Inhabitants of Jerusalem, 9:1-34

In this last chapter of the genealogies of Chronicles is presented a listing of notable families dwelling in the city of Jerusalem. The opening verse states that they are the families who were there when the city fell and its inhabitants were carried away to exile by Nebuchadnezzar. It divides them as Israelites, priests, Levites, and Nethinim. The Nethinim were servants of the temple, and some think they included the Gibeonites (Joshua-Chapter 8).

Among those called Israelites were representatives of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh. Verses 4-6 enumerate Judahites; verses 7-9 the Benjamites. No names are given for the Ephraimites and Manassites. Beginning at verse 10 is a listing of the chief of the priests, said to have numbered 1,760 (verse 13). Houses of the Levites are listed beginning at verse 14. They are broken down into the porters (verse 17), of whom there were two hundred twelve (verse

22). Verse 22 states that the original arranging of these Levites in their orders was by David the king and Samuel the seer. Their distribution about the temple precincts, term of service, place of lodging, duties and responsibilities are discussed. They guarded the doors and gates on every side, had the oversight of the holy vessels, prepared and distributed the incense spices, had charge of the fine flour for the shewbread, the pure olive oil, the frankincense, etc.

Certain of the Levites prepared the precious ointment, baked the meal offering, and prepared the shewbread fresh every sabbath. The singers also lived in the chambers of the temple, and were free of all other responsibilities, being employed solely for music and singing.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES.] In this chapter a list of inhabitants in Jerusalem (1Ch. 9:1-34); and genealogy of Saul repeated (1Ch. 9:35-44).

1Ch. 9:1-6.Reckoned, registered in form of gen. First after captivity, 4 classes. Nethinims, root nathan, to give, a sort of hieroduli, or sacred slavespersons given to Levites to perform lower and more laborious duties of sanctuary [Speak. Com.]. 1Ch. 9:3. Eph. and Man., some attached themselves to David when a fugitive, and were citizens of Jerusalem when it became capital (2Ch. 24:9). 1Ch. 9:4-6. Sons of Judah. Uthai, chief of family called after his name and not same as Athaiah in Neh. 11:4 [cf. Murphy]. 1Ch. 9:5. Shilonites (Shelani), family of Shelah, third son of Judah (ch. 1Ch. 4:21). Zerah, not mentioned after return, though an officer of this house was in Persian court (Neh. 11:24).

1Ch. 9:7-9.Sons of Benjamin. Sallus gen. different from that in Neh. 11:7-8. 1Ch. 9:10-13. Three priests, heads of families in Jerusalem, origin of their names found in ch. 1Ch. 24:7-17.

1Ch. 9:14-16.Levites. Shemaiah head (Neh. 11:15). Nehemiah and author of Chronicles fairly agree. The principal differences are that Nehemiah contracts Obadiah into Abda (1Ch. 9:17), gives Shemaiah an additional ancestor, Bunni (1Ch. 9:15), and in gon. of Mataniah substitutes Zabdi for Zichri (1Ch. 9:16) [Speak. Com.].

1Ch. 9:17-27.Porters, i.e., keepers of the temple gates (2Sa. 17:26; Mar. 13:3; Joh. 10:3). 1Ch. 9:18. Companies, orders or courses of service. 1Ch. 9:19. Korahites occupied a higher position, their office more directly connected with sacred service than others. 1Ch. 9:21. Porter, chief in reign of David (ch. 1Ch. 27:1-2; 1Ch. 27:2). Tabernacle, lit. tent of meeting (Exo. 29:42), and points to tabernacle on Mount Zion in time of David. 1Ch. 9:22. Seer, ancient popular term for prophet. 1Ch. 9:23. Children, office hereditary; wards, according to watches in set time. 1Ch. 9:24. Quarters (cf. 1Ch. 9:18 and ch. 1Ch. 26:14-16). 1Ch. 9:25. Seven (2Ki. 11:5), change of watch on Sabbath, which began at sunset. 1Ch. 9:26. Chambers, for use of priests (1Ki. 6:6; 1Ki. 12:18; 1Ki. 22:14). 1Ch. 9:27. Lodged daring week of office.

1Ch. 9:28-34.Various other functions of Levites. Charge of vessels, sacrificial bowls, trays for the shew-bread, and cups and flagons for the libations, vessels for holding stores not directly used in worship, also 1Ch. 9:29. Charge of ointment, compounding which of special service, 1Ch. 9:30 (cf. Exo. 30:23). Charge of baking, 1Ch. 9:31. Charge of shew-bread, laid in order on table every Sabbath, 1Ch. 9:32 (cf. Lev. 24:8). Charge of singing, 1Ch. 9:33, free from any special duty besides supervision, therefore could devote themselves night and day. 1Ch. 9:34. Closes first part of chapter.

1Ch. 9:35-44.A repetition of ch. 1Ch. 8:29-38. Some propose to cancel in one place or other. This unnecessary, fitly given in both places. In ch. 8 an account of subdivisions of tribe of Benjamin, and could not properly omit the most celebrated family of that tribe, that of Saul. Here bent on connecting the genealogical section of work with historical, and find it most convenient to effect the junction by re-introducing the gen. of the person with whose death his historical section opens [Speak. Com.].

HOMILETICS

RETURNED EXILES.1Ch. 9:2

First implies that others returned and settled afterwards in places not occupied by first. Numbers returned successively under Ezra, Nehemiah, and in later periods. Some who returned to the ancient inheritance had lived before time of captivity (Ezr. 3:12; Hag. 2:4-10). Four classes, representatives mentioned.

1. Israelites. Laymen. The whole nation including Judah. The name Jews gradually supplanted the name Israelites, especially among foreigners.

2. Priests. Mediation essential idea of priesthood. Israel had representatives between them and Jehovah. The office typical, and a perpetual inheritance from father to Song of Solomon 3. Levites. A special order to aid priests in higher functions. The first-born performed priestly offices before the organised temple service. To prevent disorder in domestic relations, and secure greater efficiency, primogeniture conferred upon tribe of Levi, which was to give undivided attention to duties of the sanctuary (Num. 3:11-13). They had to guard tabernacle and temple, take charge of vessels, and encamp round the tabernacle to form a partition between it and the people.

4. Nethinims. As Levites, so these were given to help. A great increase of them when Gibeonites submitted (Jos. 9:23); enlargement made by David (Ezr. 8:20). After return from captivity, their services most important on account of small number of Levites who returned (Ezr. 2:40). These classes set forth different kinds of Christian work. In the work of the service, positions of trust and honour, duties lowly and menial, variety and unity. All appointed by God, calling forth ability and activity of man. Who, then, is willing to consecrate himself?

ABILITY FOR GODS SERVICE.1Ch. 9:13-24

The return was a critical time, exposing to danger, requiring courage and physical strength. Able men for the work of the service. This ability requires

I. Intelligence to understand the work. It must be received as a divine appointment, ordained in their set office (1Ch. 9:22). No prosecution without comprehending its nature, design, and responsibilities. Porters and overseers, confectioners and singers, must train and cultivate gifts and power to work. Be well informed in the science of duty and of God. Take your wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you.

II. Perseverance to prosecute the work. They lodged all night (1Ch. 9:25); attended a week in turn (1Ch. 9:25); and were employed night and day. Many get tired, work half time, or leave entirely. The nobles bent not their necks to work, but Nehemiah continued at the wall (ch. 1Ch. 5:16). Steady, patient, faithful service acceptable to God. Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned. Pray and stay are two blessed monosyllables [Donne].

ORDER IN GODS SERVICE.1Ch. 9:23-34

Extreme care taken to secure regularity and reverence in Gods house. Order is heavens first law.

I. In the appointment of officers to rule. Each his own place and authority. Priests at the altar, porters at the gate, and leaders in the choir. Times of duty and relief fixed. Many disorderly, unsympathetic, and fail. For we sought him not after the due order (1Ch. 15:13).

II. In the regular method of worship. Variety but unity. In sacrifices to present, bread to lay out, and songs to arrange, they waited on their office according to their order. Order gives cheerfulness, alacrity, and success. Disorder produces aversion, resistance, and failure. Let all things be done decently and in order. God is not the author of confusion (1Co. 14:33-40).

The least confusion but in one, not all
That system only, but the whole must fall [Pope].

PEDIGREE OF SAUL.1Ch. 9:35-44

To construct Sauls genealogy, compare various statements in Scriptures (cf. 1Sa. 9:1; 1Sa. 14:51; 1Ch. 7:6-8; 1Ch. 8:29-33; 1Ch. 9:35-39). In the choice, anointing, and pedigree of Saul, which enter the history of Israel, notice

1. The condescension of God. Both to human weakness, in asking a king, and to smallest and apparently trivial events in life.

2. The sovereignty of God. Independent of earthly and human relations. Saul not notable, from a prominent family; but unknown, from the smallest family of the smallest of the tribes.

3. The providence of God. In preserving the record for the instruction of others. How has God, the Holy Ghost, stooped to become a historian of the smallest, most contemptible affairs on earth, in order to reveal to man, in his own language, in his own business, in his own ways, the purposes, the secrets, and the ways of the Deity [Hamann].

HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

1Ch. 9:1-2. Carried away.

1. The sin.
2. The punishment.
3. The return, and
4. The restoration. Many remained in Babylon, others returned to possessions, privileges, and honour. This typical of spiritual conduct. A wonderful providence that as the land kept her Sabbaths for those seventy years, so the country should be all that while kept empty, till the return of the natives; for we read not that any colonies were sent thither, nor any displaced to make room for these at their return [Trapp].

1Ch. 9:13. Very able men. Men of valour or men of work for the service; in either sense we get aptitude or fitness for service, bodily, mentally, and spiritually. Able ministers of the New Testament (2Co. 3:6; cf. Eph. 3:7; 1Ti. 1:11-12).

1Ch. 9:20. Phineas, highly favoured.

1. Gods presence a mark of time. In individual life and national history. The object of this verse is to mark the time to which the writer refers in the verse preceding [Speak. Com.].

2. Gods presence the source of honour. The ruler over them.

3. Gods presence the source of success in effort. The Lord was with him in his action at Baal-peor (Numbers 25).

1Ch. 9:22. Samuel the seer a privileged person. One who receives dreams and visions, gets insight into divine revelation, and is consulted by the people. All teachers should be seers in opening the eyes and giving the light and knowledge of God (2Co. 4:6).

1Ch. 9:26. Doorkeepers.

1. To open the doors of Gods house every morning and shut them at night (1Ch. 9:27).

2. To keep off the unclean and hinder those from intruding who were forbidden by the law.
3. To direct and introduce into the courts those who came to worship and facilitate their safety and profit [cf. Henry]. This required zeal, to be there first; patience, to stay until the last; and care, to be exact and successful. A mean employment in the estimation of many. Nothing mean for God. I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.

The trivial round, the Common task,
Would furnish all we ought to ask
Room to deny ourselvesa road
To bring as daily nearer God [Keble].

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

LESSON FOUR 910

I. GENEALOGIES-ADAM TO DAVID

16. THE DWELLERS IN JERUSALEM (1Ch. 9:1-34)

INTRODUCTION

A brief review of certain Levites and priests who had returned from Babylonian captivity is the subject of Chapter 9. Sauls house and his ruin at the hands of the Philistines is recounted.

TEXT

1Ch. 9:1. So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel. And Judah was carried away captive to Babylon for their transgression. 2. Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities were Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinim. 3. And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim and Manasseh: 4. Uthai the son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the son of Bani, of the children of Perez the son of Judah. 5. And of the Shilonites: Asaiah the first-born, and his sons. 6. And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel, and their brethren, six hundred and ninety. 7. And of the sons of Benjamin: Sallu the son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah, 8. and Ibneiah the son of Jeroham, and Elah the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri, and Meshullam the son of Shephatiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah; 9. and their brethren, according to their generations, nine hundred and fifty and six. All these men were heads of fathers houses by their fathers houses.

10. And of the priests: Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, Jachin, 11. and Azariah the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, the ruler of the house of God; 12. and Adaiah the son of Jeroham, the son of Pashhur, the son of Malchijah, and Maasai the son of Adiel, the son of Jahzerah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Meshillemith, the son of Immer; 13. and their brethren, heads of their fathers houses, a thousand and seven hundred and threescore; very able men for the work of the service of the house of God.
14. And of the Levites: Shemaiah the son of Hasshub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, of the sons of Merari; 15. and Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal, and Mattaniah the son of Mica, the son of Zichri, the son of Asaph, 16. and Obadiah the son of Shemaiah, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun, and Berechiah the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, that dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites.

17. And the porters: Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their bretheren (Shallum was the chief), 18. who hitherto waited in the kings gate eastward: they were the porters for the camp of the children of Levi. 19. And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, of his fathers house, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the thresholds of the tent: and their fathers had been over the camp of Jehovah, keepers of the entry. 20. And Phinehas the son of Eleazar was ruler over them in time past, and Jehovah was with him. 21. Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was porter of the door of the tent of meeting. 22. All these that were chosen to be porters in the thresholds were two hundred and twelve. These were reckoned by genealogy in their villages, whom David and Samuel the seer did ordain in their office of trust. 23. So they and their children had the oversight of the gates of the house of Jehovah, even the house of the tent, by wards. 24. On the four sides were the porters, toward the east, west, north, and south. 25. And their brethren, in their villages, were to come in every seven days from time to time to be with them: 26. for the four chief porters, who were Levites, were in an office of trust, and were over the chambers and over the treasuries in the house of God. 27. And they lodged round about the house of God, because the charge thereof was upon them; and to them pertained the opening thereof morning by morning.

28. And certain of them had charge of the vessels of service; for by count were these brought in and by count were these taken out. 29. Some of them also were appointed over the furniture, and over all the vessels of the sanctuary, and over the fine flour, and the wine, and the oil, and the frankincense, and the spices. 30. And some of the sons of the priests prepared the confection of the spices. 31. And Mattithiah, one of the Levites, who was the first-born of Shallum the Korahite, had the office of trust over the things that were baded in pans. 32. And some of their brethren, of the sons of the Kohathites, were over the showbread, to prepare it every sabbath.
33. And these are the singers, heads of fathers houses of the Levites, who dwelt in the chambers and were free from other service; for they were employed in their work day and night. 34. These were heads of fathers houses of the Levites, throughout their generations, chief men: these dwelt at Jerusalem.

PARAPHRASE

1Ch. 9:1. The family tree of every person in Israel was carefully recorded in the Annals of the Kings of Israel. Judah was exiled to Babylon because the-people worshipped idols. 2. The first to return and live again in their former cities were families from the tribes of Israel, and also the priests, the Levites, and the Temple assistants. 3. Then some families from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh arrived in Jerusalem: 4. One family was that of Uthai (the son of Ammihud, son of Omri, son of Imri, son Bani) of the clan of Perez (son of Judah). 5. The Shilonites were another family to return, including Asaiah (Shilons oldest son) and his sons; 6. there were also the sons of Zerah, including Jeuel and his relatives: 690 in all. 7, 8. Among the members of the tribe of Benjamin who returned were these: Sallu (the son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah); Ibneiah (the son of Jeroham); Elah (the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri); Meshullam (the son of Shephatiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah). 9. These men were all chiefs of subclans. A total of 956 Benjaminites returned.

10, 11. The priests who returned were: Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, Jachin, Azariah (the son of Hilkiah, son of Meshullam, son of Zadok, son of Meraioth, son of Ahitub). He was the chief custodian of the Temple. 12. Another of the returning priests was Adaiah (son of Jeroham, son of Pashhur, son of Malchijah). Another priest was Massai (son of Adiel, son of Jahzerah, son of Meshullam, son of Meshillemith, son of Immer). 13. In all, 1,760 priests returned.
14. Among the Levites who returned was Shemaiah (son of Hasshub, son of Azrikam, son of Hashabiah, who was a descendant of Merari). 15, 16. Other Levites who returned included: Bakbakkar, Heresh, Galal, Mattaniah (the son of Mica, who was the son of Zichri, who was the son of Asaph). Obadiah (the son of Shemaiah, son of Galal, son of Jeduthun). Berechiah (the son of Asa, son of Elkanah, who lived in the area of the Netophathites).
17, 18. The gatekeepers were Shallum (the chief gatekeeper), Akkub, Talmon, and Ahimanall Levites. They are still responsible for the eastern royal gate. 19. Shallums ancestry went back through Kore and Ebiasaph to Korah. He and his close relatives the Korahites were in charge of the sacrifices and the protection of the sanctuary, just as their ancestors had supervised and guarded the Tabernacle. 20. Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, was the first director of this division in ancient times. And the Lord was with him. 21. At that time Zechariah, the son of Meshelemiah, had been responsible for the protection of the entrance to the Tabernacle. 22. There were 212 doorkeepers in those days. They were chosen from their villages on the basis of their genealogies, and they were appointed by David and Samuel because of their reliability. 23. They and their descendants were in charge of the Lords Tabernacle. 24. They were assigned to each of the four sides: east, west, north, and south. 25. And their relatives in the villages were assigned to them from time to time, for seven days at a time. 26. The four head gatekeepers, all Levites, were in an office of great trust, for they were responsible for the rooms and treasuries in the Tabernacle of God. 27. Because of their important positions they lived near the Tabernacle, and they opened the gates each morning.
28. Some of them were assigned to care for the various vessels used in the sacrifices and worship; they checked them in and out to avoid loss. 29. Others were responsible for the furniture, the items in the sanctuary, and the supplies such as fine flour, wine, incense, and spices. 30. Other priests prepared the spices and incense. 31. And Mattithiah (a Levite and the oldest son of Shallum the Korahite) was entrusted with making the flat cakes for grain offerings. 32. Some members of the Kohath clan were in charge of the preparation of the special bread each Sabbath.
33, 34. The cantors were all prominent Levites. They lived in Jerusalem at the Temple and were on duty at all hours. They were free from other responsibilities and were selected by their genealogies.

COMMENTARY

Family registers and genealogical connections were very important to a people who so often found themselves uprooted and disconnected from relatives and homeland. This fact is brought into sharp focus in 1Ch. 9:1. By this time in the record we have arrived at the grievous overthrow of Jerusalem by Babylon in 586 B.C. The historian faithfully records the fact that Judah was carried away to Babylon for their transgression, (see also I Kings, chapters 24 and 25).

At this point in the record the historian proceeds to present a summary of those who returned from Babylon. He passes over any details related to the seventy years of captivity and fixes his attention on those who returned with Zerubbabel and Jeshua in 538 B.C. Four classes of people are distinguished in 1Ch. 9:2 : Israel, priests, Levites, and Nethinim. In distinguishing between priests and Levites it must be observed that every priest must necessarily be a Levite; however, not every Levite would be qualified to serve as a priest. The term Nethinin means wholly given and was a name attached to those who were bondmen of the Temple, helpers of the priests. In this fourfold reference in verse two the focus of interest is upon the priesthood and the Temple services. The place that holds priority in importance is Jerusalem. Solomons Temple had been situated here. In this place of sacred memory Zerubbabels Temple would be built. It was not until during the Babylonian captivity and the return that the Hebrews were generally referred to as the Jews, This name may well have originated out of ill will and was most likely associated with the remnant of the tribe of Judah. It is not to be supposed that the only representatives of the Hebrews who remained after the Captivity were of the tribe of Judah. For all practical purposes, the identity of the ten northern tribes was lost in the Assyrian overthrow in 72221 B.C.; however, there were scattered remnants of these tribes which along with Judah were taken into Babylon between the years of 606 and 586 B.C. and who returned to Palestine in 536 B.C. So the Chronicler says that the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, Manasseh, and Levi were certainly represented in Jerusalem after the return from Babylon. We met Perez in Genesis 38. He was the son of Judah and his mother was Tamar. Perez is an ancestor of Jesus Christ. When the author (1Ch. 9:5) speaks of the Shilonites, he is referring to those who had lived in Shiloh in the tribe of Ephraim. In earlier days the tabernacle had been located in Shiloh. Zerah (1Ch. 9:6) was a twin brother of Perez. The tribes and persons named and numbered in 1Ch. 9:3-9 correspond to the reference to Israel in 1Ch. 9:2.

