room and realize that there are men there in the Prayer Room praying all night unto the Lord for the needs of the church and for the requests that have been brought in and those requests that are called in all night long. Oh, what power is generated by those men in their prayer, in the times of prayer all night long.

Now I’d like to recommend to a lot of you fellows, get started; get involved. You know, when I go to the men’s prayer meeting on Saturday night and I hear the men praying, I can tell you the men who are in the all-night prayer times. I’ll tell you, they really learned to pray. And it’s thrilling to have men of prayer within the body. But it’s also thrilling to have so many women that also have banded together in prayer, the Monday morning prayer fellowship there. And the many prayer fellowships throughout the area where the ladies gather during the day and homes for a time of prayer. And so we’ve got ladies praying all day and men praying all night. No wonder God is blessing Calvary Chapel in such a glorious way.

“And Jabez called upon the God of Israel.” Now his prayer was really sort of for personal things.

Oh Lord, bless me indeed, enlarge my coast, keep your hand on me, keep me from evil, that it would not grieve me! And God answered his prayer, granted his request ( 1Ch 4:10 ).

You know, God wants to bless you and to me. That’s always exciting to realize that God wants to bless me. For as I look at myself I say, “How could God ever bless me?” Now He doesn’t bless me because I’m so good, but because He’s so good. And He just likes to bless people. I need the blessings. I like the blessings. I want the blessings. “Oh Lord, bless me indeed.”

“Enlarge my coast.” I think that one of the problems that we all have is that of narrowness. We always seem to want to define our borders, draw our close circle. “O God, enlarge my borders.” You see, it’s our church. “Oh, but they’re Baptist. They’re Nazarene. They’re…” And we want to sort of exclude others. We’ve got this special exclusive fellowship. Foolishness! We have no corner upon God at all. We used to sing, “Jesus loves us all one and all, you and me, everybody one and all.” And the Lord is no respecter of persons. The Lord is no respecter of churches. “God, enlarge my borders. Help me to see beyond the narrow walls of denominationalism.”

I have found that the more spiritual a person becomes, the less denominational he becomes. And we quit talking about my church, and we start talking about His church, and we see it made up of Catholics and Presbyterians and Lutherans and Methodists. And the whole shebang, you might say. All of us a part of His glorious church. We see the purposes of God wrought in the many fellowships that have been created.

One of the signs of cultism is that of narrowness and, “We are the only ones. We’re exclusive. Everybody else is Babylon. Everybody else is wrong. We’re the only ones that have the true truth. Everyone else has, well, how could you have a false truth? So we are the truly true church.” And this narrowness, sectarianism, it is carnal.

Paul said, “While some of you say, ‘I’m of Cephas, I’m of Paul, I’m of Apollos'” ( 1Co 1:12 ). He said that’s a mark of spiritual immaturity. You’re a babe in Christ. You haven’t grown up. It’s a mark of carnality. Are you not carnal? Do you not walk as men as long as one is saying, “I’m of Cephas, I’m of Paul, I’m of Apollos?” And it’s a mark of spiritual immaturity. “O God, enlarge my coast.” Lord, enlarge the borders of my life. Let me see the whole kingdom of God. The whole body of Christ.

Then of course, “Keep your hand upon me.” Oh how important it is that God keeps His hand upon my life. David said, “You held me by my right hand” ( Psa 73:23 ). Lord, keep holding my hand. I need You to hold me up. But Lord, if You don’t hold me up I’ll surely fall. Then finally, “Keep me from evil lest it grieve me.” Now this is farsightedness, which we need more of.

One of the problems of the world today is as Peter described. He said you only see that which is close. “You do not see that which is far off” ( 2Pe 1:9 ). And we only so many times look at an experience for the immediate benefits, but this is always, always the snare of Satan. Shortcut. You don’t have to take God’s way. You can have immediate fulfillment. And just about every enticement that Satan lays before you, the bait is immediate fulfillment.

You don’t have to go by way of the cross. You can have immediate fulfillment right now. Just turn aside from God’s path. You see, it’s over here. Here’s where you’re going to find it. And he seeks to turn us aside from God’s path. “O God, keep me from evil lest it grieve me,” because the end of that path when you turn aside from God’s path, the end of that path is always grief. You may be all excited now. You may be breathless over the thrills and the anticipation of what this experience is going to bring to you. But oh, six months down the line, the grief that you’re going to go through. “O God, keep me from evil lest it grieve me.”

