THE PEOPLE OF Judah were taken captive to Babylon because of their unfaithfulness. 2Now the first to resettle on their own property in their own towns were some Israelites, priests, Levites and temple servants.
3Those from Judah, from Benjamin, and from Ephraim and Manasseh who lived in Jerusalem were:
4Uthai son of Ammihud, the son of Omri, the son of Imri, the son of Bani, a descendant of Perez son of Judah.
5Of the Shilonites:
Asaiah the firstborn and his sons.
6Of the Zerahites:
Jeuel.
The people from Judah numbered 690.
7Of the Benjamites:
Sallu son of Meshullam, the son of Hodaviah, the son of Hassenuah;
8Ibneiah son of Jeroham; Elah son of Uzzi, the son of Micri; and Meshullam son of Shephatiah, the son of Reuel, the son of Ibnijah.
9The people from Benjamin, as listed in their genealogy, numbered 956. All these men were heads of their families.
10Of the priests:
Jedaiah; Jehoiarib; Jakin;
11Azariah son of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, the official in charge of the house of God;
12Adaiah son of Jeroham, the son of Pashhur, the son of Malkijah; and Maasai son of Adiel, the son of Jahzerah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Meshillemith, the son of Immer.
13The priests, who were heads of families, numbered 1,760. They were able men, responsible for ministering in the house of God.
14Of the Levites:
Shemaiah son of Hasshub, the son of Azrikam, the son of Hashabiah, a Merarite; 15Bakbakkar, Heresh, Galal and Mattaniah son of Mica, the son of Zicri, the son of Asaph; 16Obadiah son of Shemaiah, the son of Galal, the son of Jeduthun; and Berekiah son of Asa, the son of Elkanah, who lived in the villages of the Netophathites.
17The gatekeepers:
Shallum, Akkub, Talmon, Ahiman and their brothers, Shallum their chief 18being stationed at the King’s Gate on the east, up to the present time. These were the gatekeepers belonging to the camp of the Levites. 19Shallum son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his fellow gatekeepers from his family (the Korahites) were responsible for guarding the thresholds of the Tent just as their fathers had been responsible for guarding the entrance to the dwelling of the LORD. 20In earlier times Phinehas son of Eleazar was in charge of the gatekeepers, and the LORD was with him. 21Zechariah son of Meshelemiah was the gatekeeper at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting.
22Altogether, those chosen to be gatekeepers at the thresholds numbered 212. They were registered by genealogy in their villages. The gatekeepers had been assigned to their positions of trust by David and Samuel the seer. 23They and their descendants were in charge of guarding the gates of the house of the LORD—the house called the Tent. 24The gatekeepers were on the four sides: east, west, north and south. 25Their brothers in their villages had to come from time to time and share their duties for seven-day periods. 26But the four principal gatekeepers, who were Levites, were entrusted with the responsibility for the rooms and treasuries in the house of God. 27They would spend the night stationed around the house of God, because they had to guard it; and they had charge of the key for opening it each morning.
28Some of them were in charge of the articles used in the temple service; they counted them when they were brought in and when they were taken out. 29Others were assigned to take care of the furnishings and all the other articles of the sanctuary, as well as the flour and wine, and the oil, incense and spices. 30But some of the priests took care of mixing the spices. 31A Levite named Mattithiah, the firstborn son of Shallum the Korahite, was entrusted with the responsibility for baking the offering bread. 32Some of their Kohathite brothers were in charge of preparing for every Sabbath the bread set out on the table.
33Those who were musicians, heads of Levite families, stayed in the rooms of the temple and were exempt from other duties because they were responsible for the work day and night.
34All these were heads of Levite families, chiefs as listed in their genealogy, and they lived in Jerusalem.
35Jeiel the father of Gibeon lived in Gibeon.
His wife’s name was Maacah, 36and his firstborn son was Abdon, followed by Zur, Kish, Baal, Ner, Nadab, 37Gedor, Ahio, Zechariah and Mikloth. 38Mikloth was the father of Shimeam. They too lived near their relatives in Jerusalem.