The priests who are named in 1Ch. 9:10-13 are men who served in this office after the return from Captivity. A similar list is recorded in Neh. 11:12-14. Apparently it was not the intention of the historian to provide a complete list of the priests. Out of records which were available to him and directed by the Holy Spirit, he selected these representatives of the priesthood. In like manner there is a list of Levites in Neh. 11:15-18 which compares with 1Ch. 9:14-16. Descendants of familiar heads of families such as Merari, Asaph, and Jeduthun are named here. There was a village named Netophah (1Ch. 9:16) located near Bethlehem Judah. When the wall of Jerusalem was dedicated in Nehemiahs day (Neh. 12:28) the sons of the singers from among the Netophathites shared in the ceremonies at Jerusalem.

The respective responsibilities of the priests and the Levites in the renewed Jerusalem are reviewed in 1Ch. 9:17-34. The porters were men who were assigned as door-keepers at the gates leading into the Temple. The kings gate eastward and the door of the tent of meeting were places of special assignment. These porters were stationed at entrances on all four sides of the Temple and they served in courses or shifts for a week at a time. The porters were carefully organized (1Ch. 9:26) and exercised responsibility with regard to the chambers or living quarters and storage rooms at the Temple. They were also responsible for the security of the Temple treasuries. While on duty, these officers lived in quarters round about the Temple.

The details of certain Levitical responsibilities are spelled out in 1Ch. 9:28-34. Since the vessels used in the Temple were made of precious metal, they were very valuable. Precautions against theft or mismanagement were always in order. The vessels were very important also because they had been sanctified for special service. The Temple furniture, in like manner, was very special and required particular attention. The flour, wine, oil, frankincense, spices all had to be procured and properly processed. The spices used in the holy incense had been carefully prescribed in Moses day (Exo. 30:34-35). This prescription was to be used only in the Tabernacle. The baking of the unleavened bread and the preparation of the shewbread were important details under Levitical supervision.

Those who were leaders in the ministry of singing were from among the Levites. They were specialists in this service and were excused from other aspects of the work. Provisions were made for their lodging at the Temple when they were on duty.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

1Ch 9:1 So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression.

1Ch 9:1 “and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah” – Comments – Scholars generally agree that the reference to “the book of the kings of Israel and Judah” in 1Ch 9:1 is not to the canonical book of 1 and 2 Kings, since these genealogies of Israel are not found there. [25] These ancient genealogies were recorded in “civil records” kept by the Jews since the beginning of their history.

[25] Roddy L. Braun, 1 Chronicles, in Word Biblical Commentary: 58 Volumes on CD-Rom, vol. 14, eds. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas: Word Inc., 2002), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004), 138.

1Ch 9:2  Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities were, the Israelites, the priests, Levites, and the Nethinims.

1Ch 9:2 “the Nethinims” – Comments – The Scriptures teach us that these were those who ministered to the Levites (Ez 8:20). Gesenius says that the Hebrew word “Nethinims” means “given, or bestower.”

Ezr 8:20, “Also of the Nethinims, whom David and the princes had appointed for the service of the Levites , two hundred and twenty Nethinims: all of them were expressed by name.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Registration Lists of Israel

v. 1. So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies, their names were entered in the genealogical records; and, behold, they were written in the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah, who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression. The books referred to are the official lists as kept in the royal archives. These public records contained also much historical material, and from this the sacred writers, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, drew much of the contents of their books. Thus the entire account is distinguished for truth and correctness.

v. 2. Now, the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities, after the return from the Babylonian exile, were the Israelites, the members of the nation in general, the priests, Levites, and the Nethinims, chiefly members of the conquered heathen nations who were made servants in the Tabernacle and the Temple, performing the meaner tasks connected with the worship, Jos 9:27; 1 Samuel l, 11.

v. 3. And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim, and Manasseh, such Israelites as had fled to Judah at the time of the Assyrian invasion and were considered members of the southern kingdom;

v. 4. Uthai, the son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the son of Bani, of the children of Pharez, the son of Judah.

v. 5. And of the Shilonites, probably the descendants of Shelah, Num 26:20 : Asaiah, the first-born, and his sons.

v. 6. And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel and their brethren, namely, including the three chiefs mentioned in verse 4, six hundred and ninety.

v. 7. And of the sons of Benjamin: Sallu, the son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hasenuah, Neh 11:7,

v. 8. and Ibneiah, the son of Jeroham, and Elah, the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri, and Meshullam, the son of Shephathiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah;

v. 9. and their brethren, according to their generations, nine hundred and fifty and six. All these men were chief of the fathers in the house of their fathers, leaders in those divisions of the tribes known as father-houses.

v. 10. And of the priests: Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, and Jachin, these being the names of the three priestly classes dwelling in Jerusalem, Neh 11:10 ff.

v. 11. And Azariah (or Seraiah), the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, the ruler of the house of God, the prince, or president, of the Temple;

v. 12. and Adaiah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Pashur, the son of Malchijah, and Maasiai, the son of Adiel, the son of Jahzerah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Meshillemith, the son of Immer, Cf Neh 11:12; 1Ch 24:14;

v. 13. and their brethren, heads of the house of their fathers, a thousand and seven hundred and threescore; very able men, literally, “mighty men of valor,” for the work of the service of the house of God, willing, energetic, effective in all the tasks falling to their lot in the priestly office.

v. 14. And of the Levites: Shemaiah, the son of Hasshub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, of the sons of Merari, one of the three great Levitical families;

v. 15. and Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal, and Mattaniah, the son of Micah, the son of Zichri, the son of Asaph;

v. 16. and Obadiah, the son of Shemaiah, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun (or Ethan ), and Berechiah, the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, that dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites, not far from Bethlehem, Neh 7:26.

v. 17. And the porters, the captains of the four companies that guarded the four sides and the gates of the Temple, Cf Neh 11:19, were Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren. Shallum was the chief,

v. 18. who hitherto waited in the King’s Gate eastward, leading to the royal palace, which was reserved for the use of the king; they were porters in the companies of the children of Levi. There being no king in Judah after the return of the people, the King’s Gate was always locked, and no porter was needed there.

v. 19. And Shallum, the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, of the house of his father, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the gates of the Tabernacle, as briefly stated above; and their fathers, being over the host of the Lord, were keepers of the entry; the descendants of Korah, as a branch of the Kohathites, had been in charge of the entrance of the Tabernacle in the wilderness at the time of Moses, as their descendants, in turn, were in charge of the Temple gates.

v. 20. And Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, was the ruler over them in time past, Num 31:6; and the Lord was with him.

v. 21. And Zechariah, the son of Meshelemiah, was porter of the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation, he held this office at the time of David.

v. 22. All these which were chosen to be porters in the gates were two hundred and twelve, under the four captains named in verse 17. These were reckoned by their genealogy in their villages, they were registered. in their homes near Jerusalem, whom David and Samuel, the seer, did ordain in their set office, charging them with their official duty and making the office hereditary.

v. 23. So they and their children had the oversight of the gates of the house of the Lord, namely, the house of the Tabernacle, by wards.

v. 24. In four quarters were the porters, toward the east, west, north, and south; there they were stationed.

v. 25. And their brethren, which were in their villages, were to come after seven days from time to time with them, that is, the personnel of the groups, of the sections in charge of the gates, was changed every week, and on the Sabbath apparently all were on duty.

v. 26. For these Levites, the four chief porters, were in their set office, entrusted with the discharge of these duties, and were over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God, they were in the side-buildings of the Temple, over which the Levites presided. It is well-pleasing to the Lord if all things pertaining to the external parts of the Worship are done decently and in order, under the direction of men especially appointed for that work.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

1Ch 9:1

So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies. The Hebrew verb () is sufficiently satisfied by the rendering were enrolled, or were registered. The book of the kings of Israel and Judah. The book referred to is often styled “The book of the kings of Israel” (2Ch 20:34; 2Ch 33:18); and it is more probable that that is the intended title here, and that the words should follow thus: And Judah were carried captive to Babylon because of their transgressions. This the Masoretic accenting dictates, though the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Luther have our Authorized Version order. The inconvenience to certain of not being able to find their registers is alluded to in Ezr 2:59.

1Ch 9:2

Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions, in their cities. Authorities are very divided as to whether this expression describes inhabitants of the land before the Captivity or subsequent to it. Almost all the older authorities, and Keil amongst those of more modern date, take the former position; Movers, Bertheau, and others take the latter, as also Canon Rawlinson. It must be admitted that there is some obscurity, and which accounts for the contrariety of opinion. But obscurity and contrariety notwithstanding, a comparison of 1Ch 9:2 and 1Ch 9:3 with Neh 11:1-4 : produces two impressions almost irresistible, viz. that the difficulty is occasioned by some comparatively slight corruption or mutilation in our Neh 11:2; and that, whatever the reference is in Neh 11:1-4 (and there is no ambiguity there), that it is in the present passage. The fourfold classification intends the Israel people (Isa 24:2; Hos 4:9), the priests, the Levites, the Nethinims, i.e. those given as helpers of the priests, bond-men of the temple (Num 8:18, Num 8:19; Num 31:47; Ezr 2:40-48; Ezr 8:17, Ezr 8:20). Not before the time of the return does the name Nethinim seem to have crystallized upon this class of helpers, the explanation of which may possibly be that their numbers and their services then became so much more necessary. To this classification is added in Neh 11:3, “And the children of Solomon’s servants” (Ezr 2:55).

1Ch 9:3

And of the children of Ephraim, and Manasseh. These words are not found in Neh 11:4.

1Ch 9:4

This verse contains a short list, with many links wanting, of descendants of Judah through Pharez, six in number, and in reverse order. .4. similar list as regards its extreme terms is that which we find in Neh 11:4, but only three (Uthai, Imri, Pharez) of the six names here can be considered identical with a like number (Athaiah, Amariah, Perez) out of the seven found there. Neh 11:6 adds, “The number of the sons of Perez that dwelt at Jerusalem four hundred three score and eight valiant men.”

1Ch 9:5

The Shilonites. These are the descendants of Shelah, youngest son of Judah. In place of the one name Asaiah here, Nehemiah (Neh 11:7) gives a list of seven, among which Maassiah is found, answering to our Asaiah.

1Ch 9:6

No corresponding list whatever is found in Nehemiah, but in Neh 11:24 mention is made of “Pethahiah the son of Meshezabeel, of the children of Zerah.” Zeta was twin brother of Pharez (Gen 38:30).

1Ch 9:7-9

The corresponding passage (Neh 11:7, Neh 11:8) varies much in the names given, and adds up the number of Benjamite chief men to nine hundred and twenty-eight, instead of nine hundred and fifty-six.

1Ch 9:10

This verse is correct in not calling (as does Neh 11:10) Jedaiah the son of Jehoiarib, or as it is there written Joiarib. The origin of the names of these three priest families is found in 1Ch 24:7, 1Ch 24:17.

1Ch 9:11-13

This list resembles much more closely that of Neh 11:11-14. The one thousand and seven hundred and three score of this passage is not reached by five hundred and sixty-eight, when the numbers of Neh 11:12-14 are all added together. The name Azariah (in Nehemiah appearing, probably simply by copyist’s error, as Seraiah), here described as ruler of the house of God, probably points to the high priest Eliashib, who held that office in the time of Nehemiah, and was descended from Seraiah (1Ch 6:14). The ins and outs of the lists of these verses confirm the supposition that the way in which differences in the other lists occur are easily to be accounted for, in one compiler having selected some of the names of the whole line of genealogy, and another others, though in each several case according to reasons often unknown by us. Thus, between Jeroham and Pashur the table of Nehemiah supplies three additional links in the names Pelaliah, Amzi, Zechariah; while in our very next verse, for the three between Maasiai (Amashai) and Meshillemith, Nehemiah has only two names, and neither of those two (Azareel, Ahasai) the same as found here.

1Ch 9:14-16

The corresponding account of these Levites (Neh 11:15-18) has some additional detailsas, for instance, that the number of “the Levites in the holy city were two hundred four score and four;” that two “of the chief of the Levites, Shabbethai and Jozabad,” not given here, “had the oversight of the outward business of the house of God;” that “Mattaniah was the principal to begin the thanksgiving in prayer;” and that Bakbukiah (hero called Bakbakkar) was “the second among his brethren.” Hashabiah is also stated to be “the son of Bunni.” The Netophathites. The town Netophah was either locally near Bethlehem, or in some way closely related to it (1Ch 2:54; Neh 7:26). It is not directly mentioned, though existing long before, till the accounts of those who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2:22). Interesting facts, respecting its people are found in 1Ch 27:13, 1Ch 27:15; Neh 12:28. Though our Authorized Version has the name here in the plural, it is not so in the Hebrew, nor is it there accompanied by the article.

1Ch 9:17

The porters here are those who had charge of the entrances to the sanctuary. The word employed () is used, however, generally of gate or door keepers. Their number, stated in 1Ch 9:22 as two hundred and twelve, is probably corrected in Neh 11:19 to one hundred and seventy-two, made up of twenty-four for every week (1Ch 26:17, 1Ch 26:18), “entering on the sabbath” upon their work (2Ki 11:5; 2Ch 23:4), in rotation for seven weeks, and the four “chief warders.” For the five porters here mentioned there are only two mentioned in Neh 11:19, and neither of those Shallum, the chief. But see also Ezr 2:42; Neh 7:45.

1Ch 9:18

Hitherto (so Joh 5:17). The reference must be to Shallum, for see 1Ch 9:24-26 and Eze 46:1-3. The meaning of the remaining sentence of this verse is, “These were the gate-keepers for the Levite encampments side,” or what, in later temple times, answered to it.

1Ch 9:19

Shallum. Marked as a different person from the former of the same name, by the description son of Kore, etc. The pedigree here given enables us to identify the person intended as Shelemiah or Moshelemiah.. Keepers of the gates of the tabernacle of the entry. These are descriptions of “service,” not synonymous with those of 1Ch 9:17 and 1Ch 9:18, where the words and are found, in place of those used here, viz. and . They designate the care of the inner entrances of the sacred building. Their fathers were keepers of the entrance to the tabernacle, as these to the inner doors (margin, “thresholds”) of the temple. So the following verse points the times of “the fathers.”

1Ch 9:21

Zechariah (see 1Ch 26:1, 1Ch 26:2, 1Ch 26:11, 1Ch 26:14).

1Ch 9:22

The seer. It is to be noticed that the compiler of Chronicles uses elsewhere, as here, the “aforetime” name of the prophet, according to 1Sa 9:9. Note in this verse the linking together of the names of David and Samuel, to the ignoring of that of Saul. In their set office. Keil would translate, “Upon their fidelity, i.e. because they had been found faithful.” But our margin translates happily, “in their trust,” which will include, in part, the thought of Keil, and will suit our 1Sa 9:26.

1Ch 9:23-26

(See above and 1Ch 26:12-19.) For the chief porters, Bertheau suggests, as an analogous expression, (Luk 22:52). The chambers. We have the account of Solomon’s building of these in 1Ki 6:5-10, 1Ki 6:16, 1Ki 6:19; it is scarcely likely that the “chamber of mattresses” of 2Ki 11:2 was one of these, though the language of the following verse looks that way (comp. also Eze 46:5-11). And treasuries. These were store-houses () for gold, silver, as pertaining to the temple, though of corn, etc; in other connections (1Ki 7:51; 2Ki 12:18; 2Ch 5:1; 1Ch 27:25).

1Ch 9:28

That they should bring them in by tale and by tale carry them out. That is, that they should scrupulously number them.

1Ch 9:29, 1Ch 9:30

The vessels and other things required for the daily sacrificial service are here spoken of; the verses receive abundant illustration from various Old Testament passages (Exo 25:6; Exo 30:23-38; Le Exo 2:1-7, etc.).

1Ch 9:31

Mattithiah. The ubiquitous Shallum, that designates the family, not the individual, is probably here quoted, Mattithiah being at the time in question the representative son. The things that were made in the pans. The word here employed () is not found elsewhere, but other derivatives of the same root are often found (Le 1Ch 2:5; 1Ch 6:21; 1Ch 7:9; 1Ch 23:29; Eze 4:3).

1Ch 9:32

The shewbread (); literally, a pile, and hence applied to the cakes, which were piled in two rows (Le 1Ch 24:5-8) “on the pure table before the Lord.”

1Ch 9:33

Translate, And these singers, chief of the fathers of the Levites, in the chambers were free. The word “free” is surely sufficiently explained by the following sentence, in connection with Ezr 7:24; Neh 11:23. It is more doubtful whether the expression, “these singers,” refers to names, which now should have been inserted but are lost, or possibly to Neh 11:16, ante; the idiom would prefer the former. They were employed in that work day and night; literally, for by day and by night on them, in the work. If we were to suppose the cheth before the “work” an error for he, the translation would be easy and free from all doubt, for by day and by night, the work devolved upon them. Anyway, the substance of the sense is obvious.

1Ch 9:34

This verse can scarcely be other than a closing general comment respecting all the chief fathers of the Levites, who have been spoken of (1Ch 8:28); and it purports to say that the same order and principle obtained in the offices referred to from generation to generation of families.

1Ch 9:35-44

(See last chapter, 1Ch 9:29-40.)

HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON

1Ch 9:11.-The ruler of the house of God.

Whether this Azariah was the high priest or the “second priest” does not seem certain. But the office here ascribed to him is evidently one of great importance, and is suggestive of memorable truths with regard to God’s spiritual temple and kingdom.

I. THE TRUE “HOUSE OF GOD” IS SPIRITUAL. The temple at Jerusalem was the emblem of the spiritual house which no man has builtthe Church of the Divine Redeemer and Lord. This is composed of faithful and holy natures, as of “lively stones.”

II. THIS “HOUSE OF GOD” IS ORDERED AND GOVERNED ACCORDING TO DIVINE WISDOM. This is suggested by the word “ruler.” “Order is Heaven’s first law,” and this law is certainly not violated in his most precious and beloved work. God’s own wisdom is displayed in his own temple.

III. GOD‘S OWN SON IS THE RULER IN HIS OWN HOUSE. No earthly sovereign or ecclesiastical pontiff is the head of the spiritual society in which God’s Spirit ever dwells. Christ is the King, the Lord, the Priest; “the Head over all things to his Church.”

IV. ALL HUMAN RULERS ARE SUBJECT AND SUBORDINATE TO THE DIVINE LORD. Bishops are overseers, and presbyters are pastors; but they are not lords over God’s heritage. They have only authority to declare his will, and to execute his commands; and this trust they fulfil, not for their own honour, but for the order and prosperity of God’s house.T.

1Ch 9:13.-Very able men.

In this Book of Chronicles praise is accorded, not only to great warriors, but also to scholars and ministers of religion. In this passage priests are described in language which would seem more appropriate to soldiers. They are termed “mighty men of valour,” or valiant heroes, paraphrased in our version as “very able men” for the service of the house of the Lord. The employment of persons so highly qualified to render such service is very suggestive.

I. GOD CAN MAKE USE OF THE FEEBLEST AND HUMBLEST INSTRUMENTS IN THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF HIS PURPOSES. This should be remarked, lest any persons should consider themselves disqualified from serving God because, in their own judgment, not justly worthy to be termed “very able” or effective labourers.

II. NO ABILITY IS TOO GOOD, OR EVEN GOOD ENOUGH, FOR GOD‘S SERVICE. If responsible posts, influential professions, call for the services of men highly endowed and thoroughly furnished, shall we say that anything is good enough for the work of God? Remembering the honour of serving him, the difficulties peculiar to his service, let us rather seek to offer to him the best. There is abundant scope for intellectual vigour, mental acquisitions, tender sympathy, unsparing labours, and all other precious gifts, in the service of our redeeming God.

III. Therefore, THE STRONG AND GIFTED SHOULD BE ESPECIALLY SUMMONED TO ENTER UPON THE WORK OF CHRIST; to come up “to the help of the Lord against the mighty.” There is room for others; there is room for all; why not for such? If the temple ministrations offered scope for “very able men,” what need is there for wise master-builders, capable pastors, stout-hearted labourers, valiant soldiers, in the work which is dear to the heart of God, and which has been commenced by the grace of the Divine Redeemer! To one and to all we would say, “The Lord has need of you.”T.

1Ch 9:26-32.–Ministers of the sanctuary.