Sometimes I think it would be valuable if all of you could sit in my office and just listen to the stories of grief because someone turned aside from God’s path seeking fulfillment. You couldn’t talk to them at that time. They would say, “Oh, you don’t understand. This is different. This is something special.” “Yes, but God’s Word says…” “Oh, but you know this is an exception.” How is it that we always think our case is our exception? The old Greek proverb was, “The dice of the gods are loaded.” By which they were saying, “Hey man, you can’t go against God and win.” Every time you try to go against God, you’re going to lose. You’re going to end up the loser. And so, “God keep me from evil lest it be a grief unto me.” God answered his prayer.

Now we get back in the names again. One name stands out. We, with verse twenty-four, begin with the tribe of Simeon, and many of the names of those within the tribe of Simeon are given. A certain number of the tribe of Simeon, five hundred men, came down to the area of Edom, the land of Gedor. There was good pastureland there. And there they set up on the east side of the great African rift, the Dead Sea, and they found a good pasture for their flocks. They drove out the inhabitants of that land for it was good pastureland. And they dwelt there quietly and peaceably. They had driven out some of the descendants of Ham who had been there from the times of old. And this was during the time that Hezekiah was king over Israel. And they then went on down to mount Seir and took a part of the area that was of the Edomites, killing the Amaleks that were there. And it says, “They are dwelling there to this day.”

Now the tribe of Simeon was, of course, one of the ten tribes from the northern kingdom. And it is interesting that a branch from Simeon went down and established there in the area of mount Seir. A rabbi recently sought to prove that those tribes in Afghanistan that are presently fighting against the Russian invasion are actually related to the tribes of Israel. They are part of the ten tribes of the northern kingdom. And he has done quite a scholarly job and research in proving that Israel is already fighting against Russia in Afghanistan. And many of these tribal people that have since, of course, embraced the Moslem religion are actually descendants from the ten tribes that were scattered at the time of the Assyrian invasion. Whether or not that is true, I do not know. But I do know that God knows where those people are, and He’s going to gather them together. During the great tribulation He is going to seal ten thousand from each tribe, because He knows exactly who they are. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

1Ch 4:1-23

1Ch 4:1-23

“The sons of Judah: Perez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal. And Reaiah the son of Shobal begat Jahath; and Jahath begat Ahumai and Lahad. These are the families of the Zorathites. And these were the sons of the father of Etam: Jezreel, and Ishma, and Idbash; and the name of their sister was Hazzelelponi; and Penuel the father of Gedor, and Ezer the father of Hushah. These are the sons of Hur, the first-born of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem. And Ashur the father of Tekoa had two wives, Helah and Naarah. And Naarah bare him Ahuzzam, and Hepher, and Temeni, and Haahashtari. These were the sons of Naarah. And the sons of Helah were Zereth, Izhar, and Ethnan. And Hakkoz begat Anub, and Zobebah, and the families of Aharhel the son of Harum. And Jabez was more honorable than his brethren: and his mother called his name Jabez, saying I have borne him with sorrow. And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my border, and that thy hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it be not to my sorrow! And God granted him that which he requested. And Chelub the brother of Shuhah begat Mehir, who was the father of Eshton. And Eshton begat Bethrapha, and Passeah, and Tenhinnah the father of Irnahash. These are the men of Recah. And the sons of Kenaz: Othniel, and Seraiah. And the sons of Othniel: Hathath. And Meonothai begat Ophrah: and Seraiah begat Joab the father of Geharashim; for they were craftsmen. And the sons of Caleb the son of Jephunneh: Iru, Elah, and Naam; and the sons of Elah; and Kenaz And the sons of Jehalelel: Ziph, and Ziphah, Tiria, and Azarel. And the sons of Ezrah: Jether, and Mered, and Epher, and Jalon; and she bare Miriam, and Shammai, and Ishbah the father of Eshtemoa. And his wife the Jewess bare Jared the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah. And these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh whom Mered took. And the sons of the wife of Hodiah, the sister of Naham, were the father of Keilah the Garmite, and Eshtemoa the Maacathite. And the sons of Shimon: Amnon, and Rinnah, Bnenhanan, and Tilon. And the sons of Ishi: Zohethm and Benzoheth. The sons of Shelah the son of Judah: Er the father of Lecah, and Laadah the father of Mareshah, and the families of the house of them that wrought fine linen, of the house of Ashbea; and Jokim, and the men of Cozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who had dominion in Moab, and Jashubilehem. And the records are ancient. These were the potters, and the inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah: there they dwelt with the king for his work.”