39Ner was the father of Kish, Kish the father of Saul, and Saul the father of Jonathan, Malki-Shua, Abinadab and Esh-Baal.
40The son of Jonathan:
Merib-Baal, who was the father of Micah.
41The sons of Micah:
Pithon, Melech, Tahrea and Ahaz.
42Ahaz was the father of Jadah, Jadah was the father of Alemeth, Azmaveth and Zimri, and Zimri was the father of Moza. 43Moza was the father of Binea; Rephaiah was his son, Eleasah his son and Azel his son.
44Azel had six sons, and these were their names:
Azrikam, Bokeru, Ishmael, Sheariah, Obadiah and Hanan. These were the sons of Azel.
Original Meaning
THIS CONCLUDING GENEALOGY explains the genealogical introduction of the Chronicler’s history. The list of families resettling Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile joins the present to the past. It is through this extensive prologue cataloging the names of Hebrew ancestors that the restoration community is directly linked to the twelve patriarchs of Israel. As noted elsewhere, the purpose of the genealogical introduction was twofold: (1) to legitimize the restoration community as the rightful heirs of the promises made to the patriarchs and kings of Israel, and (2) to bolster the morale of those Hebrews returning to Judah from Babylonia and inspire full participation in the restoration initiative.
Families Resettling Jerusalem (9:1b–34)
THE PARAGRAPH STRUCTURE at the beginning of the section is rendered variously, frequently broken at 9:1b (so NIV, NLT) or at 9:2 (so NRSV, NKJV). The repetition of “Israel” in 2:1 and 9:1a suggests an envelope construction encasing the genealogies of 2:1–9:1a as a complete literary unit. First Chronicles 9:1a makes reference to a “book” containing genealogical records, perhaps a royal census list identified by the Chronicler as the resource for his own genealogical catalog.1 The genealogy as a whole calls attention to the priests, Levites, and temple personnel resettling Jerusalem. The citations to the tribe of Benjamin at the beginning of the list serve as a bridge between the genealogy of Benjamin (ch. 8) and the account of Saul’s kingship (9:35–10:14, including the Chronicler’s final genealogy, the Benjamite lineage of King Saul in 9:35–44).
Biblical commentators have noted the similarities between 9:1–17 and Nehemiah 11:3–19. It is unclear whether Nehemiah and Chronicles share a common source or if one of the accounts is the source of the other.2 The genealogy itself is segmented in that it demonstrates both breadth (the listing of a single generation from a common ancestor, e.g., 9:5) and depth (the listing of successive generations, e.g., 9:4). In addition to the common genealogical subfeatures identified previously (e.g., the tally [a cardinal number attached to the genealogical record, 9:6]), this genealogy also includes the subgenera of job description and schedule (e.g., 9:22–28).3
The introduction (9:2–3) to the list of people resettling Judah after the Babylonian exile subtly confirms the linkage of the postexilic Jewish community with earlier national Israel. The parallel in Nehemiah 11:4 mentions only two tribes (Judah and Benjamin), whereas the Chronicler cites the representatives of four tribes in the resettlement of Jerusalem (Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh). His reference to people returning to “their own property” (ʾaḥuzzah) translates a term used rarely in Chronicles (elsewhere only 1 Chron. 7:28; 2 Chron. 11:14; 31:1). This word may be used to describe “ancestral property” and is associated with the Israelite settlement of Canaan as prescribed by Moses (e.g., Lev. 14:34; 25:10) and implemented by Joshua (Josh. 22:4, 9, 19).
The Chronicler’s report of the reoccupation of Jerusalem (9:3) is another important tie between the present and the past for the postexilic community. The resettling of Jerusalem is a sure sign of God’s blessing and a hopeful omen since the prophetic promises for the rebuilding of the nation of Israel are centered in the city of David (Isa. 44:26, 28; Jer. 33:16).
The Chronicler abbreviates the list of descendants of Judah (9:4–6) found in the parallel of Nehemiah 11:4–6. It is possible that the names of the family leaders Uthai and Asaiah are alternate forms of Athaiah (Neh. 11:4) and Maaseiah (Neh. 11:5) respectively. The Chronicler also adds the family of Jeuel, an otherwise unknown Judahite leader. But the genealogy does correspond to the three traditional branches of the tribe of Judah recognized elsewhere, including the clans of Perez, Shelah (the “Shilonites” for the Chronicler), and Zerah (cf. Num. 26:20). The difference in tabulations (468 in Neh. 11:6 and 690 in 1 Chron. 9:6) may be due to the breadth of the census takings (“men” specified in Neh. 11:6, “people” in 1 Chron. 9:6). The Chronicler’s total may also reflect the growth in the families of Judah from the earlier census of Nehemiah.
The Chronicler’s list of the descendants of Benjamin (9:7–9) contains even more variation from the parallel account in Nehemiah 11:7–9 than the Judahite genealogy. The two genealogies have only one name in common (Sallu), and Chronicles lists four family heads while Nehemiah cites only one. Numerous solutions have been proposed for reconciling the differences in the two records, but suffice to say that each writer makes selective use of a common and more complete genealogical record.4 As with the genealogy of Judah, the totals for the census of the Benjamites increase slightly from 928 (Neh. 11:8) to 956 people counted (1 Chron. 9:9).
Characteristic of the Chronicler’s style, the list of priestly descendants resettling Jerusalem (9:10–13) is also abbreviated when compared to the parallel account in Nehemiah 11:10–14. In addition, Chronicles cites six heads of families whereas Nehemiah mentions only five. The Chronicler’s list also shows some variation in the spelling of certain names. The number of priests has increased significantly (1,760 in 1 Chron. 9:13) over the tally in Nehemiah (1,192 in Neh. 11:12–14). Both census takings, however, number less than half of the priests who initially returned from exile (4,289; cf. Ezra 2:36–39 = Neh. 7:39–42). This may indicate even priests were reluctant to live in the ruined shell of Jerusalem upon return from Babylonia (cf. Neh. 11:1–2). Selman and others are correct in suggesting that the phrase “official in charge of the house of God” is an equivalent for “high priest” (1 Chron. 9:11; cf. 2 Chron. 31:10, 13).5
As one might expect, the Chronicler (9:14–16) slightly expands the genealogy of the Levites when compared to the parallel in Nehemiah 11:15–18, mentioning seven family leaders among the eighteen names listed (versus six family leaders and sixteen names in Nehemiah). This may be the result of an updating of the records in Chronicles. Curiously, the Chronicler omits any tally (whereas 284 Levites are counted in Neh. 11:18).
The families of Shemaiah, Mattaniah, and Obadiah are emphasized because they represent the important descendants of the Levitical tribal organization, Merari, Asaph, and Jeduthun. Asaph and Jeduthun are significant because they were heads of musical guilds organized by King David for temple worship (cf. 1 Chron. 25:1–3). According to Nehemiah 12:28–29, the villages of the Netophathites were home to the Levitical singers. The town of Netophath was located only about three miles southeast of Bethlehem; historically it was connected with Caleb (1 Chron. 2:54) and David (2 Sam. 23:28–29).
The Chronicler’s section on the gatekeepers is an extensive expansion of a single verse in Nehemiah (Neh. 11:19). The gatekeepers are numbered with the Levites (1 Chron. 9:26) and form a separate class in the catalog of priests, Levites, and other temple ministers and servants. In addition to their Levitical descent, this listing emphasizes their exemplary behavior in heeding the call to live in Jerusalem (9:22, 25) and in their self-sacrificing spirit as they willingly accept additional tasks (9:26–32). The essential function of a gatekeeper was “guarding the thresholds of the Tent … the entrance to the dwelling of the LORD” (9:19).
Four chief gatekeepers are identified, as there were four entrances to the temple precincts. A gate was located on each of the cardinal compass points, with the east gate being the most important. This gate was the King’s Gate and faced the entrance to the temple sanctuary (9:18; cf. Ezek. 46:2). According to 1 Chronicles 26:13, the gate assignments of the chief gatekeepers were originally determined by the casting of lots. The gatekeepers worked their shifts in pairs for seven-day periods (9:25), and in all they manned twenty-two stations around the clock (26:17–18). The census of Nehemiah tallies 172 gatekeepers (Neh. 11:19), and by the time of the Chronicler that total has increased to 212 gatekeepers (1 Chron. 9:22).
Selman has conveniently outlined the section treating the gatekeepers according to the basic aspects of their temple ministry: authority (9:17–23), leadership (9:24–27), and tasks (9:28–32).6 The authority of the gatekeepers rested in their genealogical association with the Levites through Korah (9:18–19) and their spiritual association with Phinehas, who supervised the gatekeepers during the days of Moses (9:20; cf. Num. 25:7–13). As if to emphasize the point by “name-dropping,” the Chronicler adds the fact that the position of gatekeeper itself was formally constituted by the likes of Samuel and David (1 Chron. 9:22; cf. 23:4–5).
The gatekeepers provided leadership in the day-to-day operations of the temple by continually guarding the premises and its contents and opening the gates for temple services every morning (9:27). In addition, the gatekeepers supported the temple ministries by maintaining the furniture and the implements used in the worship rituals and by preparing the ingredients required for the priestly sacrifices and offerings (9:29–30).
It has been suggested the anomalous inclusion of the unnamed temple musicians is a concession to a group of disgruntled Levites who feel they have been slighted by their more prominent associates.7 But it seems more likely they are included for the sake of completeness in the recitation of priestly ministries connected with the temple.8 The word translated “musicians” (so NIV, NLT) literally signifies “singers” (so NKJV, NRSV). It is unclear if the singers are the Levites mentioned in 9:14–16 or gatekeepers (9:17–32) who double as temple musicians. The singers are exempt from work routinely associated with the Levitical job description since they minister “night and day” (much like the gatekeepers, 9:27; cf. Ps. 134:1; Isa. 30:29). Interestingly, the Chronicler’s stylized genealogical record of all Israel, past and present, represents the religious ideal for God’s people. The focal point of the genealogies is Jerusalem and the services of temple worship orchestrated by the priests and Levites.9
The conclusion to the list of people resettling Jerusalem (9:34) essentially repeats 8:28 (with the addition of the word “Levite”). The verse serves as a transition between the Levitical musicians (9:33) and the genealogy of Saul (9:35–44). Most commentators note the echo of “Jerusalem” marks an inclusion with 9:3 and forms an envelope construction for the section (an “artistic touch,” according to Japhet10).
Braun remarks how striking it is that this postexilic genealogy cites no Judahite connected with the Davidic ideal since King David dominates the remaining history of 1 Chronicles.11 Actually this should come as no surprise since as early as Malachi’s day prophetic appeal to the family of David ceased, implying they were no longer a factor in the restoration community.12 The Chronicler seems to assume the fate of postexilic Judah lies in the hands of the priests and Levites for an interim period until such time as God raises up a successor to the Davidic ideal (cf. Jer. 33:17; Ezek. 34:23–24; 37:25).
Genealogy of Saul (9:35–44)
THIS GENEALOGY REPEATS the register of Saul’s family tree (with minor variations) found in 8:29–38 as one segment of the genealogy of Benjamin. Japhet has noted that the parallel passage of the genealogy of Saul in 9:35–44 preserves three names not found in 8:29–38: Jeiel (9:35; cf. 8:29), Ner (9:36; cf. 8:30), and Mikloth (9:37; cf. 8:32).13 Beyond this, there are variants in six of the names recorded in the two genealogies: Zeker/Zechariah (8:31/9:37), Shimeah/Shimeam (8:32/9:38), Merib-Baal/Meribaal (8:34/9:40, lit.), Tarea/ Tahrea (8:35/9:41), Jehoaddah/Jarah (8:36/9:42), and Raphah/Rephaiah (8:37/9:43). These minor variations may be explained as either textual corruption (e.g., Jaʿadah/Jaʿarah) or to an ongoing process of transformation of names because of language changes over time.14 See further comments on 8:29–40, above.
Bridging Contexts
THE CONCLUDING GENEALOGY fixes attention on an issue common to God’s people in both the old and new covenants, namely, leadership during an interim or transition period. The prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel predicted a royal figure would arise after the Exile and rule in righteousness after the example of King David (Jer. 33:15; Ezek. 34:23). The restoration process in postexilic Israel has been underway for more than a century by the time the Chronicler writes, but the Davidic ideal is still unrealized. The concluding genealogy indicates the Levitical priests assume they are the interim caretakers of the destiny of regathered Israel until such time as the Davidic prince establishes his rule.
In part, this hierocracy (rule by a priestly class) is based on the legitimacy of recognized “office gifts” ordained by God for the political and spiritual direction of Israel. Specifically mentioned are the offices of priest, sage, and prophet (cf. Jer. 18:18; Ezek. 7:26). The role of the priest is primarily one of instructor in the law of God, offering both exhortation and rebuke. This educational function of the priesthood is necessary in order to ready God’s people to receive the future rule of the Davidic prince. The emphasis on the sacred duties for each of the priestly guilds recorded in the final genealogy suggests they take Malachi’s earlier message to heart and apply themselves to proper ministry and instruction (cf. Mal. 2:1–9).
A similar situation faces the church today as God’s people await the second advent of Jesus Christ, promised to those who witnessed his ascension and the sure hope of the church in every generation (Acts 1:11; 1 Thess. 4:16–17). The crisis of leadership during the interim period is averted by the bestowal of a new set of “office gifts” designed to instruct and direct the church of God until such time the Son of David returns to establish his kingdom of righteousness. As in the case of the Old Testament, God has ordained by his Holy Spirit that some should serve the church in leadership roles: apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers (Eph. 4:11).
According to Paul, these “office gifts” also have a didactic function, expressly designed “to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up” (Eph. 4:12). Since there is one Spirit (4:4), it is clear that the same Holy Spirit empowering leadership in the church also enabled those exercising “office gifts” in ancient Israel.15 Unlike the Old Testament, however, the New Testament brings an added dimension to the work of the Holy Spirit among the people of God in the form of a variety of “spiritual gifts” distributed to every Christian “for the common good” (of the church as the body of Christ, 1 Cor. 12:7). The Chronicler’s genealogy links the different orders of the priesthood to particular responsibilities and ministry tasks (1 Chron. 9:10–21). So too, each one should use whatever gift he or she has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms (1 Peter 4:10).
Contemporary Significance
FRESH STARTS. The concluding genealogy of the Chronicler’s prologue has proven a rich lode for biblical commentators in mining theological nuggets for life application. One important lesson—and a recurring theme in Chronicles—is the fact that the Babylonian exile did not annul God’s covenant of grant with Abraham and Sarah (Gen. 12:1–3). God is eternally faithful to his Word (cf. Ps. 111:5). The roster of postexilic inhabitants of Jerusalem only serves to affirm the assertion of Lamentations that the mercies of God are indeed new every morning and his faithfulness is surely great (Lam. 3:22–23). For this reason the Hebrew poet was certain that God’s people “are not cast off by the Lord forever” (Lam. 3:31). The Chronicler offers the resettlement of Jerusalem as indisputable proof that the hope kindled among the exiles for the eventual restoration of Israel has not been misplaced.
A second vital truth emerges from the Chronicler’s concluding genealogy, namely, that divine restoration makes human reconciliation possible. This is demonstrated in the common resettling of Israelites formerly identified and separated by the political descriptors “northern tribes” and “southern tribes.”16 Most likely the Chronicler recognizes the resettlement of Jerusalem as the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy concerning the joining of the two sticks etched with the names “Israel” and “Judah” (Ezek. 37:15–28).
The biblical principle of reconciliation also illustrates a basic attribute of God, his oneness. Even as God is One as Creator and Father, so he works to bring this ideal of “oneness” to the human experience in marriage and family and in the life of the religious community (cf. Mal. 2:10, 15). The biblical teaching of human reconciliation through divine restoration is a welcome message in our age of ever-widening “gaps” between people, whether age, race, or gender, and of broken family and marital relationships.
A third lesson is the cogent reminder that the Chronicler’s genealogies speak to the church as much as they spoke to postexilic Israel because in our times of smallness and defeatism, we need to recall those biblical declarations indicating that we too are the heirs of God’s promises for restoration (Rom. 8:17; Gal. 4:7; 2 Peter 1:4).17 This is essentially the modus operandi of the writer to the Hebrews in the New Testament. This letter seeks to encourage Christians in the throes of doubt and despair because of both persecution and false teaching by reminding them of their location in the “spiritual genealogy,” that “great cloud of witnesses” who are our ancestors in faith in God’s promises (Heb. 12:1).
Perhaps most significant, however, is the idea that the story of Israel is a story of “fresh starts” by God’s grace.18 In fact, the story of the Bible is the story of God making and remaking, “doing new things” (Isa. 43:19; cf. Jer. 31:22). Whether by raising up a courageous judge, a righteous king, or a fiery prophet, God lovingly “jump-starts” his relationship with the nation of Israel over and over again after their covenant failures (cf. Deut. 30:3; Jer. 33:25–26).
The Psalms indicate the faithful individual also experiences the compassion of God in the assurance of a fresh start after a lapse into doubt or sin (cf. Ps. 30:5; 40:3; 51:12). Even the Hebrew system of marking time is imprinted with the principle of “fresh starts” by God’s grace in the celebration of the New Moon festival—a new beginning in pilgrimage with God each month (Num. 10:10; 28:11–14). God never hesitates or wearies of “returning” to his people when they “return” to him—and he is always careful to leave in his wake the blessing of new beginning (Zech. 1:3; Mal. 3:7; cf. Hos. 6:1–2).
The New Testament, especially the Gospels and Acts, tells a similar story. There one reads of dramatic examples of “fresh starts,” people whose lives are changed because of an encounter with Jesus of Nazareth. Whether blind or lame, fisherman or prostitute, Jew or Samaritan, those touched by the ministry of Jesus Christ experience a “fresh start” by God’s grace. The radical transformation of these new beginnings is underscored by the verbs used in connection with the ministry of Jesus. The Gospel accounts employ numerous terms to describe the metamorphosis in people who “meet” Jesus, including “cleansed” (Luke 17:14), “cured” (Mark 1:42), “forgiven” (Matt. 9:2), “healed” (Luke 4:40), and “restored” (Mark 3:5). In commenting on this idea of a “fresh start” by God’s grace, perhaps with his own remarkable experience in mind, the apostle Paul says that if anyone is in Christ, that person is a new creation; “the old has gone, the new has come” (2 Cor. 5:17).
The story of “fresh starts” initiated by the grace of God is not confined to biblical history. As one reads church history, whether patristic, Byzantine, medieval, Reformation, or modern, there is a delightful repetition in the annals of Christian faith. The biographies of scholastics like Jerome and Aquinas, mystics like John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila, monastics like St. Francis and Mother Teresa, reformers like Calvin and Luther, revivalists like Wesley and Whitefield, and evangelists like Moody and Graham all have at least one chapter in common—a life given a fresh start by the grace of God. In one sense, church history is the never-ending story of new beginnings for the “bride” of Jesus Christ as God continues to build, revive, and purify the church through ordinary people empowered for extraordinary service by the Holy Spirit.
These new beginnings, flashing like meteor showers across the timeline of church history, testify to the faithfulness of God through the ages. They also confirm the biblical affirmation that God shows his gracious love to a thousand generations (Ex. 20:6). But perhaps most significant, they foreshadow that grand finale showcasing God’s marvelous capacity for “fresh starts”—the re-creation of heaven and earth!
He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” Then he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.” (Rev. 21:5; cf. Isa. 65:17)
The reality that God is a God of “fresh starts” means there is always hope for people in a tired and dismal world desperate for the chance to start over. The degree of futility connected with the “fresh starts” manufactured by secular culture (i.e., diet crazes, fashion fads, pop-culture trends, exotic therapies, etc.) may be measured by the frequency of their turnover—almost weekly! The enduring message of the church is one of hope that does not disappoint (Rom. 5:5), of lasting righteousness and salvation (Isa. 51:6, 8). The lifestyle of the Christian is one of “hopeful joy” while awaiting that “blessed hope”—the glorious appearing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (Rom. 12:12; Titus 2:13).