The arrangements for the service of the Levites in the Lord’s house seem to have been made, or at all events settled, by Samuel and by David. The same arrangements, substantially, were adopted by Solomon, in connection with the first temple, and by Ezra and Nehemiah in the second temple erected by Zerubbabel. For the custody of the holy house, four chief warders were appointed, under whom were a hundred and sixty-eight porters, who, in turn, fulfilled their important and sacred office. These attendants had their homes in certain villages in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. A course of twenty-four of them seem to have attended the sanctuary every week, commencing with the sabbath, and the turn of each course would come round once in seven weeks.

I. OBSERVE THE VARIETY AND UNITY OF THE LEVITICAL SERVICE.

1. The variety. Some were entrusted with the duty of opening and closing the doors. Others had charge of the treasury, where coin, sacred vessels and vestments, etc; were kept in security. Others had the custody of the various vessels and instruments used in sacrificial services. Others made ready the sacrifices, manufactured the incense, or prepared the sacred cakes and shewbread.

2. The unity. One God appointed them all, by the same law and ordinance, to their several ministries. One sanctuary occupied their attention and called forth their activity. One nation and people were served by all the ministrations of the priests and Levites. One object was before them allto serve Jehovah, to obey his Law, to seek his favour.

II. REMARK THE STRIKING FIGURE WHICH WE HAVE IN THESE MINISTRATIONS OF THE CHURCH OF THE LIVING AND DIVINE CHRIST.

1. There are “diversities of gifts” and trusts and services. According to the ability and opportunity is the occupation.

2. Beneath all these diversities there is an admirable unity. It is “the one Spirit” who qualifies and appoints all. There is one body, one temple, one brotherhood. And there is one aimthe service and glory of the one God and Saviour.

PRACTICAL LESSONS.
1. Let each Christian fulfil his own vocation.

2. And, at the same time, regard with sympathy and affection his fellow-workers in the same service.

3. And ever look to the one endthe service of his redeeming God.T.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

1Ch 9:1.-The far country.

The text speaks of those who were “carried away to Babylon for their transgression.” In every age and land sin means exile. It is a fruitful source of division, of painful and hurtful separation. Sin, which is “the transgression of the Law,” makes us go out into “a far country.” It takes us

I. TO A STATE OF SEPARATION FROM GOD (Isa 59:2): from his conscious presence, his favour, his likeness, his dwelling-place.

II. FAR FROM A TRUE, AN IDEAL MANHOOD. We sink a long way below the level of a pure, holy, estimable humanity.

III. INTO THE DREARY REGION OF RESTLESSNESS, MISERY, DESPAIR.

IV. To “THE FAR COUNTRY” OF INDIFFERENCE, HEARTLESSNESS (“past feeling,” Eph 4:19), UTTER UNBELIEF.

V. To “THE OUTER DARKNESS” OF FINAL EXILE FROM THE CITY OF GOD.C.

1Ch 9:11-13.–Authority and ability in the service of God.

Azariah was “the ruler of the house of God” (verse 11); concerning a thousand seven hundred and sixty it is said that were “very able men for the work of the service of the house of God” (verse 13). Here we have high authority and eminent ability in the service of the Lord.

I. AUTHORITY IN SACRED SERVICE. Our Saviour did not establish a hierarchy in the Christian Church. The apostolate was obviously a temporary institution. We read of “elders that rule well” (1Ti 5:17), and the Hebrew Christians were charged to “obey them that had the rule over them” (Heb 13:17). There was, as there is now, a place in the Church for authority on the one hand and for loyalty on the other. There are, as there ever will be, those who direct, control, organize, appoint, remove. On the part of such there should be:

1. A sense of deep responsibility; for on their decision and direction great things depend.

2. A constant appeal for Divine guidance. In the affairs of his kingdom surely the Divine Sovereign should be continually con-suited by those who speak in his Name.

3. Great carefulness to act in harmony with his revealed will, so that they may not, while professing to work for God, be simply imposing their own fallible judgment on other minds.

4. The cultivation of humility, lest they should aspire to “have dominion over the faith” of men, instead of walking humbly with God, and serving in love like that Son of man who “came not to be ministered unto, but to minister.”

II. ABILITY IN SACRED SERVICE. (Verse 13.) The ability which these priests displayed in the service of the sanctuary was of a somewhat different order from that which is now required in the service of man in the Church of Christ. But it was inspired by the same Divine Being, and it aimed at the same endthe spiritual well-being of the nation. We remark concerning ability in sacred service:

1. That it is, in large part, the gift of God. “Very able men” are “what they are by the grace of God.” Their conspicuous ability is his endowment. From the Author of their being come the faculties (memory, imagination, judgment, reason, enthusiasm, strength, will, etc.) which distinguish them from their fellows. They owe their eminence to the supreme hand that raises and levels all things. Therefore

(1) let those who possess remarkable ability wear their honours meekly, remembering whence they came; and therefore

(2) let not those who lack it be envious of those who enjoy it, for then their “eye would be evil” because God is good.

2. That it is, in large part, the product of human effort. The greatest “abilities” will come to no ripeness and bear no fruit without human industry, patience, effort. Many who have it in them to do great things go to the grave having lived useless, wasted lives. Therefore

(1) let those who are gifted of God see to it that they train, mature, and use the capacities they have of him; and

(2) let those who receive the benefit of such ability honour the human while they bless the Divine Author of 2:3. That it is a gift for the use of which its possessors should feel a large measure of responsibility. Who shall measure the vastness of the influence for good or evil which one man of great ability may exert, if we take into account not only the direct but all the indirect results of his action?

4. That the approval and award of the Master depend, not on ability, but on faithfulness. They who have served God with special powers will have the gratification of seeing peculiarly large results; but whether our talents be few or many, if we be faithful at our post, we shall all share the “Well done” of the righteous Judge.C.

1Ch 9:14-34.–Aspects of Christian work.

In the service of the sanctuary there were many offices to be filled, various duties to be discharged. These will bring to our remembrance three aspects of our Christian service.

I. THAT LOWLY LABOUR IN THE SERVICE OF THE SAVIOUR IS HONOURABLE WORK. The work of the Nethinims (1Ch 9:2) was not to be despised; they did work which was comparatively menial, but it was work that needed to be done for God, and was accepted by him. Of the Levites, some “had the charge of the ministering vessels” (1Ch 9:28); others of “the fine flour, and the wine, and the oil, and the frankincense, and the spices” (1Ch 9:29, 1Ch 9:30); one of them was placed “over the things that were made in the pans” (1Ch 9:31). These offices were humble enough, but they were not counted dishonourable by those who rendered them, and they were esteemed worthy of record in the sacred chronicle. In the cause of Christ and of man there are many duties that are demanded of us, which, to the eye of impiety, may seem servile and mean. If, however, we are looking at things with the eye of faith and filial love, they will not wear this aspect. Loyalty counts nothing too mean to be rendered to its sovereign; love nothing too trivial to be offered to its friend. Our loyalty to the heavenly King, our love to our Divine Friend, should make us not only willing but eager to take any part and do any work in his sacred service.

II. THAT A POST OF TRUST IS ONE OF SPECIAL HONOUR. It is very noticeable that so much is said about the porters that kept the gates: “the work of the service” is markedly referred to as “keeping the gates of the tabernacle;” these “over the host of the Lord,” were “keepers of the entry” (1Ch 9:19; see 1Ch 9:21-24). We read also that “four chief porters were over the chambers and treasuries” (1Ch 9:26). Special provision was made for their entertainment (1Ch 9:27). These actions were simple, mechanicalit might be thought lowly, if not menial. But they were places of trust. It was important that none should be admitted to the holy places but those who had the right of entrance. These men had the purity of the sacred courts at their command; they were trusted to see that these were not profaned by unhallowed feet. When we are trusted by our fellows or by our Master to do anything, whether it be in itself serious or slight, we should feel that we are being honoured, and we should put forth all our vigilance, strength, vigour, to prove ourselves worthy of the confidence placed in us. Nothing should make so strong an appeal to our undivided energies as being trusted to see that something is done well in the service of our Saviour.

III. THAT CONSTANCY IS A VERY VALUABLE VIRTUE IN CHRISTIAN SERVICE. The singers “were employed in that work day and night” (1Ch 9:33). It was pleasing to the ear of Jehovah to hear ceaseless strains of holy song in the house of the Lord. It is pleasing to the heart of the ascended Saviour to witness spiritual constancy in those that bear his name and profess to be his disciples. He has ordained us that “our fruit should remain“ (Joh 15:16). He wishes that we should “continue in his love” (Joh 15:9). We are to continue in the doctrine of Christ (Act 14:22; 1Ti 4:16; Col 1:23), and in brotherly love (Heb 13:1). The secret of constancy in the various graces of Christian character is abiding in Christ himself (Joh 15:1-7). Abiding in himour spirit trusting, resting, rejoicing, hoping in himour life will not flicker or expire; it will shine, like the lamp in the holy place, like the song in the sanctuary, day and night,” steadily, serenely, abidingly, in the presence of God.C.

1Ch 9:20.-God with us.

“The Lord was with him.” These words frequently occur in the sacred Scriptures. Of many of the worthies of ancient time is God’s favouring presence statedof Abraham (Gen 26:24), of Jacob (Gen 28:15), of Joseph (Gen 39:2), of Samuel (1Sa 3:19), of David (1Sa 18:14), etc. There is evidently something more in the words than

I. THE OBVIOUS SENSE IN WINCH GOD IS CONSTANTLY PRESENT WITH EVERY ONE. The omnipresent One cannot be separated, in space, from any of his creatures. “He is not far from every one of us: for in him we live, and move, and have our being” (Act 17:27, Act 17:28).

“Awake, asleep, at home, abroad,
We are surrounded still with God.”

(See Psa 139:1-24.) We shall fail to find in the text its chief significance if we do not see

II. THE DEEPER SENSE IN WHICH GOD IS WILLING TO BE NEAR US ALL. He is ready to be with us:

1. With his favouring presence; as a loving friend is, in sweet fellowship with his friend.

2. With his sympathizing presence; as the patient mother is with her sick or suffering child, taking his hand to assure him of her closeness to him and tender care for him.

3. With his encouraging presence; as a teacher is with his pupil, animating him to do his best in the trial-hour.

4. With his guiding and guardian presence; as the father leads his child on in the darkness, at once showing the way and defending from the unknown perils in the path. If we yield ourselves to God in the time of our youth, and determine to walk with Christ along the path of life, then his gracious presence will attend us at every step, he will be with us to our journey’s end, and will finally take us to be with him in the eternal home.C.

HOMILIES BY F. WHITFIELD

1Ch 9:1-44.–Genealogy of the returned exiles.

This chapter records the genealogies of Israel when, as exiles, they had returned from Babylon. Almost all the names recur in Nehemiah (11). God’s people may be scattered and downtrodden and degraded in strange lands, but he has his eye on each, and their names are in the book of life. Not one shall be missing when the Lord shall gather his own again in that land where they shall return to go no more out. The servants of God had each their work apportioned. Some had the charge of pans; some had to number the vessels; some to carry them in and out. Some were porters at the door of the house of God; some porters at the king’s gate; some “keepers of the entry;” some to oversee the vessels; some makers of “the ointment of the spices;” and some had the more exalted office of rulers of the house of God. Thus the occupation of each was widely different, but each one had his place in the vineyard, some exalted, some humble. Oh to be able to say, in whatever position of life God may place us, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” Let each one fill his post, however humble it may be, and “do it heartily as unto the Lord.” The reward will be given, not according to the dignity of the post, but according to the faithfulness of the servant. “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” There is one service in this list which is worthy of note. It is that of the Levites who were singers. They were free because they were in the chambers of the house of God, and their work was to praise day and night (verse 33). Surely praise is for all times, and is associated with freedom in the highest sense of the word. The soul that has been “made free” can sing; and praise, unlike prayer, will never end. “I will bless the Lord at all times: his praise shall continually be in my mouth.” None can praise but those whom “the truth” has made “free,” and they can sing, like Paul and Silas, even in a dungeon. These are the true Levites. They are indeed in “the chambers”the secret places of God’s love. The service of praise is indeed “upon them” (margin). They must praise. They cannot do otherwise. They know Jesus. They see him. And they look forward to that time when they shall praise him “as they ought.” God hasten that glorious time, when heaven and earth shall be vocal with praise, and Jesus shall be the Object of it for ever!W.

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK

1Ch 9:2.–Returned captives.

The allusion made here to those who were the first to reoccupy their ancestral possessions in the Holy Land, may serve to introduce the subject of the returned captives, and may set us upon learning the permanent lessons of their restoration. Some account may be given of the moral and religious condition of the Jewish people while in Babylon; of the literary, national, and religious influences exerted upon them by the associations of their captivity; of their measure of fitness for restoration when the providential time came; and of the historical circumstances which led up to their release. For these topics valuable help may be gained from Stanley’s ‘Jewish Church,’ vol. 3. We only note one or two points which might be missed or under-estimated.

1. The work of the prophets of the Captivity, in distinctly connecting national sufferings with national sins, and so producing a national repentance and a heart-return to Jehovah.

2. The influence exerted by the association of Babylonian idolatry with Babylonian tyranny; a similar influence to that exerted by the Egyptian experiences on the first fathers of their race. . They were made to feel that idolatry could never assure national liberty; it is never anything but an engine of human tyrannyman’s way of mastering and managing the bodies and minds of his fellow-men. The Jews have been, ever since the Captivity, the most strictly monotheistic race on the face of the earth.

3. The sympathy with the Jewish people which Cyrus, as a monotheist, was likely to feel.

4. And the limited and almost disappointing character of the first party to return. It was but a company representative of a national return. The majority of the Jews, having become settled and prosperous in the land of their exile, preferred to remain behind; only 42,360, attended by 7337 servants, were found willing to return to their native land. That company started under the leadership of Zerubbabel, the head of the house of Judah, and grandson of King Jehoiachin. The chief effects of the Captivity upon the Jews have been thus summarized.

(1) The old tendency to idolatry had been eradicated;

(2) there had sprung up a deep reverence for the letter of the Law, and for their great lawgiver, Moses;

(3) the love of agriculture had declined, and had given place to a taste for commerce and trade;

(4) the vernacular language had undergone a change, the old Hebrew giving place to the Chaldee. Fixing our attention on the first returning company, we note

I. THEY HAD RETURNED TO LOYALTY. That is, to their full allegiance to Jehovah, their one, immediate, invisible, spiritual King. This heart-return and national return was the essential preparation for their restoration; as we know that repentance, confession, conversion, and heart-return to God must ever precede the assurance of Divine forgiveness and acceptance. The sanctified influences of the Captivity bore directly upon bowing the people down in penitence and winning them to full allegiance to their God. So it may be impressively urged that Divine blessings are always held back until we are ready to receive them, and the great readiness is full openness to God, hearty loyalty to him.

II. THEY NOW RETURNED TO PRIVILEGE. Explain their sentiment about their beloved land, as showing what a privilege they esteemed it to be only to go and dwell in it. They also had the privilege of comparative national liberty and independence. They might enjoy their family possessions. They might renew the Jehovah-worship. God would do great things for his loyal people whereof they might be glad.

III. THEY FOUND THAT RETURN TO PRIVILEGE MEANT RETURN TO DUTY. A connection that is universally preserved and constantly repeated. Privilege never stands alone. No man can ever get it as an isolated and distinct thing. Responsibility and duty are always linked with it; and whoever will have privilege must have these things with it. The “returned captives” found that they were called to rebuild their city, retill their lands, restore their ceremonial worship, reorganize their governmental and social systems, secure their defence from external foes, raise again their demolished walls, and erect a new temple upon the ruins of the old. And, beyond such material things, they were bound to “occupy for God,” they were to present such a model “state” as would effectively witness to all surrounding nations, and to all succeeding generations, of God’s high claims, God’s infinite justice, God’s triumphing mercy, and God’s sure faithfulness alike to his threatenings and to his promises. The forms in which, for us, duty follows privilege may be illustrated. Position brings influence, wealth brings power, learning brings claims, gifts bring spheres, piety brings the call to witness, etc.

Application may be made to God’s restorations from the sicknesses and calamities of life. When God brings us up again out of any “depths,” we should feel as did David, “Before I was afflicted I went astray: but now have I kept thy Word.” If we thought aright we should daily regard ourselves as urged to all holy endeavour by the pressure of the feeling that we are God’s “restored ones.”R.T.

1Ch 9:13.–Strong for God’s service.

Of certain men, otherwise unknown, this is the permanent historical record, “They were very able men for the work of the service of the house of God.” It is a description full of interest, and reminds us that

I. GOD GIVES TO MEN THE NEEDED GIFTS FOR HIS WORK. For all his work in the world; but here we are specially reminded of his work in the Church and in Divine service. In older times we find Moses with the genius for order and rule, and Bezaleel with the genius for decoration, and Joshua with the genius for war, and David with the genius for song; and so on through each age we may go, marking the men endowed with gifts for pious services. Each apostle has his gift. Reformers, leaders, teachers, rise for their specific work in each ageAugustine, Anselm, Bernard, Luther, Calvin, Pascal, Whitefield, etc. Ever and again God gives us “very able men for the work of the service of his house.” And the greater and more prominent instances only affirm and assure the general truth that for all his work, be it greater or smaller in man’s esteem, God ever finds the men and endows with the gifts, and each may become, by the faithful culture of his gift, a “very able man” for God’s service. If he may he ought.

II. THE GIFT IS OFTEN UNRECOGNIZED BY HIM WHO HAS IT. And so the Church loses much of the service she needs. Especially apply to the ministerial endowment. It is usually found associated with a modest and retiring disposition, and in self-diffidence many fail to believe in their own powers. And powers often lie dormant and unrecognized until circumstances of life secure their development. Men are often surprised by the discovery of hitherto unknown faculties. The men who push are seldom the men of real power. But the modesty of the highly endowed often prevents their gaining their due place and sphere. As an instance of unrecognized gifts, reference may be made to Dr. Guthrie, who, though so successful as a writer, only began to write for the press when he had reached middle life. We need a worthier apprehension of the truth that every renewed man is also an endowed man. In the light of it we may urge on each individual the duty of discovering his gift, and so cultivating and using it that he may prove a “very able man” for the work of the Lord. Exactly what Christ’s Church needs is “very able men,” by endowment and culture, in all her departments of service; and we should have the faith that the endowments are given us, and we must secure the recognition and culture of them.

III. THE CHURCH SHOULD DISCERN THE MEN WITH THE GIFTS. Compare the intense expression of Moses, “Would God that all the Lord’s people were prophets!” Sometimes jealousies of order and office blind our eyes so that we cannot see the gifts of others. Sometimes desire for the exclusive honour of place and work makes us wilfully put other men down. Sometimes the presentation of the gift informs which appear to us strange, leads to our making a false and unworthy estimate of the gift. The Church has often grievously erred in casting out from her midst “very able men for God’s service.” They who watch for Divine endowments must be willing to recognize them in the great variety of forms in which they come to men. And all we really need to be assured of is the Divine stamp upon them. To refuse the men whom God has gifted is to be “found fighting against God.”

Press the responsibility of all who are in Church offices which bring them into immediate contact with the people or the children. They should be ever looking for the “signs of power,” and leading out those who may become “very able men for God’s work.” And then press the responsibility that rests on the men who are found and proved strong, able for God’s work. Having “put their hand to the plough, they must not draw back.” Life for them is full of noblest possibilities. They must be “faithful unto death,” and win “the crown of life.”R.T.

1Ch 9:19, etc.-God’s door-keepers.

Some were appointed to serve as “keepers of the gates,” and some as “keepers of the entry,” and one man was “porter of the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.” David recognized an attractiveness in such offices because they secured constant presence in the holy courts. He says, “I had rather be a door-keeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.”

I. LOWLY SERVICES ARE ASKED AT OUR HANDS. Common life in the family, the business, and society has its many lowly services and its few great ones. And in religious life the same is true. Of most of us God asks that we will do little things for him well. What a gracious lesson in doing cheerfully lowly work our Lord gave us when he laid aside his garments, took a towel, girded himself, and began to wash the disciples’ feet! “He that would he greatest among you let him be your servant.”