E.M. Zerr:

1Ch 4:1-4. Plurality of wives was tolerated in ancient times, and that gave occasion to think of a man’s posterity in different groups. Hence we have an account of Judah’s sons in this paragraph, although we had one in Ch. 2:3. And again, we should keep in mind the special reason for the importance of family registration in view of property inheritances, and also the interest in the promises to be fulfilled through the descendants of Abraham and David

1Ch 4:5-8. Evidently the point in this paragraph is signified by Ashur’s having two wives, and their respective sons were named

1Ch 4:9. It was decreed from the beginning that childbirth should be attended with pain; and after the sin of Eve that pain was to be increased. See my comments at Gen 3:16 regarding this subject- While this increase of pain was to be general, there would be exceptions where still greater suffering would have to be endured. The last word of this verse means pain, and the word Jabez in the Hebrew means sorrow. The birth of this son was attended with unusual pain and sorrow, so he was given a name that signified the experience.

1Ch 4:10. While it was through no fault of his that Jabez was so named, he seemed to fear it might act as a “bad luck” omen in his life. In view of this, he earnestly prayed to God for help, that he would bless and prosper him in the ways of life- It is pleasant to read that the prayer was granted

1Ch 4:11-12. Chelub is mentioned to begin this paragraph. The only reason I can find for his mention is the fact that he was a part of the family tree of Judah. All that Smith’s Bible Dictionary says of him is, “A man among the descendants of Judah.”

1Ch 4:13. Othniel is the name to have our attention here. He was the man who fought a battle to obtain a wife. (Jos 15:16-17).

1Ch 4:14. Craftsmen. is from CHARASH and Strong defines it, “a fabricator of any material-” These people were engaged in the special trade of preparing materials to become parts of some larger unit. They happened to live in this certain valley which gave it the name Charashim, which means “craftsmen-”

1Ch 4:15 – Caleb is a familiar name to us because he was one of the 12 spies who went to search out the land of Canaan. He was one of the faithful ones, who, with Joshua, was permitted to enter the promised land.

1Ch 4:16-20. All of the persons named in this paragraph were members of Judah’s family stock- Some of them are identical with others of note, such as Ezra, Miriam, Heber, Pharaoh, Amnon; but the similarity to the ones of note is purely a coincidence.

1Ch 4:21. Er was the grandson of Judah, not his son who was slain by the Lord for his evil conduct. Sometimes the thing that won a place of honorable mention was some special trade. As an instance of it, we read of the fabricators in V. 14, and now the workers in linen in this verse.

1Ch 4:22. The verse means that these men were dominant persons in the land of Moab. Ancient things means that it had been a matter of established note, from ancient times, that the men referred to did occupy that sort of dominion in the land of Moab.

1Ch 4:23. This verse is a kind of detail of the preceding one. The statement is there made that the men were prominent. This verse explains that they had a special trade, that of working in pottery, and that they were employed by the king. So important was this work that it made them something like the “indispensable man.” They not only worked in pottery, but had care of the shrubbery so important in the palace grounds.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Here another line from Judah is traced, and must be viewed in the light of the royalty manifest in David. It is the story of the multiplication and settlement of the people who became workers in the great kingdom. Thus we have the descent of such as became workers in fine linen, of the potters, and also of the king’s workmen.

Two verses of this section tell the story of one man, and of how he, by prayer and obedience, obtained the favor of God. Incidentally, the story is full of interest. In all likelihood, Jabez was a nephew of Caleb. For some reason his mother had given him this name, which means “bringeth sorrow.” Perhaps his knowledge of the meaning of the name had cast a shadow over all his life. Dr. W. E. Barnes says, “The man with the illomened name staved off ill-fortune by his prayer.” This would seem to be perfectly correct in the light of the fact that in his prayer he asked “that it be not to my sorrow!”

The chief beauty of the story is its revelation of God’s interest in individuals. While through these genealogies, and indeed through all the history, we are occupied with those connected with government and the procession of events leading to universal issues, it is refreshing to be halted by the story of one man who took his need directly to God and obtained the answer of God’s grace.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

1Ch 4:9-10

In what Jabez was “more honourable than his brethren” we are not told. It might be in courage; it might be in learning; it is certain that he was honourable for his piety.

I. Jabez called on the God of Israel. It was the habit of his life; it was the action of each separate day; he was known by this; this lay at the foundation of his courage, his goodness, his success.

II. The prayer of Jabez is (1) earnest; (2) full of desire for God; (3) it is a thorough prayer: he asks no partial blessing.

III. “Enlarge my coast.” He prays for more territory to his people and himself-more power, more wealth. These are what we should call earthly and temporal blessings. The best men of the Old Testament did not distinguish between temporal and spiritual, as we do. The thing we have to fear is, not “enlargement” in itself, but possible harm and danger to us in the process-perversion, corruption, the coming in of hurtful elements.

IV. Notice the summing up of the prayer: “and that Thine hand might be with me,” etc. So let us seek preservation from evil, inward and outward, by watchfulness, by prayer, by dependence on God, and we need never fear enlargement. Let it go on without limit and without fear if it goes on thus, banked in on either hand by Divine blessing and by Divine care.

A. Raleigh, The Way to the City, p. 190.

References: 1Ch 1:12.-H. Jones, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 141. 1-Parker, vol. viii., p. 318. 2-Ibid., p. 323. 3-Ibid., p. 327. 1Ch 4:9, 1Ch 4:10.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvii., No. 994; H. Melvill, Sermons on Less Prominent Facts, vol. i., p. 297; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 255, and vol. ii., p. 524. 1Ch 4:17.-J. M. Neale, Occasional Sermons, p. 116. 1Ch 4:22.-Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 33.

1Ch 4:23

I. Notice how work links men to kings. Here we have potters, gardeners, and hedgers mixed up with the king. The men and women who work, whether with brain or hand, or both, are the people who save the nation from ruin. Is it not so in Christian life and experience? What is a man’s religion worth if it does not teach him to labour? Are we not to work out our own salvation, and that for the best of reasons: “It is God that worketh in us”?

II. Kings need different kinds of workers. God needs us. Not that He could not have done without us, but He has elected to win the world by human instrumentality, and-let it be said with reverence-the interests of God are very greatly bound up with the progress of humanity. There is a sense in which God needs us, and cannot carry out His plans without us.

III. “There they dwelt with the king,” willing to stay in his service “all the days of their appointed time.” Let us be willing to stay. Heaven will keep. Some day we shall go to dwell with the King in another sense. We shall go from the soot of the pottery and the burning heat of the garden to dwell in “quietness and assurance for ever.”

T. Champness, New Coins from Old Gold, p. 193.

References: 1Ch 4:23-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiv., No. 1400; Ibid., Morning by Morning, p. 155. 4-Parker, vol. viii., p. 331. 1Ch 5:26.-E. H. Plumptre, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. ii., p. 230. 5-Parker, vol. viii., p. 335. 1Ch 6:31.-Ibid., Fountain, May 15th, 1878. 6-Ibid., vol. viii., p. 341. 7-8-Ibid., p. 346. 1Ch 9:22.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. x., p. 341. 9-Parker, vol. viii., p. 351. 1Ch 10:9, 1Ch 10:10.-Expositor, 2nd series, vol. vii., p. 309.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 4:1-23 Additional Genealogies of Judah

1. The sons of Judah (1Ch 4:1-8)

2. Jabez more honorable (1Ch 4:9-10)

3. Further descendants of Judah (1Ch 4:11-20)

4. Descendants of Shelah (1Ch 4:21-23)

Hur and Shobal, mentioned in the first verse, were the sons of Caleb the son of Hezron. The families of the Zorathites sprang from Reaiah, the son of Shobal. Jabez is especially mentioned. Jabez means He causes pain. And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oh that Thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that Thine hand might be with me, and that Thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! And God granted him that which he requested. The occasion when this prayer-vow was uttered is not given; probably it was made in connection with the expulsion of the Canaanites from the land and the acquisition of their territory. It was a simple prayer of childlike faith. For blessing, for increase, for companionship and for preservation Jabez cast himself upon the God of Israel, and He granted him his request. Blessing came to Jabezs soul; his coast was enlarged; the hand of the Lord was with him and kept him from evil. God never disappoints faith.

Then we have mentioned in this chapter the craftsmen; Geharashim (verse 14) means valley of the craftsmen; the workers in fine linen (verse 21); and those who were potters (verse 23).

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

am 2283, etc. bc 1721, etc

Pharez: 1Ch 2:5, Gen 38:29, Gen 46:12, Num 26:20, Num 26:21, Rth 4:18, Mat 1:3, Luk 3:33, Phares, Esrom

Carmi: 1Ch 2:9, Chelubai, 1Ch 2:18, Caleb

Reciprocal: 1Ch 2:7 – Carmi 1Ch 5:3 – Carmi 1Ch 9:4 – Pharez

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

1Ch 4:1. The sons of Judah The posterity: for only Pharez was his immediate son. But they are all mentioned here only to show Shobals descent from Judah.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1Ch 4:9. Jabez, dolour, grief, anguish. He was honourable; the same with Othniel, according to the Targumists.

1Ch 4:22. Jokim, &c. These four probably resided in Moab, about the time of Elimelech. Rth 1:2.

REFLECTIONS.

In the vast line of great men and of princes, mentioned in the tribe of Judah, no one here claims so particular attention as Jabez. He was more honourable than his brethren. They, as well as he, were princes by birth; and though he might excel them in riches, yet his greatest honours arose from his piety, his learning, and the distinguished actions of his life.

His mother bare him with great sorrow: she narrowly escaped with life in giving birth to her son. Hence she called him Jabez, because he caused her grief. It often happens that the things which at first cost us some prayers and tears, afterwards prove the happiest sources of our comfort and joy. The Hebrew mothers were often short-sighted in giving names of bitterness and sorrow to their sons. God is better to his people than their fears, and often renders affliction subservient to their greatest joy.

Jabez on coming to his estate began the world with God. He called on the name of the Lord, that is, he sincerely renewed his covenant with God; he prayed for all its spiritual blessings, Jer 31:33, and most solemnly vowed to live like his fathers, the holy patriarchs, whom God had blessed and clothed with his high defence. He fixed his eye on the great and everlasting covenant of Israel. He deprecated all its curses by revering God, and avoiding vice; and he claimed all its blessings by piety and obedience. What an example for the young heir to imitate; what an encouraging model for every man to cast himself and his family on the care of heaven.

His piety was connected with industry. He built Jabez, a city, which he called after his own name. Not the Jabesh-gilead; for there, the country being joined to the name, marks that there was another Jabez. Those who look for covenant mercies must use industry, faith and prayer, in obtaining them. He prayed that God would bless him indeed, and enlarge the boundaries of his coast. What, having much, did he pray for more? Did he wish to add house to house, and field to field, till no inheritance was left for the poor? Did he wish to serve God for his gifts, and content himself with a terrestrial paradise? Did he wish to be lord and tyrant over the vassal poor, and to exercise his penal claim over oppressed humanity? If so, thousands would now join him in devotion. No, no; heaven forbid the thought. But though the tribe of Judah had expelled the Canaanites, yet they returned and dwelt in many of the burnt cities. Hereby Jabez found his princely lot encumbered, and even his life menaced by the enemy. Therefore he prayed that God would inspire him with the courage of Caleb, honourably to clear the lot given him by the Lord; and in all those skirmishes and conflicts he kept his eye on the heavenly country, and the better inheritance promised to his fathers. Let us in like manner pray for the Lord to give us resolution and courage to vanquish every foe, and improve the lot divinely given us of the Lord.

God granted him his request. He, according to his promise, was with him in all his wars and conflicts, to drive the heathen from his inheritance; for virtue, after all, is that source of courage most to be depended upon in extreme danger. Thus the Lord was with Jabez; and thus he will be with the poor man in his cottage, the farmer in his fields, the merchant in his warehouse, and the lord in his mansion, provided they properly claim the protection of his arm.

The Lord, through all the pilgrimage of life, preserved him from evil, that it did not grieve him. No weapon uplifted against him prevailed, no sickness materially affected either him or his sons; for the Lord preserves all them that love him; but all the wicked will he destroy.

Jabez in prosperity, and it is great to say, did not apostatize from his vows, and from his God. He devoted his leisure to sacred literature. He became a distinguished doctor in the law, and trained up the whole or part of his sons to the same studies and duties. The families of scribes in Jabez acquired a celebrity which claimed a notice in the contracted annals of the kingdom. 1Ch 2:55. What mercies, temporal and spiritual; what honour, human and divine, didst thou, Lord, heap on this devout and faithful man. What favours didst thou confer on his family, that they inherited not only the lands, but also the piety of their parent. So, according to rank and situation, thou wilt proportion blessings in time or in eternity, to every man who, like Jabez, shall begin the world and persevere through life in piety, devotion and righteousness. Thy gracious hand is over them that love thee, even to thousands of generations.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

PART I (1 Chronicles 1-9). Genealogical Lists, together with Geographical and Historical Notes.These chapters form a general introduction to the whole work. They contain the following genealogies, often in an incomplete form: Adam to Israel (1Ch 1:1 to 1Ch 2:2)with the exception of Cains descendants (Gen 4:16-22)the whole material is taken from Genesis 1-36; Judah (1Ch 2:3-55); David (1Ch 3:1-24); Judah again, and made up of fragments (1Ch 4:1-23); Simeon (1Ch 4:24-43); Reuben, Gad, and half the tribe (the eastern) of Manasseh (1Ch 5:1-26); Levi and the Levitical cities (1Ch 6:1-81); Issachar (1Ch 7:1-5); Benjamin (1Ch 7:6-12); Naphtali (1Ch 7:13); half the tribe of Manasseh (the western) (1Ch 7:14-19); Ephraim (1Ch 7:20-29); Asher (1Ch 7:30-40); Benjamin again, together with the house of Saul (1Ch 8:1-40). Then follows an enumeration of the inhabitants of Jerusalem given in the order: sons of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, Manasseh, priests, Levites, doorkeepers (1Ch 9:1-44); 1Ch 9:35-44 are repeated verbally from 1Ch 8:29-38.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

4:1 The {a} sons of Judah; Pharez, Hezron, and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal.

(a) Meaning, they came from Judah, as nephews and kinsmen: for only Pharez was his natural son.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

B. The House of Israel chs. 4-7

The writer’s next concern was to trace the line of people to whom and through whom God promised to bring blessing and salvation. That nation was Israel, the descendants of Jacob. The writer viewed Israel as consisting of 12 tribes, not just the tribes represented by the returnees from Babylonian exile. The nation as a whole would have a future. [Note: See Howard, pp. 253-56, for a discussion of the Chronicler’s concern to demonstrate the unity of all the Israelites throughout 1 and 2 Chronicles.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

1. The family of Judah 4:1-23

Jacob prophesied that his fourth son, Judah, would become the leader of the Israelites. Through him God would provide the greatest promised blessing to come (Gen 49:8-12). The Davidic dynasty was one branch of Jacob’s descendants, so the writer had special interest in Judah.

"Many unrelated fragments have been brought together here in the interests of completeness." [Note: Williamson, p. 58.]

Jabez’s prayer (1Ch 4:10) shows that prayer and a prayer-answering God can overcome the threat of evil. [Note: For an excellent exposition of this verse, see D. Edmond Hiebert, Working With God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession, pp. 68-76. See also David L. Cooper, "The Prayer of Jabez," Biblical Research Monthly 9:1 (January 1944):3-4. On 1Ch 4:12, see C. H. Knights, "The Text of 1 Chronicles IV 12: A Reappraisal," Vetus Testamentum 37:3 (July 1987):375-77.] This writer believed in the efficacy of prayer, and he emphasized prayer much in his narrative.

"As a Judahite and ancestor of David, it seems quite likely that Jabez was a type of David and that his fervent appeal was made in anticipation of God’s selection and blessing of the yet unborn house of David." [Note: Merrill, "A Theology . . .," p. 185.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

{e-Sword Note: 1 and 2 Chronicles were largely in topical format in the printed edition. When possible, this content has been divided by verse/chapter. Content that could not fit elsewhere was placed in the 1 and 2 Chronicles Book Comments for e-Sword.}

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary