4<\/strong>. moe<\/em> ] Cp. 1Ch 14:3<\/span>, note.<\/p>\n Among the sons of Eleazar<\/em> there were sixteen chief<\/em> men of the house of their fathers<\/em> ] R.V. of the sons of Eleazar there were sixteen, heads of fathers’ houses<\/strong>.<\/p>\n and eight among the sons of Ithamar according to the house of their fathers<\/em> ] R.V. and of the sons of Ithamar, according to their fathers’ houses, eight<\/strong>.<\/p>\n 4. there were more chief menfound<\/B>The Hebrew<\/I> may be translated, “There weremore men as to heads of the sons of Eleazar.” It is true, inpoint of fact, that by the census the number of individuals belongingto the family of Eleazar was found greater than in that of Ithamar.And this, of necessity, led to there being more fathers’ houses, andconsequently more chiefs or presidents in the former.<\/P><\/p>\n And there were more chief men found of the sons of Eleazar than of the sons of Ithamar<\/strong>,…. Or heads of men, heads of their fathers’ houses and families:<\/p>\n and thus were they divided; among the sons of Eleazar there were sixteen chief men of the house of their fathers, and eight among the sons of Ithamar, according to the house of their fathers<\/strong>; in all twenty four, and into so many classes or courses did David divide them; Jarchi says at first when the tabernacle was at Shiloh, there were but sixteen courses, eight from Eleazar, and eight from Ithamar, as is explained in the treatise of fasting n; but when David saw that there were more heads of men, or chief men of Eleazar’s, he divided the courses of Eleazar into two parts, and fixed sixteen courses; and the courses of Ithamar he established as at first, eight courses; left them as they were, which he thinks appears from 1Ch 24:6<\/span> but of the former number of courses, and when and by whom fixed, the Jews are divided o;<\/p>\n [See comments on Lu 1:5]<\/span>. Perhaps there were none before David’s time.<\/p>\n n T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 27. 1. o T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 27. 1.<\/p>\n As the sons of Eleazar proved to be more numerous in respect of the heads of the men than the sons of Ithamar, they (David, Zadok, and Ahimelech) divided them thus: “For the sons of Eleazar, heads of fathers’-houses, sixteen; and for the sons of Ithamar, (heads) of fathers’-houses, eight.” means neither in respect to the number of the men by the head (cf. 1Ch 23:3<\/span>), nor with respect to the chiefs of the men, divided according to their fathers’-houses (Berth.). The supplying of the words, “divided according to their fathers’-houses,” is perfectly arbitrary. The expression is rather to be explained by the fact that, according to the natural articulations of the people, the fathers’-houses, i.e., the groups of related families comprehended under the name , divided themselves further into individual households, whose heads were called , as is clear from Jos 7:16-18<\/span>, because each household had in the man, , its natural head. are therefore the heads, not of the fathers’-houses, but of the individual households, considered in their relation to the men as heads of households. Just as sa tsuJ .s is a technical designation of the larger groups of households into which the great families fell, so is the technical expression for the individual households into which the fathers’-houses fell.<\/p>\n (4) And there were more chief men found.<\/strong>Literally, And the sons of Eleazar were found more numerous as regards the heads of the men than the sons<\/em> of Ithamar.<\/em> The basis of division was not the individual members of the different families, but the heads of them. There were more head men, or heads of households, deriving from Eleazar than from Ithamar.<\/p>\n Chief men.<\/strong>Heb., heads of the men, i.e.,<\/em> heads of single families or households; just as heads of the fathers denotes heads of groups of fathers or clans. (Comp. Jos. 7:14<\/span>; Jos. 7:16-18<\/span>.) Of course, as the heads of households were more numerous, the total number of priests claiming descent from Eleazar must likewise have been more numerous than their kinsmen the Ithamarites.<\/p>\n And thus were they divided . . . fathers.<\/strong>Rather, And they divided them: to the sons of Eleazar, heads of father-houses, sixteen, and to the sons of Ithamar, to their father-houses, eight<\/em> (heads<\/em>). They<\/em> (i.e.,<\/em> David and the two high priests) divided them (1Ch. 24:3<\/span>.)<\/p>\n chief men = strong men. Hebrew. geber. App-14. Here denoting the heads of houses, or families. <\/p>\n more: 1Ch 15:6-12 <\/p>\n sons of Eleazar: Num 25:11-13 <\/p>\n according: 1Ch 23:24 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: 2Sa 8:17 – Zadok 2Ki 23:4 – priestss of the second order 1Ch 27:17 – of the Aaronites 2Ch 1:2 – the chief 2Ch 35:8 – rulers Jer 19:1 – the ancients of the people Mat 2:4 – the chief<\/p>\n 1Ch 24:4. Among the sons of Eleazar were sixteen chief men, &c. He appointed, therefore, sixteen courses of the sons of Eleazar, under as many heads of their families, and half as many of the posterity of Ithamar.<\/p>\n And there were more chief men found of the sons of Eleazar than of the sons of Ithamar; and [thus] were they divided. Among the sons of Eleazar [there were] sixteen chief men of the house of [their] fathers, and eight among the sons of Ithamar according to the house of their fathers. 4. moe … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Chronicles 24:4”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11031","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11031","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11031"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11031\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11031"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11031"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11031"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"