II. LOWLY SERVICES ARE NECESSARY TO THE GENERAL WELL–BEING. Illustrate from church offices. The organ-blower’s is a very humble office, but most necessary and useful. The verger, door-keeper, cleaner, etc; are but in humble places and duties, and yet the comfort of “priest and people” depend on their lowly work. So in all good enterprises there is a great deal of mechanical and insignificant work demanded, but the efficient doing of them bears directly on the entire success. Standing quite alone, the humble duty seems scarce worth the doing, but when it is seen fitting into its place in the great whole, its real importance and dignity are recognized. Illustrations may be found in the importance of the lesser parts of a great machine or work of mechanical construction. A fine tower once fell in ruins to the surprise of all, until the builder confessed that he had neglected the little iron tiesinsignificant thingsthat held the stones together. No man ever gains a worthy apprehension of life until he fully and finally settles with himself that he will think nothing small, and treat nothing as small, since “all things have their necessary uses,” and God asks for “faith- fulness in that which is least.”

III. LOWLY SERVICES FIND SPHERES FOR THE EXPRESSION OF CHARACTER. And the best; for men are less sophisticated, more simple and more genuine in them. If we would know what a man really is, we must not watch him merely on “show days,” but rather see him in the private scenes of home and business. We put on character-garments for public scenes, just as we do outer coats for the streets. When “taken at unawares” we express what our character really is.

IV. LOWLY SERVICES OFTEN BECOME THE MOST EFFICIENT TESTS OF CHARACTER. The necessity for personal attentions to the poor wounded man on the road to Jericho, tested and proved the selfishness of priest and Levite, as a call for some high and honourable service would not have done. And similar calls are made on us. We want to do the great things, and show off the blossoms of fine character which we have carefully stuck on. And God, in his providences, only provides humble spheres, unobserved places, and lowly work, which will let the fine pretences alone to wither and fall off, and only test and culture the real and the worthy and the true. Who of us can review our lives, and fail to see the places where, again and again, we were “weighed in the balances and found wanting” when we were asked to take some humble place of service or do some little thing for Jesus’ sake? Still we are so unwilling to take the lowest rooms, even though Christ taught us that he looks among the people there to find the right-hearted, the worthy, whom he may hid “Go up higher.” In respect of the power to hold and exhibit character, the little things often have more capacity than the big.

V. LOWLY SERVICES FIT IN WITH GREATER ONES TO PERFECT THE WHOLE OF SERVICE, Door-keepers fit in with porters, and sacrificers, and singers, and priests, to make the whole of temple service. And the least piece lost from the whole mars the beauty of the perfect service. What God asks is faithfulness, and he can find it in the “least things.” Remember George Herbert’s familiar verse, “Who sweeps a room,” etc.R.T.

1Ch 9:22.-Samuel’s life-work.

The assertion made in this verse, that Samuel was concerned in the organization of the tabernacle service, comes upon us with surprise. We are to suppose that he provided for the reformation of the ritual and ministrations in the tabernacle after the confusions in the days of the judges; though this statement is not found in any other place in the Old Testament. “Samuel the seer was zealous for the external ordinances of God’s house, and the precursor of David in this respect.” We have side hints given us in the Scriptures of work done by great and good men which is not detailed so as to become a part of history. We need not assume that the whole of any man’s story is preserved; only such parts as are likely to prove permanently interesting and instructive. An instance may be found in the case of David. His public life of incident pushes back out of sight his valuable labours in connection with the sanctuary order and worship. So the worthy estimating of any human life is a difficult, nearly an impossible thing, seeing that we have not the whole before us, nor can we fairly judge the relative value of the parts. Full estimates of human lives must be left to God and the future. It is full of instructive significance that, as the generations pass, wholly different estimates are taken of historic characters, as other and fuller information concerning them comes to light. This may be illustrated in the cases of Lord Bacon, whose moral character recent writers are able to clear, and Protector Cromwell, whose portraiture Carlyle has at last succeeded in worthily drawing. Apply these thoughts to Samuel, and estimate

I. HIS KNOWS WORK AS A JUDGE. He belongs to the class so called, and was a deliverer and a magistrate, combining the offices which were characteristic of this order of men. In his deliverings grandly loyal to Jehovah. In his magistracy pure–handed and abidingly faithful to men. Everywhere and in everything making character, piety, and integrity tell for good.

II. HIS UNKNOWN WORK AS A RELIGIOUS REFORMER. Explain the influences upon a national religion of such changes and troubles as marked the time of the judges. Such conditions do not imperil personal piety, they rather intensify it, as may be seen in the story of the persecuted Christians in Madagascar; but they do imperil the order and ceremonial of religion, and especially in such a case as that of Israel, in which the religion was centralized on one spot, and to it all the worshippers had to come at fixed intervals. Samuel would not only have to restore the tabernacle system and services, but also to revive the religious spirit of the people; and to this, doubtless, his earnest attention was directed in his regular circuits for the administration of justice.

III. His ASSUMED WORK AS THE FOUNDER OF THE SCHOOLS OF THE PROPHETS. For on this part of his work we have no certain information. “In his time we first hear of what in modern phraseology are called the ‘schools of the prophets.’ Their immediate mission consisted in uttering religious hymns or songs, accompanied by musical instrumentspsaltery, tabret, pipe and harp, and cymbals. In them the characteristic element was that the silent seer of visions found an articulate voice, gushing forth in a rhythmical flow, which at once riveted the attention of the hearer. These or such as these were the gifts which under Samuel were now organized, if one may so say, into a system. From them went forth an influence which awed and inspired even the wild and reckless soldiers of that lawless age. Amongst them we find the first authors distinctly named, in Hebrew literature, of actual books which descended to later generations. Thither, in that age of change and dissolution, Samuel gathered round him all that was generous and devout in the people of God.”

Learn to estimate aright men’s secondary influence and work, for in this God may judge otherwise than we are wont to do, and put our last first.R.T.

1Ch 9:23-34.-The importance of order in God’s worship.

The point of interest in these verses is the extreme care given to securing quietness, regularity, order, and due solemnity in God’s worship. A point emphasized by the apostle in his counsel to the early Christian Church, “Let all things be done decently and in order.” The order of God’s house has this for its special mission, that it declares, realizes, and illustrates the Divine order in creation, providence, and redemption. “Order is Heaven’s first law;” and it is the necessary attendant on truth, purity, almightiness, and the eternally right. So if man, in any of his spheres, can present a worthy picture or shadow of the Divine, one of its essential features must be orderliness, and such orderliness will prove to be witness and power.

I. ORDER REGARDED AS A SIGN OF OBEDIENCE. Since it is God’s will that everything should have its fitting place and be in that place, our setting things right becomes a sign of our true-hearted obedience to him; and the securing of order gains moral quality, and becomes an agency in the culture of character.

II. ORDER REGARDED AS A SIGN OF SYMPATHY OF FEELING WITH GOD. Not merely have we to concern ourselves with it as our duty, but, from a higher standpoint of kinness with God and fellowship with his mind, we want what he wants, we love what he loves, and we try to get our works in full harmony with his. We would have heaven and earth ring together the same sweet note.

III. ORDER REGARDED AS OUR WITNESS AGAINST THE DISORDER OF SIN. If we have rightly caught the redemptive spirit, then we shall be oppressed and troubled by the disorders caused by sin, whatever forms they may take, and we shall ever be striving to reach them that we may set them straight. Therefore Christians enter as remedial and recovering forces into all family life, social life, business life, and national life; everywhere seeking to get things out of the disorders of evil, and set in the eternal order of righteousness. And in Christ’s Church and Christ’s worship the devoutness, regularity, and beauty of a gracious order should make a striking contrast with the restless, anxious, disordered world around. Men should find heart-rest in God’s sanctuary.

IV. ORDER REGARDED AS A MORAL FORCE IN THE WORLD. For what does it plead and work? For

(1) stillness;

(2) forethought;

(3) grace of form;

(4) due relations of office.

But under ordinary human conditions even “order” has its perils. It may come to be sought for its own sake and not merely for its uses. It may come to supersede “life” and even to crush “life” out, as has been proved in the over-elaboration of Church ceremonial. Two things are essential to true and worthy human worship. They are fully compatible one with the other. The culture of each may run along with the culture of the other. Nothing can supersede “life;” but order may be fully developed so that it may worthily express “life.”R.T.

1Ch 9:28-32.–Every man to his own office.

The distribution of gifts is constantly recognized, and on this we have much apostolic teaching. But the answering distribution of offices requires to be more fully apprehended. The power and the place are divinely fitted together; and in the economy of the Divine administration we may be sure there are no more powers given than there are places in which the powers may find exercise. It follows upon this that each man is bound to realize his power, discover his place, fit into it faithfully, and interfere with no other man‘s work. The way in which one man’s gifts and work may fit into another man’s is often an insoluble puzzle to us, but is quite plain in the plan of Divine forethought, and will be discovered when we can read final issues. Each man stands right before God when he clearly sees his work and says, “This one thing I do.” The following points have been, in part, presented in previous outlines; they should be dealt with now in the light of the above topic, “Every man to his own office:”

I. GOD HAS BOTH GIFTS AND SPHERES FOR THEIR EXERCISE. That be has gifts we know, but we too readily assume that the spheres are human arrangements.

II. GOD‘S PROVIDENCES TEND TOWARDS SECURING THE PROPER RELATION OF GIFTS AND SPHERES. A north-country proverb tersely expresses this, “The tools will come to the hands that can use them.” Every man, sooner or later, gains his providential opportunity, when he may do what he can do.

III. MAN‘S WILFULNESS SERIOUSLY MINGLES THE GIFTS AND THE SPHERES. By some men’s failing to recognize their gifts; by others prostrating their Divine gifts to base and selfish uses; by some, when they know their gifts, refusing to occupy their spheres; and by the forcing of too many into certain particular spheres for which an undue preference is shown. What we need in Christ’s Church and work is a wise subdivision of labour and more earnest endeavour to do faithfully and well our little piece. And in just this our Lord and Master set us his own holy example.R.T.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

1Ch 9:1. So all Israel, &c. But all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and behold they were written in the book of the kings of Israel. But Judah were carried away to Babylon for their transgression. Houbigant. The first clause in this verse is written to give a reason why the genealogies of Israel, that is, of the ten tribes, are omitted; because they were already written in the book of the kings of Israel. Houbigant renders the beginning of the next verse thus: now they who first returned, every one into the possession of his own city, were, &c.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

f. The Inhabitants of Jerusalem till the Times of the Kings, with a Repetition of the Genealogy of Saul.Ch. 9

1. The Inhabitants of Jerusalem: 1Ch 9:1-34

1Ch 9:1.And all Israel was registered; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel; and Judah1 was carried away to Babel for his transgression. 2And the former inhabitants, that were in their possession in their cities, were Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinim. 3And in Jerusalem dwelt, of the sons of Judah, and of the sons of Benjamin, and of the sons of Ephraim and Manasseh.

4Uthai the son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the son of Bani,2 of the sons of Perez the son of Judah. 5And of the Shilonites:3 Asaiah the first-born, and his sons. 6And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel and their brethren, six hundred and ninety.

7And of the sons of Benjamin: Sallu the son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah. 8And Ibneiah the son of Jeroham, and Elah the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri, and Meshullam the son of Shephatiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah. 9And their brethren in their generations, nine hundred and fifty and six; all these men were chiefs of their father-houses.

10,11And of the priests: Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, and Jachin. And Azariah the son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, a prince of the house of God. 12And Adaiah the son of Jeroham, the son of Pashhur, the son of Malchijah, the son of Maasai, the son of Adiel, the son of Jahzerah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Meshillemith, the son of Immer. 13And their brethren, heads of the father-houses, a thousand and seven hundred and sixty, able men for the work4 of the service in the house of God.

14And of the Levites : Shemaiah the son of Hashub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, of the sons of Merari. 15And Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal, and Mattaniah the son of Micah, the son of Zicri, the son of Asaph. 16And Obadiah the son of Shemaiah, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun, and Berechiah the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, who dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites.17And the porters: Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, 18and Ahiman, and their brethren; Shallum the head. And hitherto he was in the kings gate eastward; these are the porters for the camps of the sons of Levi.19And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brethren, for the house of his father, the Korhites, were over the work of the service of the keepers of the thresholds of the tents; and their fathers in the camp of the Lord were keepers of the entry. 20And Phinehas the son 21of Eleazar was formerly prince over them ; the Lord with him. Zechariah5 22the son of Meshelemiah was porter at the door of the tent of meeting. All these that were chosen to be porters at the thresholds were two hundred and twelve; they were registered in their villages: David and Samuel the 23seer had ordained them in their trust. And they and their sons were over 24the gates of the house of the Lord, at the house of the tent, by wards. To the four winds were the porters, to the east, west, north, and south. 25And their brethren in their villages were to come in seven days from time to time26with them. For they were in trust, the four head keepers of the gates, these Levites, and were 6over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God.27And they lodged around the house of God; for on them was the charge, and 28they had to open every morning. And some of them were over the vessels of service, for they brought them in and out by tale. And 29some of them were appointed over the vessels, even over all the holy vessels, and over the 30flour, and the wine, and the oil, and the frankincense, and the spices. And of the sons of the priests some were compounders of the ointment of the spices.31And Mattithiah of the Levites, who was the first-born of Shallum the Korhite,32was in trust over the baking in pans. And of the Kohathites their brethren,33some were over the shew-bread, to prepare it every Sabbath. And these the singers, heads of the fathers for the Levites, were free7 in the chambers; for they were over them in the service day and night.

34These are the heads of the fathers for the Levites, heads in their generations; these dwelt in Jerusalem.

2. Register of Sauls Family repeated: 1Ch 9:35-44

35And in Gibeon dwelt the father of Gibeon, Jeiel ;8 and his wifes name was36Maachah. And his first-born son Abdon, and Zur, and Kish, and Baal, and 37Ner, and Nadab. And Gedor, and Ahio, and Zechariah, and Mikloth. 38And Mikloth begat Shimam; and they also, beside their brethren, dwelt in Jerusalem with their brethren.

39And Ner begat Kish, and Kish begat Saul, and Saul begat Jonathan, and Malchi-shua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal. 40And the son of Jonathan was Merib-baal: and Merib-baal begat Micah. 41And the sons of Micah: Pithon, and Melech, and Tahrea. 42And Ahaz begat Jarah; and Jarah begat Alemeth, and Azmaveth, and Zimri; and Zimri begat Moza. 43And Moza begat Bina,and Rephaiah his son, Elasah his son, Azel his son. 44And Azel had six sons; and these are their names: Azrikam, Bocheru, and Ishmael, and Sheariah, and Obadiah, and Hanan; these were the sons of Azel.

EXEGETICAL

Preliminary Remark.Of the two unequal sections into which our chapter falls, the second, 1Ch 9:35-44, coincides almost literally with 1Ch 8:29-38, and so presents only a repetition of the register of Saul and his house there given, preliminary to the narrative of the fall of his dynasty following in 1 Chronicles 10. The first section, 1Ch 9:1-34, presents in its first half, containing a list of the heads of families dwelling in Jerusalem, 1Ch 9:4-17, several points of contrast with a similar list in Neh 11:3-19. The plan of both lists is at all events the same; and if, with Bertheau, of the three chiefs of Judah, 1Ch 9:4-6, we put Uthai beside Athaiah (Neh 11:4), and Asaiah beside Maaseiah (1Ch 9:5) (so that only the third name, Jeuel, has nothing corresponding to it in Nehemiah); if we consider the recurrence of the Benjamite chiefs Sallu and Hodaviah in Neh 11:7-9 (where, certainly, the remaining names are wanting); if we compare the six chiefs of the priestly divisions with those corresponding in number and mostly in name in the list of Nehemiah, and find here (1Ch 9:10-13) the series: Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, Jachin, Azariah, Adaiah, Masai, there the series : Jedaiah, Joiarib, Jachin, Seraiah, Adaiah, Amashai; if we observe among the chief of the Levites two, Shemaiah and Mattaniah, verbally identical, and a third, Obadiah (= Abda in Nehemiah), approximately so; if, lastly, we perceive at least two of the four chiefs of the porters, Shallum and Akkub, common to both lists,a pretty general agreement even in names appears to prevail between the two registers. It seems natural, also, either with Zunz (Gottesdiensll. Vortrge der Juden, p. 31; also Herzfeld, Gesch. p. 298) to conceive our list modelled after that of Nehemiah, or both drawn from one source, and in like manner referring to the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the exile, as Movers (p. 234), Berth., Kamph., etc., do. But if both lists are based upon one common document, relating to the times of Ezra and Nehemiah, and arising from them, we should expect a more complete agreement with regard to all the names. The accordance of the names in only half of the whole number given, and the resemblance in place (giving first the sons of Judah, then the sons of Benjamin, then the priests, and then the Levites and porters), are sufficiently explained by supposing a general continuity of the inhabitants of Jerusalem before and after the exile, and laying the diversities of the two lists to the account of the altering, disturbing, and partly destroying effects of the exile, and the similarities to that of the endeavour of those returning with Zerubbabel and Ezra to restore as far as possible the former state of things. The following exegetical treatment of the passage will prove that, with this presupposition, the assumption of the origin of our present list before the exile, in contrast with the obvious reference of Nehemiahs list to the times after the exile, has nothing of moment against it, and is even demanded by 1Ch 9:2 and other indications.

1. 1Ch 9:1-3. Transition from the Genealogical Registers of the Twelve Tribes to the Enumeration of the Inhabitants of Jerusalem.And all Israel was registered; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel; and Judah was carried away. By the Masoretic accentuation, which plainly separates from the foregoing words, and makes it the subject of a new sentence (comp. Crit. Note), the first sentence appears to treat of Israel in the narrow sense that is, of the northern kingdom, and its kings in particular (so Berth., Kamph., etc.). But the phrase all Israel makes it more natural here to think of the people of the south as well as of the north; and it is also in favour of this, that the expression: the book of the kings of Israel, is in 2Ch 20:34 manifestly of like import with the book of the kings of Judah and Israel, or Israel and Judah, as well as that the universal sense of the term Israel is found at the beginning of the second verse. Keil therefore justly remarks: The antithesis of Israel and Judah is analogous to that of Judah and Jerusalem; that is, Israel denotes the whole covenant people, Judah a part. To understand the name Israel of the whole people is also demanded by the position of our verse at the end of the genealogies of all the tribes of Israel, and not merely of the ten northern tribes. That 1Ch 9:1 effects the transition from the genealogies to the following enumeration of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and so forms properly the close of the genealogies in 1 Chronicles 2-8, is so obvious, that Bertheau has not been able to bring forward a single tenable ground for his counter assertion, that the verse forms obviously a new beginning. For the affirmation, that we perceive in it a brief introduction to the historical accounts of the tribe of Judah, or of the Israelites after the exile, can furnish no ground for this, because it not only contradicts the assertion that Israel is to be understood of the northern kingdom, but cannot be reconciled with the letter of the verse (that begins with the connective ). The same exegete justly declares against the further assertion of Berth., that 1Ch 9:1 cannot be written by our historian himself, but must have been taken literally from his source,an assertion which is devoid of all solid ground.For their transgression: so 1Ch 5:25-26.

1Ch 9:2. And the former inhabitants, that were in their possession in their cities. Movers, Berth., and Kamph., who find in the following list the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the exile, in the time of Nehemiah, will understand by these former inhabitants those citizens of Jerusalem who dwelt there in the time of Zerubbabel and his immediate successors, before Jerusalem was newly peopled from the surrounding districts. It is much more natural, with almost all old expositors, and with Keil, to refer here to the inhabitants of Jerusalem before the exile; for, in that case, the inhabitants in their possession in their cities are in no way opposed as former inhabitants of Jerusalem to the later, but both appear so placed side by side that this opposition is excluded. The parallel Neh 5:15, quoted by Bertheau, where the governors from Zerubbabel to Ezra are opposed as to Nehemiah as the later , proves indeed the possibility of understanding the predicate in the sense of before the exile, but not the necessity. And from the dwelling in their cities (comp. Ezr 2:70; Neh 7:23; Neh 11:1 f.) nothing can be concluded in favour of this interpretation.Were Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinim. Israel denotes here obviously the lay element of the citizens, that which is otherwise designated by beside (Isa 24:2; Hos 4:9). For the notion and name of the Nethinim, properly the bestowed, that is, the temple ministers, comp. Num 8:19; Jos 9:27; 1Sa 1:11; Ezr 2:43; Ezr 8:17; Ezr 8:20, and elsewhere.

1Ch 9:3. And in Jerusalem dwelt of the sons of Judah, etc. These words are not a superscription of the list of those dwelling in Jerusalem in contrast with those living in other cities (as Berth., etc.). The list rather begins with these words, so that thus the verse serves to introduce the contents of the greater part of our chapter (to 1Ch 9:34), and corresponds to 1Ch 9:35. This close connection of our verse with the following special enumeration of the families of Jerusalem (1Ch 9:4 ff.), and the mention of the sons of Ephraim and Manasseh as fellow-citizens with them in Jerusalem (comp. 2Ch 34:9), are against referring the present list to the time after the exile. The book of Nehemiah (1Ch 11:3) announces its list corresponding to ours in quite another way, so that there no doubt at all remains of its exclusive reference to conditions and relations after the exile. Moreover, the circumstance that the following list contains no names of Ephraimites and Manassites in Jerusalem, is simply explained by this, that of the former only a very few families dwelt in Jerusalem, while the Jews and Benjamites formed the bulk of its population. On the evangelical and theocratic import of the association of Ephraim and Manasseh with Judah, Benjamin, and Levi in the citizenship of Jerusalem, comp. below, evangelical and ethical principles, No. 1.

2. 1Ch 9:4-17. Special Enumeration of the Inhabitants of Jerusalem, and first, of the Heads of Families of Judah and Benjamin, of the Priests and Levites: 1Ch 9:4-6.Three heads of families out of the three chief branches of Judah, those of Perez, Shelah, and Zerah (comp. 1Ch 2:3-4).Uthai, the son of Ammihud. . . of the sons of Perez. The name Uthai might be etymologically equivalent to that of the Athaiah () mentioned Neh 11:4 as a head of a family of the sons of Perez; for = whom Jehovah helps, might, if we regard the somewhat obscure root as a by-form of , have the same meaning as . But to the still diverse form is to be added the quite diiferent series of ancestors that connect Athaiah with Perez (Uzziah, Zechariah, Amariah, Shephatiah, Mahalalel, instead of the present Ammihud, Omri, Imri, Bani). It seems therefore very doubtful whether Uthai be the same with Athaiah. For the defective reading concealing the name Bani, see the Crit. Note.

1Ch 9:5. And of the Shilonites, Asaiah the first-born, etc. It seems pretty certain, that should be read here instead of , as in Neh 11:5. We expect to find the descendants of Shelah (Num 26:20; comp. 1Ch 2:3; 1Ch 4:21) mentioned between the sons of Perez and those of Zerah. Moreover, it is doubtful whether the Shelanite Asaiah (, whom Jehovah has made) is to be at once taken as identical with the Maaseiah (, Jehovahs Work), as both names are of frequent occurrence (comp. for Asaiah, 1Ch 4:36, 1Ch 6:15, 1Ch 15:6; 1Ch 15:11, 2Ki 22:12; 2Ki 22:14, and for Maaseiah, 1Ch 15:18; 1Ch 15:20, 2Ch 23:1, Jer 21:1; Jer 29:21). The existence of an Asaiah as head of a house in the family of Shelah before the exile does not preclude the appearance of a Maaseiah, son of Baruch, son of Col-hozeh, son of Hasaiah, etc., as head of this family after the exile.

1Ch 9:6. And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel and their brethren, six hundred and ninety. This number refers, as the plur. suff. in shows, not to Jeuel alone, but to the three chiefs named in 1Ch 9:4-6, and to their brethren, the remaining heads of houses of subordinate import. So it is also with the number 956 in 1Ch 9:9. Moreover, the name Jeuel (), or its variant (), occurs elsewhere; for example, 1Ch 5:7, 2Ch 26:11. In Nehemiah 11. no descendants of Zerah are given.

1Ch 9:7-9. Four Benjamite chiefs: Sallu, Ibneiah, Elah, Meshullam, of whom the first (and, as here, the son of Meshullam) occurs also Nehemiah 11, but the other three not ; see the Preliminary Remark.

1Ch 9:9. And their brethren, etc.; comp. on 1Ch 9:6.All these men were chiefs of their father-houses. This remark, which naturally refers, not to the brethren numbered, but to the chiefs named, applies to all that are named from 1Ch 9:4, both Jews, and Benjamites. It serves thus to close the list of family chiefs, and lead to the following one of the priests and Levites.

1Ch 9:10-13. The priests of Jerusalem.Jedaiah, and Jehoiarib, and Jachin. The names of these three priestly classes dwelling in Jerusalem (comp. 1Ch 24:7; 1Ch 24:17) are found also in the parallel list in Neh 11:10 ff. (supposing that there, by a change of into , the true reading is restored).

1Ch 9:11. And Azariah the son of Hilkiah … a prince of the house of God. Instead of this prince or president of the temple, Azariah ben Hilkiah, certainly the same who, 1Chr 5:40, was named as grandfather of the Jehozadak who was carried to Babel (comp. also 2Ch 31:13), Neh 11:11 names rather a Seraiah son of Hilkiah. Yet the identity of this Seraiah with the Azariah of our passage is probable, as the other ancestors of both up to Ahitub (Meshullam, Zadok, Meraioth, Ahitub) are quite the same. Seraiah might indeed be a descendant of Azariah ben Hilkiah after the exile.

1Ch 9:12. And Adaiah the son of Jeroham, etc. This priestly chief Adaiah (belonging to the class of Malchijah; comp. 1Ch 24:9) is given in Neh 11:12 in the same form and with the same line, up to Malchijah, as here. The following Maasai (), belonging to the class of Immer (1Ch 24:14), is called in Nehemiah Amashai (), and appears there connected by another line with Immer. Another priestly chief given by Nehemiah, Zabdiel, son of Hagge-dolim, who is designated the president or overseer of the last-named priestly family (that of Amashai), is wanting here.

1Ch 9:13. And their brethren, heads of the father-houses, 1760. This number cannot possibly refer to the heads; it rather denotes (like the number 1192 in Nehemiah) that of the brethren or the heads of houses standing under the heads of the great complex of families. The phrase appears thus inexact; perhaps, with Keil, a transposition of the words is to be assumed, in such a way that heads of father-houses is placed before and drawn to 1Ch 9:12 as closing formula, while and their brethren () is immediately connected with the number 1760. Moreover, that all the priests dwelling in Jerusalem, or the priestly families of the six classes named, amount in our passage to 1760, and in Nehemiah only to 1192, tends to confirm our view of the present list as belonging to the period before the exile; we expect for the priesthood of Jerusalem after the exile, about 150 years after the restoration of the city and temple, not so great a number as here.Able men for the work of the service in the house of God. Before , which may not be a mere accusative of reference (able men with respect to the work), the word (comp. 1Ch 23:24; Neh 11:12), or perhaps a mere (which might easily be overlooked after ), appears to have fallen out; see Crit. Note.

1Ch 9:14-16. The Levites of Jerusalem.Shemaiah the son of Hashub, etc. This Merarite Shemaiah, as the descendant of Asaph (therefore Gershonite) Mattaniah named in 1Ch 9:15, recurs in Neh 11:15, and with substantially the same line of ancestors. Bakbakkar, Heresh, and Galal (1Ch 9:15 a) are wanting there; for the first name would have to be identified with Bakbukiah, Neh 11:17, of which there are grave doubts, as ( = ) seems to mean destruction of the hill; but , desolation from Jehovah. And of the names of Levites in 1Ch 9:16, only Obadiah can be identified with Abda, Neh 11:17 (as Jeduthun appears as the ancestor of both). Berechiah is wanting in Nehemiah; and the latter has two names, Shabbethai and Jozabad, which are foreign to our text.And Berechiah, the son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, and so a Kohathite, as the name Elkanah is native in this family; comp. 1Ch 6:18-23.Who dwelt in the villages of the Netophathites, thus near Bethlehem; comp. Neh 7:26. This clause refers, not to Berechiah, whose dwelling is in Jerusalem, but to his ancestor Elkanah. It is impossible to determine what the Kohathite so called in 6. 18 ff. was to this Elkanah.

1Ch 9:17. And the porters: Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brethren; Shallum the head. The four here named (of whom, in Neh 11:19, only two, Akkub and Talmon, recur) are to be regarded, as appears from the particulars following (1Ch 9:24; 1Ch 9:26), not as common porters, but as captains of the four companies of porters, who were to keep guard on the four sides and gates of the temple : they are designated, 1Ch 9:26, as head keepers of the gates, a phrase reminding us of the in Luk 22:52. The number of all the doorkeepers, which is stated to be 172 in Neh 11:19, is wanting here, where it would, like that of the priests, have been considerably higher, because Jerusalem before the exile must have had a much more numerous staff of officers in every respect than that after the exile, to which the catalogue of Nehemiah refers. From all this, the correspondence of the two similar lists in the personal matters is only partial, and by no means such as to be inconsistent with the origin of the one before the exile and of the other after it. The resemblance and even sameness of the names in two or three generations does not of itself prove the identity of the persons, because we learn from the genealogy of Aaron (5. 29 ff.) that the series Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok repeats itself at different times (comp. 1Ch 9:33 f. and 37 f.). In general, the same names recur very often in genealogies, because it was the custom to give the children the names of their ancestors; comp. Luk 1:59; Winer, Realw. ii. 133; Hvernick, Einl. ii. 1, 179 ff. But if the likeness of names in the two lists furnishes no necessary ground for the identity of the lists, and in no way warrants us to identify the like sounding names by the assumption of errors of the pen, we must, on account of the great diversity in all points, understand our list of the inhabitants of Jerusalem before the exile, especially as the following remarks on the functions of the Levites demand this, because they relate throughout to the time before the exile.

3. 1Ch 9:18-34. The Ministerial Functions of the Levites, and first (1Ch 9:18-26 a), of the Levitical porters.And hitherto (he was, namely Shallum, who is called in 1Ch 9:17 the head of the porters) in the kings gate eastward; that is, till the present time the family of Shallum had to keep the guard at the east gate of the temple, that chief entrance to the inner court, by which the king alone entered (comp. 2Ki 16:18; Eze 46:1-2). The hitherto scarcely gives a hint of the time when the present list was composed. It may point as well to a time before the exile as after it, as Shallum is here obviously named as a hereditary name of a house or collective personality, which Keil contravenes unnecessarily. For the circumstance that a pedigree of Shallum is given, not yet in 1Ch 9:18, but at length in 1Ch 9:19, shows that in this latter passage the person of the patriarch of the leading house of doorkeepers is first distinguished from his descendants; see also after.These are the porters for the camps of the sons of Levi. This expression, having an antique ring, and reminding us of the wanderings of the people under Moses (Num 3:21 ff.), proves no more than the many other designations of this kind (tent, 1Ch 9:20; tent of meeting, 1Ch 9:21; house of the tent, 1Ch 9:23 a) that our list was composed before Solomon or near the time of Moses; comp. camp of Jehovah of Solomons temple, 2Ch 31:2.

1Ch 9:19. And Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah. This reference of Shallum to Korah, the grandson of Kohath (1Ch 5:7), comes so close upon the ancestry of Shelemiah or Meshelemiah, the Korhite appointed by David over the east gate, 1Ch 26:1; 1Ch 26:14, that the Shallum of our passage can scarcely be different from him. It is also highly probable that the name of , the father or ancestor of Korah, should be restored there (see Crit. Note), so that the identity of the two persons and the merely formal diversity of their names (, requital; , whom Jehovah requites) is almost certain; and the Meshelemiah, 1Ch 9:21, must be held to be identical with the Shallum belonging to the time of David; for there, as in 1Ch 26:2, a son Zechariah is ascribed to him. Thus the record goes back, as in 1Ch 9:20 to Phinehas the contemporary of Joshua, so in 1Ch 9:21 at least to a contemporary of David; and the guard at the east gate (the kings gate), as it was hereditary in the family, is referred to a nomination by King David. The then mentioned brethren of Shallum, of the house of his father, the Korhites, are the heads of the other three families of porters, Akkub, Talmon, and Ahiman, living in the time of David, 1Ch 9:18.Were over the work of the service of the keepers of the thresholds of the tent. This specifies the service performed by these Levites at the temple; they were threshold or gate keepers; comp. 2Ki 12:10; 2Ch 23:4. The genit. of the tent (here expressed by before , because the preceding word having the article cannot be in the construct state) applies to the tent in Jerusalem erected by David, without, however, expressing any contrast to the temple of Solomon (which, in 1Ch 9:23, seems clearly to be included in the term tent); comp. on 1Ch 9:18.And their fathers in the camp of the Lord were keepers of the entry, namely, in the time of Moses, to which there is reference here as in the following verse. In the Pentateuch there is no mention of the Korhites keeping guard in the time of Moses; but as the Kohathites to whom they belonged were the first servants of the sanctuary, Num 4:4 ff., and especially had the charge of the tabernacle, it is in itself probable that they had to keep the entrance to the sanctuary (comp. Num 4:17-20); and therefore we cannot doubt that our statement follows an old tradition (Berth.).

1Ch 9:20. And Phinehas the son of Eleazar was formerly prince over them, over the porters of the Korhite family. Phinehas cannot have been invested with this oversight of the Korhite porters when he was high priest, but only under the high-priesthood of his father Eleazar; as also Eleazar, as chief over the chiefs of Levi, Num 3:32, under the presidency of Aaron, had the oversight of the keepers of the sanctuary.The Lord with him. This clause might be meant as a historical remark, and so completed by a was, in which case the copula was to be expected before , as in 1Ch 11:9. It is more natural to see in the two words a blessing, God be with him, and to compare the German phrases, God bless him, Of blessed memory. We may remember also Gods covenant of peace with Phinehas and his posterity, Num 25:11 ff. [This goes to prove that the historical is the correct meaning, and not one that is nearly akin to an error of doctrine.J. G. M.]

1Ch 9:21. Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah, that is, Shallum; see on 1Ch 9:19. The designation of this Shallum (before whose name we miss the copula ; see Crit. Note) as porter at the door of the tent of meeting has something indefinite needing explanation. But we can find nothing either from the present passage or from 1Ch 26:2 to clear up this difficulty, or account for the prominence given to this Zechariah.

1Ch 9:22 returns to the description of the service of the porters, which was interrupted by the historical digression, 1Ch 9:19-21. What is now stated belongs to the time of the author of the list, with the exception of the remark applying to the time of David, 1Ch 9:22 b.All these, that were chosen to be porters at the thresholds. On , chosen, comp. 1Ch 7:40, 1Ch 16:41; for construction with , 1Ch 25:1. The number 212 as the total of the porters agrees neither with the time of David, in which (1Ch 26:8-11) 93 porters in all officiated at the tabernacle; nor with that of Zerubbabel, for which Ezr 2:42 gives the number 139; nor, lastly, with that of Nehemiah, for which, Neh 11:19, the number 172 is set down. But it suits the time before the exile, to which also the numbers of the families and priests in 1Ch 9:6; 1Ch 9:9; 1Ch 9:13 most probably point.They were registered in their villages. They dwelt, therefore, in villages (, as 1Ch 6:41 ff.) around Jerusalem, and came to it on the days of their service, as the singers in the time after the exile, Neh 12:29 f.David and Samuel the seer (ancient designation for prophet, ; comp. 1Sa 9:9) had ordained them in their trust., in their trust, official trust or duty; comp. the same term without suffix, 1Ch 9:26; 1Ch 9:31; 2Ki 12:16; 2Ki 22:7; 2Ch 31:12. The naming of Samuel with David (and after him, against the order of time; comp. Heb 11:32) the Chronist no doubt found in his source, and it is explained by the fact that the agency of Samuel in the religious institutions of Israel prepared the way for the reforms of David, and were therefore usually mentioned along with them. And perhaps some arrangement regarding the Levitical porters was made by Samuel which laid the foundation for that of David, though we have no information concerning this beyond the present passage.

1Ch 9:23. And they and their sons, the porters of the time of David and after it. The following phrase also, at the house of the tent (comp. on 1Ch 9:18-19), is chosen, because the present statement applies to boththe tent-sanctuary before Solomon, and the stone temple built by him.

1Ch 9:24. To the four winds (quarters of the heaven; comp. Job 1:19; Mat 24:31) were the porters,, that is, according to the arrangement of David (1Ch 26:14 ff.).By wards, of persons, as Neh 12:9; Neh 4:3; Neh 4:16.

1Ch 9:25. Were to come in seven days, the seventh day from time to time, that is, on the Sabbath of the week, on which every family was in their rank to perform the service in , to denote obligation, as 1Ch 5:1).With them ( ), along with the heads or chiefs of the divisions, 1Ch 9:17, who dwelt in Jerusalem itself, and to whom the notice in 1Ch 9:26 a refers.For they were in trust, the four head keepers of the gates; comp. on 1Ch 9:17.

1Ch 9:26 b32 report on the duties of the other Levites besides the porters.These Levites, and were, etc. It has been remarked in the Crit. Note that for this we are most probably to read (according to 1Ch 9:14), And of the Levites were. At all events, the duties enumerated in the following passage (exclusive of 1Ch 9:27) belong to the Levites in common, and not to the porters. Accordingly, the words must be regarded either as a subscription to the whole preceding paragraph from 1Ch 9:14 (so Berth.), or amended (with Keil) in the way indicated.Over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God. These chambers () and treasuries () were in the side buildings of the temple, over which the Levites presided; comp. Eze 40:17; Eze 42:1 ff.; Neh 10:38; and Keil, Bibl. Arch. i. pp. 121, 124.

1Ch 9:27. And they lodged around the house of God. This notice, referring again to the porters, with the subjoined statement, that they had to open every morning (lit. were set over the keys; comp. , Jdg 3:25; Isa 22:22), is strange in the present place: it had its place perhaps originally after 1Ch 9:26 a.

1Ch 9:28. And some of them were over the vessels of service, the more valuable vessels of gold and silver, with the sacrificial bowls (1Ch 28:13 f.; Dan 1:2; Dan 5:2 ff.), which required careful keeping, and as they were to be taken out of the treasuries for the public worship an exact tale.

1Ch 9:29. Over the vessels, even over all the holy vessels, and over the flour, and the wine, etc. As the term is used here as in 1Ch 9:28, the difference between the vessels here and there mentioned seems to depend on the articles which are here named in connection with the latter, namely, flour (, Lev 2:1 ff.), wine, oil, frankincense, and spices (, as Exo 30:23). They may be, therefore, the more ordinary, less costly vessels used in the daily incense, meat and drink offering (comp. on Exo 25:6). For , order, appoint, in the Piel, comp. Dan 1:5; Dan 1:10-11; the partic. Pi. only here.

1Ch 9:30. And of the sons of the priests, etc. To them belonged, Exo 30:23 ff., the preparation of the holy anointing oil, by the compounding of several spices. This notice referring to the priests does not, strictly taken, belong to the functions of the Levites. The division of things has here for the moment overruled the division of persons. [The priests, however, were Levites.]

1Ch 9:31. And Matti-thiah of the Levites, who was the first-born of Shallum the Korhite: thus an elder brother of that porter Zechariah, 1Ch 9:21, if this is actually to pass for the son of the Shallum here. But certainly, in 1Ch 26:2, Zechariah is directly called first-born () of Meshelemiah; and hence, to maintain the identity of this Meshelemiah with Shallum, we must assume that in our passage Mattithiah bears the honourable title of first-born only in an improper sense, because he ranks high among the descendants of Shallum on account of his office (Berth.). Nothing further is known to us concerning the person or time of Mattithiah.Was in trust over the baking in pans. The term , a baking in pans (comp. , an iron pan, Lev 2:5; Lev 6:14; 1Ch 23:29; Eze 4:3), is used only here.

1Ch 9:32. And of the Kohathites their brethren, the brethren of the last-mentioned Levites, at whose head was the Korhite Mattithiah. For the way of laying on the shew-bread, see Lev 24:6 ff.Every Sabbath. For the phrase (the first with Pattach in the last syllable, for euphony), comp. Bertheau.

1Ch 9:33. And these the singers, heads of the fathers for the Levites, were free in the chambers. This is usually regarded as a first subscription to the foregoing, from 1Ch 9:14, to which a second still more general subscription is added in 1Ch 9:34. Yet in the mention of the singers (the families of which had been reported in 1Ch 9:14-16), the enumeration of the ministerial functions of the several classes of the Levites, which had begun 1Ch 9:26 b, is rather continued; and therefore, instead of these are the singers, the rendering is rather these singers, etc., and thus a force, extending to a rather remote point (1Ch 9:14), is to be assigned to the demonstrative (Kamph. justly). The being free in their chambers is set forth very naturally, because their exclusive occupation with their art was to be indicated. Comp. Rashis and Kimchis interpretation of , immunes ab omni alio officio.For they were over them in the service day and night. This literal rendering of the Masoretic text ( ) seems to express the sense: they were placed over them, the subordinate singers, had to superintend them (Berth.). But the comparison of the somewhat different passage, 2Ch 34:12, is insufficient to justify this view. It is more natural to take to mean: it lay upon them; but then would have to be changed into (1Ch 9:27), and so the suitable sense restored: for by day and night their service, their singing function, was incumbent on them.

1Ch 9:34. These are the heads of the fathers for the Levites, etc. Comp. the similar subscription, 1Ch 8:28. Since this precedes the first genealogy of Saul, as here the repetition of this genealogy immediately follows, Movers (p. 82 f.) conjectured that it had its place here originally, but was taken by an old transcriber erroneously for the beginning of the following genealogy of Saul, and therefore transposed with this (as he endeavoured to point out a more suitable place, as he thought, for it at the close of the genealogy of Benjamin, 1Ch 8:1-27) to that previous place, and thereby somewhat altered. This assumption would only be plausible if the double position of the genealogy of Saul must be regarded as resting on a mistake, and contrary to the plan of the writer, for which there is no manner of ground. He rather repeated this genealogy intentionally here to form a proper transition from his genealogical section to his following (introducing the historical section) account of the fall of Sauls house. This simple consideration removes all that was formerly adduced in the way of doubts, conjectures, and highly absurd and superfluous reflections on the supposed ground of this repetition, as, according to Mar Sutra in Tr. Pesachim 62b, 400 (or in another report, 1300) camel-loads of explanations are forthcoming on this repetition and on the present section; comp. Herzfeld, Gesch. p. 299.

4. Repeated Genealogy of Saul: 1Ch 9:34-44.On the deviations of this list from 1Ch 8:29-39, see on that passage, where it has been already stated that our present passage seems to present the older and more correct text with respect to the forms of the names.

EVANGELICAL AND ETHICAL REFLECTIONS ON CH. 19

There is in many respects the impression of wandering in a wilderness, of walking among the stones in a graveyard, ranged in long rows, and more or less weathered, remaining on the mind after the exegetical examination of the genealogical contents of these chapters. But as in the wilds of Hauran, Iduma, and Arabia Petra, bristling with innumerable bare rocks, there is, notwithstanding all the drought and waste, a mysterious charm that acts with irresistible attraction on all Christian travellers animated by the spirit of biblical research; or as, to use another but kindred figure, the labyrinthine windings of the old Christian catacombs of Rome, with their thousands of sarcophagi, and the ever-varying inscriptions and manifold symbolic figures on them, prepare for the Christian antiquarian walking through them, not weariness, but an inexhaustible charm and ever new satisfaction; even so do the seemingly so dry and unrefreshing names of these nine chapters act upon the searchers of Scripture, not only the Jewish, but also the Christian. For it is from beginning to end holy ground through which we here pass. They are the grave-stones of the people of God, the monuments of a thousand years of the old covenant people, between the rows of which the Chronist leads us. They are the cities and places of the holy land, the origins of which are here presented to us in greater or briefer extent. And the same mysterious attraction that yearly impels thousands of Christian pilgrims, of all countries and confessions, to that land, in which not merely Israel after the flesh, but also the confessors of Christ, have to seek a right of home, insensibly influences every reader of this section who is led by a Christian and scientific interest. The same home-longing that comes upon us on beholding every chart of the country of the twelve tribes, on examining every plan and picture of Jerusalem, even on reading the plainest and simplest of the innumerable books of travels with which the present luxuriant literature of Palestine constantly floods us, seizes with irresistible power the biblical inquirer who turns his attention to these opening chapters of our work; it sweetens in many ways the hard labours that are occasioned by the deciphering of the often illegible text, the pondering on the import of so many isolated names, the reconciling of so many contradictory statements concerning places, persons, and genealogical lists. Considered in detail, there are four chief aspects in which the deeper significance of the history of salvation in our chapters is presented, and on which the attention of the historical inquirer, moved by higher motives than mere profane history and criticism can yield, will be concentrated.

1. The grouping and arrangement of the genealogical material, with all the complication, seeming inconnection and arbitrariness of the considerations involved, is highly attractive, as it affords a deep insight into the organic arrangement of the tribes of Gods people, and the parts they are destined to perform in the history of the theocracy. The fundamental principle of division is neither purely genealogical nor politico-theocratic, but has reference to all these relations. The enumeration of the tribes is not arranged genealogically, according to the ages of the twelve sons of Jacob; otherwise it would have begun with Reuben and ended with Benjamin. It proceeds not according to the political relations of the time of the divided kingdom; otherwise Judah and Benjamin would have stood first, and Ephraim would have followed at the head of the northern kingdom. It follows not exclusively the geographical principle; for if it starts with Judah, the chief tribe of the south, and passing over the seats of the Simeonites, extending far to the south, bends round to the three eastern tribes, and enumerates them from south to north, in order to pass on to the remaining tribes of middle and northern Canaan, in the enumeration of the latter it abandons all geographical order, as the southern Benjamin and probably Dan are annexed to the northern Issachar, and then follows, not Ephraim, the more southern of the tribes of Joseph, but the more northern Manasseh, next to Naphtali; and lastly, after Ephraim and Asher, Benjamin reappears. In the midst of this not very geographical enumeration falls the copious genealogical details of Levi, to whom a definite territory was wanting, on account of its distribution over all the tribes. And yet in this apparently ungeographical and unhistorical order there lies a deeper sense. The author, as a strict theocratic legitimist, subordinates all the others to the two chief tribes, Judah and Benjamin, forming the kingdom of Judah, and adhering to the legitimate national sanctuary, as well as the tribe of Levi remaining in natural mutual connection with them. As he otherwise ignores, as far as possible, the northern kingdom, that had revolted from the legitimate worship, and subordinates the tribes belonging to it, on every occasion, to the orthodox tribes of the south, and regards them as mere dependencies of the latter (comp. 1Ch 9:3, where, along with Jews, Benjamites, and Levites, those belonging to the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are named as belonging to the inhabitants of Jerusalem; also the quite similar passage, 2Ch 34:9, and our remarks on it), here also is all that does not belong to the kingdom of Judah treated as accessory, and not only more briefly despatched (none of the tribes belonging to the north is given as fully as the tribe of Simeon belonging to Judah; some, as Dan and Naphtali, are almost wholly, and one, Zebulun, wholly omitted), but pushed in as subordinate, filling up between the tribes of Judah, Levi, and Benjamin, forming the beginning, the middle, and the end. What is especially conspicuous and beautiful is the central, all-pervading, embracing, and connecting position of the priestly tribe of Levi. Over the whole distribution of the tribes is spread out as a connecting network the uniformly-distributed tribe of Levi, as the priestly mediator between God and His people, in its forty-eight cities, that belonged to all the tribes, but are not to be regarded as exclusively inhabited by Levites (comp. our remarks on 1Ch 6:65); whereby, according to Joshua 21 (and our 1 Chronicles 6), a peculiar crossing of the families of Levi took place, partly in the east and partly in the north of Palestine, so that those akin in family appear removed as far asunder as possible (Kohathites in Judah and Simeon, but also in Ephraim and West Manasseh; Merarites in Reuben and Gad, but also in Zebulun, etc.). It is as if this tribe, provided it remained at the height of its destiny, and the consciousness of Gods people clung to it, should represent the strong sinews and muscles running through the body of the people, which bind the members into a living and moving whole (Hoffmann, Blicke in die frheste Geschichte des gelobten Landes, p. 99 f.).

2. Prominent in this arrangement, with regard to the history of grace, is the passing over of two tribes in silence. That Dan is only indicated, not named, in 1Ch 7:12, can only be conceived as a critical judgment on this tribe, that early and almost wholly fell into idolatry (see on the passage, and comp. 1Ch 27:16 ff., where there is not so much an overpassing of the name as a transposition of it to the end of the twelve tribes, by which the same theocratico-critical judgment is passed upon it). On the contrary, it may be accidental that no mention is made of the tribe of Zebulun in giving the genealogy of the twelve tribes, though it occurs in the enumeration of the Levitical cities (1Ch 6:48; 1Ch 6:62). Yet a certain significance for the history of salvation cannot be denied to this accidental omission, as it was certainly the relative smallness of the tribe, the low number of famous and populous families, that occasioned its disappearance from the genealogical traditions of the later time. Yet this so small and obscure tribe9 it was that included Nazareth, the dwelling – place of the earthly parents of Jesus. Zebulun, with its neighbour Naphtali, was, according to prophetic announcement (Isa 9:1; Psa 68:28), to prove to be the people walking in darkness, the land overshadowed with heathen gloom, that was to see the great light of salvation go forth from its midst. In this contemporaneous omission, then, of Dan, the tribe typically pointing to the Antichrist, and of Zebulun, the tribe serving as the earliest scene of the earthly living and working of the Saviour, there is in our registers a certain significance for the history of salvation, that even if it rests upon accident, points to a higher guidance and a providential arrangement.

3. The investigator of all that is significant for the history of salvation and the defence of the truth, will take no less interest in the many historical and archological notices that are interwoven in the genealogical text. With their now scanty, now copious, contributions to the special history of the tribe, their details, often truly surprising by the epic grandeur and dramatic life of the narrative (to which belong, in particular, the records of the conquests of the Simeonites, the successful raids of the three trans-jordanic tribes against the north Arabian Beduin, and the slaying of the two sons of Ephraim, Ezer and Elad, by the primeval inhabitants of Gath), their highly ancient colouring both in style and deed, which prompts us almost to generalize the remark once added by the author: these are ancient things, and apply it to the whole of these accounts,10 these notices delight us as petrifactions from the grey foretime imbedded in the strata of genealogical series; they resemble scattered gems or medals of antique stamp shining through the rubbish of ages, that give us accounts of otherwise unknown events of theocratic history, and open to us perspective views into remote epochs of the development of Gods people, on which the darkness of absolute oblivion would otherwise have rested. From each of these, now shorter, now longer, documents concerning the older and oldest history of the tribe, goes forth the testimony of an unusually rich and many-sided individual impress of the Israelitish spirit, reminding us almost of the German nation in the multiplicity of its tribes, of a fresh but rude native power as a heritage more or less proper to each of the twelve tribes, and to each in peculiar modification, and thereby of a divine providence guiding and governing the life of the several tribes and of the whole nation with uninterrupted fatherly love as well as judicial integrity.

4. Of pre-eminent importance is finally the appearance, more or less clear in every tribe, of a preponderating repute and influence of one family over the rest. In the tribe of Judah, it is the family of Hezron the son of Perez, and grandson of Judah, that by its growth and power casts all the rest into the shade. In the tribe of Levi, the Kohathites predominate; in that of Benjamin, it is the house of Jeuel, or Abi-gibeon, the ancestor of Saul (1Ch 8:29, 1Ch 9:35 ff.), that, obscuring all the rest, rises to kingly worth and power, and even in its later offshoots, especially the sons of Azel and the bold archers of Ulam (1Ch 8:38-40), remains great and renowned. Among the Simeonites, Shimei, the descendant of Shaul, the last of the five sons of Simeon, becomes the ancestor of the most flourishing family (1Ch 4:26 f.). Among the Reubenites, the family of Joel is conspicuous (1Ch 5:4 f., 8 f.); among the Gadites, that of Buz (1Ch 5:14); among the Manassites, that of Machir the father of Gilead (1Ch 7:14 ff.); among the Ephraimites, that of Resheph the ancestor of Joshua (1Ch 7:25); among the sons of Issachar, that of Izrahiah the son of Uzzi, the son of Tolah (1Ch 7:3); among the sons of Asher, that of Heber the son of Beriah (1Ch 7:32 ff.). It is obvious enough to explain this remarkable phenomenon naturally, and regard it as preservation and completion of the strong families in the struggle for existence, or, if you will, as natural training. The statement of Palgrave, the English traveller, regarding the division of all the Arab tribes into two kinds of families, the townsmen or peasants, and the nomads or beduin, of which the former are the stronger and more developed, the latter the weaker, though patriarchally the more simply constituted, and therefore better fitted for handing down faithfully their genealogical recollections, should perhaps be regarded as pointing to a partial explanation of the present interesting phenomenon.11 Neither of these two purely natural attempts at explanation can be called satisfactory. The last and deepest ground of the rise of one family or tribe to a physically, ethically, or intellectually distinguished preeminence, and to an illustrious name, obscuring kindred tribes or families, is the secret of the divine election, that, without respect to character or conduct, raises and glorifies the one people or family, and leaves the other to lowness and oblivion, according to the words, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated; and, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion (Rom 9:13; Rom 9:15; Mal 1:2 f.; Exo 33:19). As in the life of nations, so is this elective grace visible in the development of single tribes, clans, and families, and often in a way that directly contradicts the normal mode of growth and self-development, especially the law of the prevalence of the strong over the weak in the struggle for existence, and rather proceeds according to the Pauline saying: God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence (1Co 1:27-29). Above all, in the development of the forefathers of Christ, before David as well as after, in the times of the rise as in those of the decline, this election by grace has repeatedly asserted itself, and operated as the proper principle and inmost motive of that blessed historical process, embracing many thousands of years, which, as the divine education of the human race, is the counterpart of all natural training, and the ideal archetype of all human education.

Footnotes:

[1]The Sept, the Vulg., and Luther attach to the foregoing word ( ), with an arbitrary interpretation of the following ( ,translatique sunt in Babyl.).

[2]For the Kethib is doubtless to be read the Keri (comp. the name in 1Ch 6:31, among the Merarites).

[3]For , since ( is a city of Ephraim, must apparently have been read, according to Gen 26:20, (the Shelanites, descendants of Shelah, third son of Judah). The incorrect pointing appears to have arisen from the scriptio plena: . Comp. Neh 11:5, where, instead of , we should also perhaps point .

[4]Before a (in consequence of the at the end of ) seems to have fallen out. Comp. of the Sept., and 1Ch 7:2; 1Ch 12:25 (also F. Bttcher, Neue exeg. krit. Aehrenlese, iii. 223).

[5]Before a seems to have fallen out.

[6]For the original text seems to have been ; comp. ver.14.

[7] Kethib: . Keri: .

[8]So the Keri. The Kethib is .

[9]That Zebulun, in the times of Moses, and even David, sent into the field an army of 50,000 men (see 1Ch 12:33), is not in contradiction with its insignificance in the later times before and after the exile, and is historically quite conceivable.

[10]Thus J. frst (Gesch. der bibl. Lit. i. p. 318) conjectures that the raid of Elad and Ezer, the sons of Ephraim, against Gath, narrated 1Ch 7:21, is probably taken from the old accounts ( ) mentioned 1Ch 4:22, which the Chronist had before him, but without adducing any direct proof for it.

[11]Palgrave, Central Arabia, i. p. 35: Arab nationality is and always has been based on the divisions of families and clans. These clans were soon by the nature of the land itself divided each and every one into two branches, correlative indeed, but of unequal size and importance. The greater section remained as townsmen or peasants in the districts best susceptible of culture and permanent occupation, where they still kept up much of their original clannish denominations and forms, though often blended, and even at times obliterated, by the fusion inseparable from civil and social organization. The other and lesser portion devoted themselves to a pastoral life. They, too, retained their original clannish and family demarcations, but unsoftened by civilization, and unblended by the links of close-drawn society; so that in this point they have continued to be the faithful depositaries of primeval Arab tradition, and constitute a sort of standard rule for the whole nation. Hence, when genealogical doubts and questions of descent arise, as they often do among the fixed inhabitants, recourse is often had to the neighbouring beduins for a decision unattainable in the complicated records of the town life. Wellhausen (De gentibus et familiis Jud., etc., p. 24 f.), setting out from the mainly correct presupposition, that these observations of Palgrave on the Arabs apply mutatis mutandis to the tribes of ancient Israel, has described the family of Celeb (1Ch 2:18 ff., 1Ch 2:42 ff.) as an example of a Jewish family dwelling in towns and tilling the ground, and therefore widely spread, but certainly difficult to reduce to a genealogy; and, on the contrary, that of his brother Jerahmeel, 1Ch 2:25-41, as an example of a nomad family, remaining certainly smaller and less renowned. but also provided with far more precise and correct genealogical recollections Etenim casu non factum est, he thinks, with reference to 1Ch 2:25-41, quod nusquam excultior invenitur articulatio corporis ethnologici, quam apud Jerachmeelem *immout mosille schemate genealogico depingendi res gentilicias fluxit primarie e tali societate, qu magn famili erat similior quam artificios an contort structur civilatis qu recte dici potest, ita postea etiam ibi sine dubio maxime viguit. ubi antiqua patriarcharum fidelius servabatur vit consuetudo, sic quidem ut sanouinis vis jungens et dirimens ceteris omnibus causis, quibus homines solent conciliari et abalienari aut revera prvaleret aut certe secundum conscientiam popularem prvalere judicaretur, etc.

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

CONTENTS

This chapter sums up the subject of the registry of Israel. The Levites are taken notice of. And particular mention is made of Saul and Jonathan’s stock.

1Ch 9:1

By all Israel being reckoned, must be meant all that were in this register. For the Reader will not, I hope, have overlooked that in the foregoing Chapters of the genealogy of Israel, there is no account of the tribes of Zebulun and of Dan. Perhaps Ezra, who seems to have been the Compiler of this account of Israel, did not find mention of either of these tribes in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, after their return from the Babylonish captivity. I cannot account for the omission any other way. But there is a more alarming omission in the book of the Revelations, on what ground I presume not to explain. Dan is not among the number of the sealed of Israel by the angel. Rev 7:1-8 . Let the Reader in the perusal of this verse take notice how the sacred Writer dwells upon the cause of Israel’s being carried away to Babylon. It is sin which is the sad cause of every man’s sorrow. Rom 5:12 .

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

The Hell of Death Church Usages Every Man In His Place

1Ch 9

If we regard all the names which occur in this chapter under the image of a deep flowing river, all we can hope to do is to wander by its banks awhile, and pluck here and there a flower, or watch here and there some shining bubble as it rises, gleams, and dies. We can hardly realise the toil that is expressed in the keeping of so large and critical a register. It is easy for us to run through the names, as but so many letters in the alphabet thrown into various relations and signifying little or nothing in particular. But let any one connected with a large family make a point of giving the name of every individual connected with that family, say during the last two hundred years, and he will soon see how vast and intricate were the labours of the registrars of Israel. We cannot too often repeat that all these lists of names represent a solemn process always taking effect in the divine administration of human affairs. From an early period in Biblical history we are accustomed to think of God keeping books in which are written names, and deeds, and judgments a register traced in every line by a hand that cannot err. In the last portion of the sacred canon we come again upon the same idea, for John, the holy seer, noted the production of books, and of one particular book in which the history of the world was written. Solemn beyond all imagination is the thought that whilst literary men are writing the histories of their respective countries, God himself is putting on record the whole drama of human life the world over, a drama in which every actor is still alive, and upon whom special judgment will be eventually delivered. Historians speak about pre-historic time, they draw a line beyond which they know nothing; to that dim region they refer as the sphere of fable, conjecture, mythology; they can only begin at a definite date and work down to modern times. Not so with the divine historian; he begins his narrative far away in eternity, yea, by looking into the elements if we may so say, which constitute his own nature, and his history is the more complete and entrancing in that what he says of humanity he is really giving a revelation of himself. Hence the mysteriousness of the Bible. We feel that we do not get at the beginning so far as mere letters are concerned, so that when the letter comes before the eye it brings with it vitality and colour, celestial and indescribable. All edifices of stone began, continued, and ended, by dates clearly determinable; but who knows where cloud first took shape, where rainbow first spanned the sky, when music first broke in upon the silence of space? It is even so with every individual man’s life, the man feels as if he had been in a pre-existent state; he claims spiritual kinship and masonic brotherhood, and all the charm of soul friendship without being able to assign any reason of a strictly logical kind for the outgoing of his affection and confidence. All that we ever see is but a little and obscure part of so-called history. The infinite volume lies under the divine hand, and when we come to peruse it we shall find many a mystery illuminated, and many a fear dispelled.

In the very first verse, we come upon the expression “Who were carried away to Babylon for their transgression.” Familiar words these in various relations. Transgression always carries a man away from flowery paths, from sweet rest, from conditions of growth and perfectness; carries him away into degradation, bondage, and despair. The way of transgressors is hard. Let no man or nation think that transgression is not followed sooner or later by adequate punishment. If we could in imagination summon all transgressors, their unanimous testimony would be that their master is deceitful, cruel, and implacable. Men do not think of the bondage of Babylon, they think of the delight of the immediate satisfaction of burning desires. Men are made mad by sin. When the soul rises in the fierceness of self-will, when a legion of devils seem to besiege the heart, when the ear is filled with promises of delight, it is in vain for virtue to expostulate, or for judgment to threaten and denounce. But, alas I to what a Babylon is the sinful soul being driven! What time for reflection, unavailing repentance, and inexpressible suffering, is surely coming! It is the merest and emptiest sentimentalism to turn away from this aspect of the case, and to speak of the love or mercy of God. Love has been trampled upon, mercy has been abused, gospels with all their mystery of redemption and pardon have been scornfully entreated; what wonder therefore, that the apostle should solemnly declare that the only thing which remains in the case of impenitence is a fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation. We must not look upon the future punishment of the wicked as a mystery of which no sign or hint has ever been given in this life. All the way through God has been pointing out that there is as certainly a way to destruction, as there is a way to immortality. Let there be no mistake about this matter, as if God had concealed the one way, and pointed out only the other. In his very first interview with man, God pointed out the hell of death. We are not to suppose that what we speak of as the bottomless pit is an invention of the middle ages, or a mere priestly contrivance, for the frightening of souls. It is hardly too much to say that there is more of hell in the Book of Genesis than there is of heaven. If we are the subjects of surprise at all, it must be that any heaven is possible to a soul which has disregarded the way of God. It is the more important to notice this, because there are not wanting those who would teach us that destruction, or hell, or the worm that dieth not, or the fire which is not quenched, is a superstition of days quite modern. Our answer is an empthatic No. Go to Genesis, the very book with which the Bible begins, and there you will find the revelation of the issue of disobedience.

In the thirteenth verse we read “Very able men for the work of the service of the house of God,” in other words, mighty men of valour, an expression which occurs in chapter 7, 1Ch 7:9 . The ability is noticeable in connection with its definite exercise. We do not read of ability in some merely general way, but of ability specially directed to the house of God. It is often supposed that ability is necessary in a larger way everywhere than in the sanctuary. It is not uncommon to imagine that the son who has least mental power, may be able to serve in the Church. All this will be changed just in proportion as right conceptions of the Church of God prevail. If that Church is simply managed by mechanical regulations, by the starting of wheels, the turning of taps, the management of congregational machinery, then an automaton may some day be invented, that will conduct the whole process without intelligence or feeling. But if the Church of God is humanity in its best aspect, and humanity engaged in its most beneficent activities; if it is humanity intent upon bringing all races and grades of men into sympathy, and conducting them towards a worthy destiny, then is the Church a place for statesmanship, genius, and more than soldier-like discipline and authority. The Church does not exist for the purpose of retaining dogmas that are dead, no more than society is an institution for the preservation of barbarisms which civilisation has superseded. The Church as to its forms, usages, and methods must adapt itself to all variations of progress. In its quest after God, in its love of truth, in its consecration to the cross of Christ, in its sense of responsibility, it must remain the same through all the ages; we thus have in the Christian Church what may be termed the permanent and the changeable the eternal truth, and the variable instrumentality.

In the nineteenth verse men are referred to as being over the work of the service, keepers of the gates of the tabernacle. Here there is no reference to special genius. The men were what we should call churchwardens, attending to outward things, to necessary but not supreme arrangements connected with the tabernacle or temple. But it is just here that Christianity in some of its rarest qualities is revealed. We must never forget that there are men unknown for genius or large capacity who can be entrusted with the lighting of the lamps or the keeping of the gate better than many poets or philosophers. The question should always be, what is the thing to be done and who is the best man to do it? There is quite as much responsibility in its own degree resting upon the door-keeper as upon the high priest. It does not look so within our narrow limits of judgment, yet it may be really so in the estimation and criticism of God. But the distance is not always between the high priest and the keepers of the gates of the tabernacle; it is often between the high priest and the man who stands next to him in dignity; it is often between two men who are so nearly equal as scarcely to be measurable in influence as between one another; it is where responsibility seems to lessen its claims as it goes down from office to office that men must be particularly careful lest they suppose that the office determines the responsibility. If a man can only keep a gate, then in keeping a gate he rises to the very highest degree of responsibility or obligation. Very often the highest work of the Church fails in the attainment of its object because it is not adequately supported by the secondary order of officers. When the keeper of the gate feels that he is as responsible for the success of the temple service as is the high priest himself, the institution will be equally vital at every point and exquisitely adapted to the ends proposed by its creation. Zechariah according to the twenty-first verse was porter of the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, that is to say, he was the door-keeper of the tent of meeting. Door-keeping was no sinecure in the olden days. There were two hundred and twelve porters or door-keepers according to the twenty-second verse. Nehemiah speaks of the total of the porters as one hundred and seventy-two. Ezra reckoned the number as one hundred and thirty-nine. Under David the number of warders was ninety-three. David and Samuel had ordained the door-keepers in their office of trust. It has been pointed out that no mention is made elsewhere of Samuel’s part in arranging the Levitical service; but tradition associated him with David in the work of religious reform, and the statement of the text may be true in spirit though not in form. It is interesting to notice according to the best authorities that the families of the temple warders, like those of the singers, lived on their farms in the villages round about Jerusalem, and came up for their duties every seventh day. There is always much work to be done which the supreme men of the Church as priests, prophets, interpreters, cannot do so well as it can be done by intellectually inferior men. The rule should be every man in his place, and a place for every man.

Prayer

Almighty God, let thy morning be unto us as an opening into heaven. We are tired of the earth. We look upon it in itself; it began so little and so cold, and so full of disappointment: a garden of bitterness, a vineyard in which we seek wine and find nothing but sourness: but when we see its connection with heaven it becomes beautiful, a worthy habitation for a little while, a vital opportunity. So may we regard it at this moment. Let the light which is above the brightness of the sun make our souls glad; let our poor voices be taken up on high, purified of all dissonance, and made to harmonise with the music of the angels. Give us to feel how near the earth is to heaven, and how at any moment heaven may open and take us into its light and peace. Thus may we rejoice with exceeding joy, and thus may the peace we possess pass all understanding an infinite depth, a tranquillity that cannot be perturbed. Great peace have they that love thy law; they are blessed with the calm of heaven; though the earth be removed and though the mountains be cast into the midst of the sea: a strong rock is our God, a hiding-place not to be violated. When we think of ourselves, and trust to our own little strength, then the day becomes night, and the night becomes sevenfold in darkness; but when we think of God, there is no more sea, no more death, no more night, neither sorrow, nor crying, nor any pain. May we be filled with God; may we be the subjects of spiritual ecstasy, gracious transport, the holy enthusiasm which lifts the soul above all detail of care, and anxiety, and darkness, and leads it into the liberty of heaven. For occasional blessedness we are grateful: but having tasted that the Lord is gracious we would eat and drink abundantly of his goodness. Lord, excite our hunger, and then satisfy it; afflict us with a gracious thirst, and then quench it with the river of life. Is not all time an opportunity for the display of thy goodness? We have lived, and therefore we believe. Dead men cannot praise thee, but conscious men feel that thou mayest be, and the wisest of them dare not deny thee. But to some thou art ever coming as a light of heaven, a glory ineffable; and they assert thine existence, and declare thy providence, and vindicate thy righteousness. Because we have lived we believe; we see what thou hast done in the days that are gone, and all thy doing has become a noble argument, conclusive by its very persuasion. For all thy love how shall we bless thee? It falls out of every pore of the sky. Thy goodness endureth for ever now beautiful, now solemn, now a great blessing, now an immeasurable bereavement, now a cradle, now a grave; but it is the same God that worketh in all. Thine acts are full of tenderness, thy dispensations of affliction are full of mercy. Why will we not let thee alone? Why will we criticise our Father, whose right hand is power, whose left hand is mercy, whose head is wisdom, whose heart is love? Forgive us wherein we have been ungrateful, frivolous, worldly, selfish, and set within us the Spirit of the dear Christ, Son of God, God the Son, who loved us, and gave himself for us, and has been a highway unto God, that we may find at thy throne pardon and peace. May Jesus dwell within us, then there shall be no darkness in the soul; may the Christ of God be our guest, then there shall be bread enough and to spare for the spirit; may he who is the Light of the World be the light of our individual life. Dry our tears; call back the wanderer; if any man has lost the way and wants to find the road again, send angels to help him, and all through eventide may he rejoice in that his feet are walking the right path. For all mankind we pray; the whole world is thine; all men belong to the common Father; may they belong to one another, may recognition take the place of alienation, may hostility be displaced by trust, and may the whole world find kinship in Christ. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

1Ch 9:1 So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they [were] written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, [who] were carried away to Babylon for their transgression.

Ver. 1. In the book of the kings. ] Not now extant. This chapter, and 1Ch 3:19 ; 1Ch 3:24 , are noted for some parcels of the last passages, for history, of the Old Testament.

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

1 Chronicles Chapter 9

1Ch 9:2-44

If we reign in life, it is by Him and by Him only; and if Israel is ever yet to reap blessing and to be the means of blessing throughout the earth, all depends upon the Messiah. Little did they know that when they rejected Him! They never entered into the mind of God; and, when Jesus came, they were less prepared than ever. Never did God see them in a lower condition. They had been grosser; they had been more offensive in their abominations, but their heart was far from Him. In vain did they worship Him. Hence, therefore, they deliberately preferred man – and man false and guilty and rebellious – to the Lord of glory. “Not this man, but Barabbas.” How utterly, then, all was ruined – ruined morally before the destruction came upon Judah and Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans. It is always so. Outward judgment follows, and is in no way the cause of our misery. The misery is from within, from self, from Satan’s power through self.

So it was with Israel, so it is with each; and so, further, are we delivered by one Man outside ourselves, and that one Man the Son of God. All depends upon Him, therefore, for us now, for every day’s blessing – not merely for our salvation, but for every day’s light and guidance. All our mistakes arise because, alas! not Christ governs, but self. All our happiness is found where Christ takes the first place. So it will be with Israel by-and-by. But this was not understood then. God shows that He understood it all along, and that He revealed it in His Word; for this it is that accounts for the books of Chronicles the purpose of God. It is all hinging upon His purpose, upon His Messiah – His purpose to send His Son to take up that purpose and give it solidity, to make it unfailing.

David, therefore, acting as a type of the Messiah, orders everything anew. The old state of things according to Moses did not abide in its arrangements. The grand principles, of course, are everlasting; but there was a most important difference in the form, and that difference of form was due to the superior glory of the one who was there even as a type. How much more when we remember the antitype, the Lord Jesus. David, therefore, orders an entirely new arrangement in this respect. The priests were divided into courses, and one course was to be always on the spot in Jerusalem. That state of things is not in the least referred to in the Pentateuch. But David not only arranged for a house of God, but houses for the priests. There were many mansions around that central house of God for the priests; and there the priests, each according to their course, lived. The consequence was that they required to have the offerings brought there – to Jerusalem. We can see the reason why. God had been preparing the way, even from the beginning, for the offering at that one place that is named – where His name should be placed – that one place that He should choose. Then when the place was chosen and the temple built, we can understand all, because these priests could not have subsisted a day unless Israel had, according to the command of God, brought their offerings and their sacrifices and the like. On this they subsisted. Had there been neglect in this respect, the priests must have of necessity gone back to their own places of residence, and left the altar and the incense, and all the order of the temple, completely neglected.

Accordingly, then, we see the great importance of the change that now took place, and why the genealogies became of such importance, because the books of Chronicles were written after the captivity, when everything was thrown into disorder. The Jews, disheartened by the destruction that they never would believe till it came, might have thought, “What is the use of a genealogy? What is the use of caring now about our lands or houses? Everything is ruined. All is gone.” But the man who believed God, knew that seventy years would see them returning from their captivity; and, therefore, care for God and confidence in His Word would make them jealously preserve their genealogies in order that, when they did return, they might enter upon the allotment of God. For this was what made every homestead in Israel so precious – that it was God that gave it. It was not merely something that man earned by his own labour or skill. It was the gift of God to them.

Therefore, if an Israelite was bound up very particularly with his family, it was no mere matter of vanity or pride, as among us very often; but in Israel it was bound up with the purpose of God. It was no question of what some rogue had done, so, perhaps, getting his family into favour, as is very often among the Gentiles; but in Israel, all was ordered of God. It was God’s appointment, and the worthies there were men who were worthy according to God – men who had, by their achievements in faith, won, according to the will of God, a place for Israel; for all their blessings were more or less connected, although all was poor and feeble compared with that which shall be, but still it was a type of what is to be. Hence, therefore, patriotism, a genealogical line, families that held on to the remotest antiquity – these had a divine character in Israel, which they have not in any other country under the sun. Elsewhere it often becomes offensive; indeed, if people only knew the truth, a thing rather to be ashamed of than to be proud of.

But in Israel it was not so. There, although there were sad blots, and blots upon the fairest, still, for all that, there was that which was truly divine working in the midst of that poor people from the beginning downward. We can see therefore that these genealogies had a character altogether higher than might at first sight appear, and I have no doubt that most of us have read these genealogies, thinking it was high time to skip over them. I have no doubt we have often wondered why they were ever written at all, and why they should be in the Bible, though, perhaps, without in the least wishing to disparage what was inspired – for I am now supposing pious people. But I am quite persuaded that very few persons, comparatively, have a clear distinct judgment why God has attached so much importance to these genealogies. One reason why I have dwelt upon it now is this – to give, as I trust, a truer view, a simpler understanding, why the Lord in this wondrous book should give us so much that appears to be little more than a list of names.

Well, when they returned, these genealogies would be of capital importance, and of capital importance for the Israelites in order that they should not usurp in order that they should not be unjust – in order that they should be content with what God had given to them – in order that they should link themselves with all that was great and glorious in God’s sight in the past. These genealogies were of the greatest moment for this. In their weakness they would require every cheer and encouragement.

But, further, they were under responsibility, according to their substance, to give to the temple of God – to remember the priests and Levites who had none inheritance among their brethren, and, more particularly, as the order set up by the king would be restored again, the courses of priests. We find it in the New Testament. We see the birth of John the Baptist under these very circumstances. His father, according to his course – the course of Abia – was at that time doing service at the temple. He had left his house in the country. He was in Jerusalem. Thus the genealogies were of the greatest moment in order to settle justly, and according to the will of God, that which could not be haphazard and of the will of man; but there should be faith in it, piety in it, an owning of God in it.

These, therefore, seem to be among the grounds – I do not say all the grounds, but among the grounds – why God led some of the Jews to pay such attention to their genealogies. And it is remarkable that at least one tribe, if not two, is left out here. I presume they did not think of it; many individuals in all the tribes may have been careless, but it is a solemn thing to find that, from one cause or another, almost in every case in the Bible where tribes are mentioned, one or two are left out. It is the failure of man. No matter what it is, it is the failure of man. If Moses speaks prophetically, Moses also leaves out. This was a sad and solemn sign – the omission of a tribe. The fact is, there will always be these irregularities till Jesus comes. There never will be order maintained in this world according to God until the Lord Jesus reigns. But at this time there was a peculiar disorder – the utter breakup of the people, of the kingdom, the carrying away into captivity, could well account for this. The genealogies, therefore, are very partial; but they were all reckoned by genealogies. And if a priest could not prove his genealogy, he was not allowed, as we know from the book of Ezra, which is the successor of the Chronicles – the natural sequel of these books. The priests were not allowed to minister at all unless they could prove their genealogy, though they might be ever so truly sons of Aaron.

The fact itself was not enough. There must be the proper register and proof of their genealogy – a thing of very great importance for us now, I would just observe, to draw spiritual profit from; for now in these days, when there is a universal profession of Christianity, we are called upon to prove our genealogies. You see there is no difficulty in bearing the name. The time was when a man confessed Christ to the danger of his life. Now it is a cheap and common thing. Nearly everybody does it. All the world (so to speak) is baptized in these lands. Therefore, plainly, in answering to the type of a priest as of a spiritual man that draws near to God, one must look for more than the mere fact of being baptized. It is not enough – we all feel that – and without knowing that we are acting upon this very principle; that is, we require the priests to prove their genealogies. By-and-by, when the Lord comes, He may discover many a one that we may not have thought of. That does not prove we were wrong. It does show how full of grace He is, and how perfect His wisdom. But we must go by what appears. He acts by what is. He is the truth. We are not the truth. We can judge only according to evidence that comes before us.

So in 1Ch 9 we have the inhabitants of Jerusalem. This is the peculiar feature of what begins here – the inhabitants of Jerusalem. And Benjamin is particularly mentioned with a view to that. But, further, the Levites and the priests are brought before us for the very same reason, and their various offices and work. And last of all, because they had been connected in so special a place – and, indeed, were of Benjamin – of the family of Saul, as mentioned before. These repetitions are very striking in the book. They are not casual; they are all connected with God’s purpose, for now the great object is to show the passing away of man’s will in order that God’s purpose should reign Man chose Saul for reasons of his own. The children of Israel wished a king like the nations. This never could satisfy God. God must choose a man after His own heart. Hence, therefore the’ first part of the regular history of Chronicles, after the genealogies, is a brief notice of the passing away of the house of Saul in the next chapter.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah. Not the existing books of Samuel and Kings, but another book, being a collection of matters from them. Referred to in 2Ch 16:11; 2Ch 25:26; 2Ch 27:7; 2Ch 28:26; 2Ch 32:32; 2Ch 35:27; 2Ch 36:8.

Israel. Punctuate and read “Israel: and Judah was carried away”, &c.

transgression = defection. Hebrew. ma’al.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 9

You get to chapter nine and it declares,

So all of Israel was reckoned by the genealogies; and, behold, they were written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were carried away to Babylon because of their transgression ( 1Ch 9:1 ).

Again God declares that the reason for the fall was their transgressions. Carried away to Babylon. And again we come back now to the priests and the descendants of the priests and the Levites and so forth. And in verse twenty-six, we are told that portion of them.

For these Levites, the four chief porters, were in their set office, and were over the chambers and treasuries of the house of God. And they lodged round about the house of God, because the charge was upon them, and the opening every morning pertained to them ( 1Ch 9:26-27 ).

And so it was their duty to just live around it to protect it from vandals and so forth, and every morning to open it up and to set things out. Set out all of the instruments, the vessels for the worship, the fine flour, the wine, the oil, the frankincense, and all.

And in verse thirty-three we get back to the singers.

These are the singers, chief of the fathers of the Levites, who remaining in the chambers were free: for they were employed in that work day and night ( 1Ch 9:33 ).

In other words, they were free from the other labors in order that day and night they may spend their whole time in just praising and worshipping the Lord. That would be quite an occupation. Quite a job. Get paid for that. Just being around, worshipping God all the time and getting paid for it.

And so then we jump to in verse thirty-five, the family of Saul again through Jonathan, the descendants of Jonathan. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

1Ch 9:1-9

1Ch 9:1-9

“So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel. And Judah was carried away captive to Babylon for their transgression. Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities were Israel, the priests, the Levites, and the Nethinem. And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim and Manasseh: Uthai the son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the son of Bani, of the children of Perez the son of Judah. And of the Shilonites: Asaiah the first-born, and his sons. And of the sons of Zerah: Jeuel and their brethren, six hundred and ninety. And of the sons of Benjamin: Sallu the son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah, and Ibneiah the son of Jeroham, and Elah the son of Uzzi, the son of Michri, and Meshullam the son of Shephatiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah; and their brethren according to their generations, nine hundred and fifty six. All these men were heads of father’s houses by their fathers’ houses.”

E.M. Zerr:

1Ch 9:1. Genealogies is from YACHAS, and Strong defines it, “to enroll by pedigrees.” Written in the book is explained by my comments on 1Ki 14:19.

1Ch 9:2. The preceding verse closed with a reference to the Babylonian captivity. Up to that point in this book, the writer was giving a list of the different families of Israel, showing the proper place and rank of the people. Between the 1st verse of this chapter and the one we are studying, the 70 years of the captivity took place and the people were released to return to Jerusalem. This verse, as well as the rest of the chapter, will give us a brief list of those who returned, and their places of residence, as well as the particular rank and service accepted. It will be instructive for us to note the list, to compare it with that contained in the preceding chapters of this book. First is from a word that Strong defines, “first, in time, place or rank.” The connection indicates the last word of the definition is the one that applies here. This conclusion is justified by the special naming of priests, Levites and Nethinims. The last word was never used until after the captivity, although the special temple service, which distinguished them as a class, had been used previously.

1Ch 9:3-8. This paragraph begins stating the various persons who located in Palestine after returning from Babylon. Men from four tribes, Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim and Manasseh, dwelt in Jerusalem.

1Ch 9:9. There were 956 of these, said to be chief men, which agrees with the definition of rank as the meaning of first in 1Ch 9:2.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

In this chapter the genealogies are completed, that is to say, they here reach the latest point in their history, and refer to the dwellers in Jerusalem after the return from captivity. They are lists of the heads of the families of Judah, Benjamin, the priests, and the Levites.

Immediately following these lists we have an account of the porters and their duties, together with those of the Levites and the priests. In the opening verses of the chapter we are told the reason for Judah being carried away into captivity, and all that follows tells the story of how, under the direction of “very able ‘men for the service of the house of God” (verse 1Ch 9:13), an attempt was made to restore the order and worship which had been lost in the captivity.

The chronicler is now about to proceed to the story of the central epoch in this whole history, namely the reign of David. He here repeats with greater detail the important genealogy of Saul as a prelude to the story of his death, which prepares the way for the accession and reign of David.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

7. The Record of the Inhabitants of Jerusalem after the Return

CHAPTER 9

1. The restoration (1Ch 9:1-2)

2. Different residents in Jerusalem (1Ch 9:3-9)

3. The priests (1Ch 9:10-13)

4. The Levites (1Ch 9:14-16)

5. Porters and Levites; their duties (1Ch 9:17-34)

6. The house of Saul (1Ch 9:35-44)

All Israel was reckoned by genealogies, which means that from the beginning of the nation, public records were kept. The name of every individual and the family and tribe to which they belonged were carefully registered. This complete registry was contained in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, which does not mean the two books of Kings. The genealogies contained in the preceding chapters were condensed from the larger registry in the archives of Israel and Judah. Such genealogical registers were likewise kept during the captivity. The names registered in the rest of this chapter are the names of the inhabitants of Jerusalem after the exile. Almost all the names are also found in Nehemiah 11 with some marked differences. The genealogy of the house of Saul is repeated once more (1Ch 8:29-38), evidently, as the connecting link with the next chapter.

It is beyond the scope of our work to follow these genealogical registries at greater length, or to attempt the solution of many supposed difficulties.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

am 2804, etc. bc 1200, etc

all Israel: Ezr 2:59, Ezr 2:62, Ezr 2:63, Neh 7:5, Neh 7:64, Mat 1:1-16, Luk 3:28-38

carried: 2Ch 33:11, 2Ch 36:9, 2Ch 36:10, 2Ch 36:18-20, Jer 39:9, Jer 52:14, Jer 52:15, Dan 1:2

Reciprocal: Ezr 8:1 – genealogy Neh 11:3 – Israel Neh 11:11 – the ruler Eze 37:19 – Behold

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

1Ch 9:1. They were written in the book In the public records, wherein there was an account of that kingdom, and of the several families in it.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1Ch 9:1. All Israel were reckoned by genealogies, from books carried to Babylon.

1Ch 9:2. Nethinims. They were of the seven nations, Gibeonites and others, whom providence had graciously spared, and blessed with the humblest place in the Lords house. Persons who had made the vows of Nazarites might be included in this class of men, who did the meaner services for the priests. See Ezr 2:58; Ezr 8:20. Jos 9:23.

1Ch 9:3. Ephraim and Manasseh, the scattered families of those tribes returned with Judah. To seek for the ten tribes is therefore a hopeless dream. They occupied Jerusalem and the best of the land by virtue of the kings edict.

1Ch 9:15. Heresh, the artist or carpenter, as the Vulgate and Montanus read. But rabbi Abulensis says, that the levites did not follow trades; and that this word, though the name of a trade, is also the name of a man.

1Ch 9:20. Phinehaswas the ruler. The Vulgate reads, was their duke before the Lord. Each highpriest had the dignity of a prince.

REFLECTIONS.

How gracious was the Lord in turning the captivity of his people as the rivers of the south; and how happy to see once more the hill of God smoke with burnt-offerings. How gracious was the care of providence in preserving the ministers of the true religion, while the false prophets and the idolatrous priests of Bethel and Dan, for ought that appears, were all consumed away.

It is a striking proof that Judah and Benjamin had profited by their long captivity, that they began their commonwealth by a proper attention to religion. In arranging the service of the sanctuary they followed the excellent order established by Samuel, when he reformed the abuses of Elis house; an order which David had followed and enlarged. The state which does not found the compacts of national society on the belief of a God, a providence, and a futurity, is likely to be unhappy in itself, or not long to exist. If good principles are not daily inculcated, infidelity and vice will inundate the land; good men will fly with their persons and property, and ruin will be the consequence. And who will respect the laws, or revere the majesty of his sovereign, who does not fear the Lord?

On the return from Babylon, the higher parts of worship being first restored, the singers were also reppointed to their sacred work. These were not merely boys and girls, but venerable fathers of the levites superintended this branch of sacred service: and what part of worship is more elevating to the soul? When discreet and pious men lead a congregation to glorify God in simple and harmonious sounds, or even accompanied with music which does not drown the voice, it exalts the worship of a faithful people. But when a number of young men demonstrate their want of piety and prudence by introducing light tunes, and pieces in which the congregation cannot possibly join, they offer a very great insult to God and his people. He sits in the heavens, he listens to the fervent devotion of all religious assemblies; but he abhors the mere service of the lips, and unavailing sounds.

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

9:1 So all Israel were reckoned by genealogies; and, behold, they [were] written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah, [who] were {a} carried away to Babylon for their transgression.

(a) Until now he has described their genealogies before they went into captivity, and now he describes their history after their return.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

TEACHING BY ANACHRONISM

1Ch 9:1-44

“And David the king said Who then offereth willingly? And they gave for the service of the house of God ten thousand darics.”- 1Ch 29:1; 1Ch 29:5; 1Ch 29:7

TEACHING by anachronism is a very common and effective form of religious instruction; and Chronicles, as the best Scriptural example of this method, affords a good opportunity for its discussion and illustration.

All history is more or less guilty of anachronism; every historian perforce imports some of the ideas and circumstances of his own time into his narratives and pictures of the past: but we may distinguish three degrees of anachronism. Some writers or speakers make little or no attempt at archaeological accuracy; others temper the generally anachronistic character of their compositions by occasional reference to the manners and customs of the period they are describing; and, again, there are a few trained students who succeed in drawing fairly accurate and consistent pictures of ancient life and history.

We will briefly consider the last two classes before returning to the first, in which we are chiefly interested.

Accurate archaeology is, of course, part of the ideal of the scientific historian. By long and careful study of literature and monuments and by the exercise of a lively and well-trained imagination, the student obtains a vision of ancient societies. Nineveh and Babylon, Thebes and Memphis, rise from their ashes and stand before him in all their former splendor; he walks their streets and mixes with the crowds in the market-place and the throng of worshippers at the temple, each “in his habit as he lived.” Rameses and Sennacherib, Ptolemy and Antiochus, all play their proper parts in this drama of his fancy. He cannot only recall their costumes and features: he can even think their thoughts and feel their emotions; he actually lives in the past. In “Marius the Epicurean,” in Eberss “Uarda,” in Masperos “Sketches of Assyrian and Egyptian Life,” and in other more serious works we have some of the fruits of this enlightened study of antiquity, and are enabled to see the visions at second hand and in some measure to live at once in the present and the past, to illustrate and interpret the one by the other, to measure progress and decay, and to understand the Divine meaning of all history. Our more recent histories and works on life and manners and even our historical romances, especially those of Walter Scott, have rendered a similar service to students of English history. And yet at its very best such realization of the past is imperfect; the gaps in our information are unconsciously filled in from experience, and the ideas of the present always color our reproduction of ancient thought and feeling. The most accurate history is only a rough approximation to exact truth; but, like many other rough approximations, it is exact enough for many important practical purposes.

But scholarly familiarity with the past has its drawbacks. The scholar may come to live so much amongst ancient memories that he loses touch with his own present. He may gain large stores of information about ancient Israelite life, and yet not know enough of his own generation to be able to make them sharers of his knowledge. Their living needs and circumstances lie outside his practical experience; he cannot explain the past to them because he does not sympathize with their present; he cannot apply its lessons to difficulties and dangers which he does not understand.

Nor is the usefulness of the archaeologist merely limited by his own lack of sympathy and experience. He may have both, and yet find that there are few of his contemporaries who can follow him in his excursions into bygone time. These limitations and drawbacks do not seriously diminish the value of archaeology, but they have to be taken into account in discussing teaching by anachronism, and they have an important bearing on the practical application of archaeological knowledge. We shall return to these points later on.

The second degree of anachronism is very common. We are constantly hearing and reading descriptions of Bible scenes and events in which the centuries before and after Christ are most oddly blended. Here and there will be a costume after an ancient monument, a Biblical description of Jewish customs, a few Scriptural phrases; but these are embedded in paragraphs which simply reproduce the social and religious ideas of the nineteenth century. For instance, in a recent work, amidst much display of archaeological knowledge, we have the very modern ideas that Joseph and Mary went up to Bethlehem at the census, because Joseph and perhaps Mary also had property in Bethlehem, and that when Joseph died “he left her a small but independent fortune.” Many modern books might be named in which Patriarchs and Apostles hold the language and express the sentiments of the most recent schools of devotional Christianity; and yet an air of historical accuracy is assumed by occasional touches of archaeology. Similarly in mediaeval miracle-plays characters from the Bible appeared in the dress of the period, and uttered a grotesque mixture of Scriptural phrases and vernacular jargon. Much of such work as this may for all practical purposes be classed under the third degree of anachronism. Sometimes, however, the spiritual significance of a passage or an incident turns upon a simple explanation of some ancient custom, so that the archaeological detail makes a clear addition to its interest and instructiveness. But in other cases a little archaeology is a dangerous thing. Scattered fragments of learned information do not enable the reader in any way to revive the buried past; they only remove the whole subject further from his interest and sympathy. He is not reading about his own day, nor does he understand that the events and personages of the narrative ever had anything in common with himself and his experience. The antique garb, the strange custom, the unusual phrase-disguise that real humanity which the reader shares with these ancient worthies. They are no longer men of like passions with himself, and he finds neither warning nor encouragement in their story. He is like a spectator of a drama played by poor actors with a limited stock of properties. The scenery and dresses show that the play does not belong to his own time, but they fail to suggest that it ever belonged to any period. He has a languid interest in the performance as a spectacle, but his feelings are not touched, and he is never carried away by the acting.

We have laid so much stress on the drawbacks attaching to a little archaeology because they will emphasize what we have to say about the use of pure anachronism. Our last illustration, however, reminds us that these drawbacks detract but little from the influence of earnest men. If the acting be good, we forget the scenery and costumes; the genius of a great preacher, more than atones for poor archaeology, because, in spite of dress and custom, he makes his hearers feel that the characters of the Bible were instinct with rich and passionate life. We thus arrive at our third degree of pure anachronism.

Most people read their Bible without any reference to archaeology. If they dramatize the stories, they do so in terms of their own experience. The characters are dressed like the men and women they know: Nazareth is like their native village, and Jerusalem is like the county town; the conversations are carried on in the English of the Authorized Version. This reading of Scripture is well illustrated by the description in a recent writer of a modern prophet in Tennessee:

“There was naught in the scene to suggest to a mind familiar with the facts an Oriental landscape-naught akin to the hills of Judaea. It was essentially of the New World, essentially of the Great Smoky Mountains. Yet ignorance has its license. It never occurred to Teck Jepson that his Bible heroes had lived elsewhere. Their history had to him an intimate personal relation, as of the story of an ancestor, in the homestead ways and closely familiar. He brooded upon these narratives, instinct with dramatic interest, enriched with poetic color, and localized in his robust imagination, till he could trace Hagars wild wanderings in the fastnesses, could show where Jacob slept and piled his altar of stones, could distinguish the bush, of all others on the bald, that blazed with fire from heaven when the angel of the Lord stood within it. Somehow, even in their grotesque variation, they lost no dignity in their transmission to the modern conditions of his fancy. Did the facts lack significance because it was along the gullied red clay roads of Piomingo Cove that he saw David, the smiling stripling, running and holding high in his hand the bit of cloth cut from Sauls garments while the king had slept in a cave at the base of Chilhowie Mountain? And how was the splendid miracle of translation discredited because Jepson believed that the chariot of the Lord had rested in scarlet and purple clouds upon the towering summit of Thunderhead, that Elijah might thence ascend into heaven?”

Another and more familiar example of “singular alterations in date and circumstances” is the version in “Ivanhoe” of the war between Benjamin and the other tribes:-

“How long since in Palestine a deadly feud arose between the tribe of Benjamin and the rest of the Israelitish nation; and how they cut to pieces well-nigh all the chivalry of that tribe; and how they swore by our blessed Lady that they would not permit those who remained to marry in their lineage; and how they became grieved for their vow, and sent to consult his Holiness the Pope how they might be absolved from it; and how, by the advice of the Holy Father, the youth of the tribe of Benjamin carried off from a superb tournament all the ladies who were there present, and thus won them wives without the consent either of their brides or their brides families.”

It is needless to say that the chronicler was not thus hopelessly at sea about the circumstances of ancient Hebrew history; but he wrote in the same simple, straightforward, childlike spirit. Israel had always been the Israel of his own experience, and it never occurred to him that its institutions under the kings had been other than those with which he was familiar. He had no more hesitation in filling up the gaps in the book of Kings from what he saw round about him than a painter would have in putting the white clouds and blue waters of today into a picture of skies and seas a thousand years ago. He attributes to the pious kings of Judah the observance of the ritual of his own times. Their prophets use phrases taken from post-Exilic writings. David is regarded as the author of the existing ecclesiastical system in almost all matters that do not date back to Moses, and especially as the organizer of the familiar music of the Temple. Davids choristers sing the hymns of the second Temple. Amongst the contributions of his nobles towards the building of the Temple, we read of ten thousand darics, the daric being a coin introduced by the Persian king Darius.

But we must be careful to recognize that the chronicler writes in perfect good faith. These views of the monarchy were common to all educated and thoughtful men of his time; they were embodied in current tradition, and were probably already to be met with in writing. To charge him with inventing them is absurd; they already existed, and did not need to be invented. He cannot have colored his narrative in the interests of the Temple and the priesthood. When he lived, these interests were guaranteed by ancient custom and by the authoritative sanction of the Pentateuchal Law. The chronicler does not write with the strong feeling of a man who maintains a doubtful cause; there is no hint of any alternative view which needs to be disproved and rejected in favor of his own. He expatiates on his favorite themes with happy, leisurely serenity, and is evidently confident that his treatment of them will meet with general and cordial approval.

And doubtless the author of Chronicles “served his own generation by the will of God,” and served them in the way he intended. He made the history of the monarchy more real and living to them, and enabled them to understand better that the reforming kings of Judah were loyal servants of Jehovah and had been used by Him for the furtherance of true religion. The pictures drawn by Samuel and Kings of David and the best of his successors would not have enabled the Jews of his time to appreciate these facts. They had no idea of any piety that was not expressed in the current observances of the Law, and Samuel and Kings did not ascribe such observances to the earlier kings of Judah. But the chronicler and his authorities were able to discern in the ancient Scriptures the genuine piety of David and Hezekiah and other kings, and drew what seemed to them the obvious conclusion that these pious kings observed the Law. They then proceeded to rewrite the history in order that the true character of the kings arm their relation to Jehovah might be made intelligible to the people. The only piety which the chronicler could conceive was combined with observance of the Law; naturally therefore it was only thus that he could describe piety. His work would be read with eager interest, and would play a definite and useful part in the religious education of the people. It would bring home to them, as the older histories could not, the abiding presence of Jehovah with Israel and its leaders. Chronicles interpreted history to its own generation by translating older records into the circumstances and ideas of its own time.

And in this it remains our example. Chronicles may fall very far short of the ideal and yet be superior to more accurate histories which fail to make themselves intelligible to their own generation. The ideal history no doubt would tell the story with archaeological precision, and then interpret it by modern parallels; the historian would show us what we should actually have seen and heard if we had lived in the period he is describing; he would also help our weak imagination by pointing us to such modern events or persons as best illustrate those ancient times. No doubt Chronicles fails to bring before our eyes an accurate vision of the history of the monarchy; but, as we have said, all history fails somewhat in this respect. It is simply impossible to fulfill the demand for history that shall have the accuracy of an architects plans of a house or an astronomers diagrams of the orbit of a planet. Chronicles, however, fails more seriously than most history, and on the whole rather more than most commentaries and sermons.

But this lack of archaeological accuracy is far less serious than a failure to make it clear that the events of ancient history were as real and as interesting as those of modern times, and that its personages were actual men and women, with a full equipment of body, mind, and soul. There have been many teachers and preachers, innocent of archaeology, who have yet been able to apply Bible narratives with convincing power to the hearts and consciences of their hearers. They may have missed some points and misunderstood others, but they have brought out clearly the main, practical teaching of their subject; and we must not allow amusement at curious anachronisms to blind us to their great gifts in applying ancient history to modern circumstances. For instance, the little captive maid in the story of Naaman has been described by a local preacher as having illuminated texts hung up in her bedroom, and (perambulators not being then in use) as having constructed a go-cart for the baby out of an old tea-chest and four cotton reels. We feel inclined to smile; but, after all, such a picture would make children feel that the captive maid was a girl whom they could understand and might even imitate. A more correct version of the story, told with less human interest, might leave the impression that she was a mere animated doll in a quaint costume, who made impossibly pious remarks.

Enlightened and well-informed Christian teachers may still learn something from the example of the chronicler. The uncritical character of his age affords no excuse to them for shutting their eyes to the fuller light which God has given to their generation. But we are reminded that permanently significant stories have their parallels in every age. There are always prodigal sons, and foolish virgins, importunate widows, and good Samaritans. The ancient narratives are interesting as quaint and picturesque stories of former times; but it is our duty as teachers to discover the modern parallels of their eternal meaning: their lessons are often best enforced by telling them afresh as they would have been told if their authors had lived in our time, in other words by a frank use of anachronism.

It may be objected that the result in the case of Chronicles is not encouraging. Chronicles is far less interesting than Kings, and far less useful in furnishing materials for the historian. These facts, however, are not inconsistent with the usefulness of the book for its own age. Teaching by anachronism simply seeks to render a service to its own generation; its purpose is didactic, and not historical. How many people read the sermons of eighteenth-century divines? But each generation has a right to this special service. The first duty of the religious teacher is for the men and women that look to him for spiritual help and guidance. He may incidentally produce literary work of permanent value for posterity; but a Church whose ministry sacrificed practical usefulness in the attempt to be learned and literary would be false to its most sacred functions. The noblest self-denial of Christian service may often lie in putting aside all such ambition and devoting the ability which might have made a successful author to making Divine truth intelligible and interesting to the uncultured and the unimaginative. Authors themselves are sometimes led to make a similar sacrifice; they write to help the many today when they might have written to delight men of literary taste in all ages. Few things are so ephemeral as popular religious literature; it is as quickly and entirely forgotten as last years sunsets: but it is as necessary and as useful as the sunshine and the clouds, which are being always spent and always renewed. Chronicles is a specimen of this class of literature, and its presence in the canon testifies to the duty of providing a special application of the sacred truths of ancient history for each succeeding generation.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary