16

Joseph's sons were Ephraim and Manasseh, Gen. 41:51 Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh: “For God has made me forget all my toil and all my father’s house.” Gen. 41:52 And the name of the second he called Ephraim: “For God has caused me to be fruitful in the land of my affliction.” These became, in a sense, Jacob's sons: Gen. 48:5 And now ...


12

This is just by way of postscript and supplement to a (good!) answer already provided. The lists of tribes given in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament typically are as @Niobius describes: Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, replace both Joseph and Levi, most obviously in the tribal settlements during the "conquests" of Joshua/Judges. This is also how they ...


7

Context(s) The context for 1 Chronicles 16:22 is, obviously, 1 Chronicles 16. This is the Chronicler's account of David's finally successful efforts to bring the Ark to Jerusalem, expanded over the parallel version in 2 Samuel 6. One of the most striking differences is that the Chronicler supplies the song that was sung as the Ark processed into Jerusalem. ...


6

What an excellent question! Aaron had four sons: two died an early death with no survivors, and the other two sons survived:-- Eleazar and Ithamar. Thus the Levites who served as priests at the time of David are all descended from one of these two priestly lines. In the Hebrew Bible, when we see the Ahimelech(father)/Abiathar(son) team, these two are the ...


6

It cannot be deduced that Naphtali had sex with Bilhah by the Biblical texts. 1 Chronicles 7:13 is not saying that Naphtali had his children with Bilhah. Bilhah is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 7:13 because Naphtali was her second son by Jacob, according to Genesis 30:1-8. Naphtali's sons can be rightly called her sons as well. In fact, some translations render ...


5

There is little help for discerning the Chronicler's understanding of the phrase highlighted by OP. But, there are some observations to draw on: The Text The key verse cited has a parallel in Samuel: 1 Chr 17:5 ≈ 2 Sam 7:6. The main differences come at the end of the verse - 1 Chr 17:5b וָֽאֶהְיֶ֛ה מֵאֹ֥הֶל אֶל־אֹ֖הֶל וּמִמִּשְׁכָּֽן׃ = wāʾehyeh ...


5

No. Only Reuven slept with Bilhah. When it says "בְּנֵ֥י בִלְהָֽה" ("[these are the] sons of Bilhah"), it is not referring only to the four sons of Naftali mentioned in verse 13, but to all of the descendants of Bilhah mentioned, from verse 1 to verse 13. This is parallel to the verses in Genesis 46:23-25: וּבְנֵי־דָ֖ן חֻשִֽׁים׃ וּבְנֵ֖י ...


4

That's an interesting question. Jabez isn't mentioned anywhere else, he just appears, prays, and disappears again. I think that given the tone of this interjection, the chronicler's point was theological in nature. This fits with the overall theme of 1-2 Chronicles, which was written after the Jew's return from exile to remind them of God's covenant ...


4

Because it's not entirely a genealogy Korah also appears in 1 Chron 6:38, so it is unlikely this his rebellion in Numbers 16 was the cause of him being omitted from a later chapter in 1 Chron. The one "son of Izhar" mentioned in your verse, 23:18, is Shelomith, who is not among Izhar's sons listed in Exodus 6:21, Korah, Nepheg, and Zichri. It's not only ...


3

There are multiple reasons why God would not have "punished" David for this. The primary answer is that David did not touch the ark. The death of Uzza is explicitly tied to that fact in 1 Chr 13:10 (NKJV, bold added): Then the anger of the LORD was aroused against Uzza, and He struck him because he put his hand to the ark; and he died there before God. ...


3

They are the indeed the same. Just as this is the same Elkanah from Exodus 6:24. He is not listed as from the tribe of Ephraim in 1 Samuel 1. He is listed only as an Ephraimite (or Ephrathite as some translations use the word) in the sense that he lived in the land of Ephraim. This can be a bit confusing at times and the precursor of a geographical ...


3

I did a little google search and found that there is also a mention of a Jozabad in 1 Chronicles 12:4 and it appears that this is one of the Benjamite archers who joined David at Ziklag and in 1 Chronicles 12:20 it(my source) only gives a definition for one of them (I assume the other Jozabad), a chief of the tribe of Manasseh. I looked at other versions ...


3

This same observation has been made before about Elishama/Elishua in these same verses (see KJV). If there's a story here, we can't really know what it is from the text. Options may include: it's possible that the later children were given this name because the previous child of the same name died. perhaps these children were named by their mothers. ...


3

The NASB translation notes that the sentence Abshai the brother of Joab was chief of the thirty comes from the Syriac. In the MT there is no contradiction between these two verses: Jashobeam is chief of the thirty (ketiv) or chief of the officers (qere), and Abshai is chief of the three. So the contradiction comes from the mix between the MT and Syriac (but ...


2

TL:DR - Hebrew genealogies are sometimes exact, but sometimes they are a less exact line of succession with a theological purpose. Differences in purpose can account for the differences in similar genealogies. The Purpose of Hebrew Genealogies In order to understand the answer first here are some some general insights into Hebrew Genealogies. Hebrew ...


2

Assyria seized control of all of Aram (Syria) and the northern kingdom of Israel in a single military operation during the Syro-Ephraimite War, c.734-732 BCE. Only the highland region of Ephraim (Samaria) survived the war relatively untrampled. It retained the name 'Israel', though only for a decade until it too was destroyed. Current scholarship suggests ...


2

The Idea in Brief The last section of Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar indicates that this specific verse contains aposiopesis, which provides for the awkward structure of the verse. That is, Jabez promises that the "if the Lord does (this and that) and..." and yet nonetheless the passage does NOT include any reference to what Jabez did in response to his vows. In ...


2

The evidence, and the consensus of critical scholars, is that the Deuteronomic History (Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings and 2 Kings), written before the Babylonian Exile, was the main source for the Book of Chronicles (now 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles), but that the author of Chronicles probably had other material available as well. Chronicles ...


2

While Joseph's answer has much to commend it, I feel it is headed in the wrong direction. I don't think there is a need to suppose two sets of Abiathars and Ahimelechs where one is father-son and the other vice versa. First, 1 Kings 2:26-27 is clear that it was indeed the so-called "good" Abiathar it's talking about since verse 27 notes that his life was ...


2

Sorry to come in late here, but I don't see the ancient Jewish sources cited in any of the answers. There are two issues here: (1) who instigated David to conduct a census and (2) was the sin that David had a census taken, or the way he had it done? First, let's look at the verse in 2 Samuel 24. Translations differ on a key point -- who was it that ...


2

One thing to consider is that the Zerubbabel in Chronicles is not the same as the Zerubbabel in the New Testament. Chronicles lists Zerubbabel as the son of Pedaiah and Nephew of Salathiel, son of Jehoiachin (Jeconiah). Some think this is in error and try to force the NT Zerubbabel in there because of Matthew. This is clearly a misunderstanding, as God ...


2

The New Testament genealogies of Jesus contain many puzzles, of which the family surrounding Salathiel (Shealtiel) is just one: Matthew, in agreement with 1 Chronicles 3:17, says that Salathiel was the son of Jechonias, whereas Luke says that he was the son of Neri. Whereas Jechonias was a king, Neri was a commoner, from a long line of commoners, so there ...


2

The Targum Chronicles seems to clarify the Hebrew. Targum Chronicles (I) 28:19 כולא בכתבא מן ידא דייי הוה עלי לאסתכלא בכל עבידת צורתא׃ The term in bold is the Aramaic ethpaal infinitive, which is translating the Hebrew hiphil perfect third masculine singular form of sakal, and so the literal yet very sensible translation from the Targum into English ...


2

The Levites were granted inheritance among the children of Israel so Elkanah, the father of Samuel, could be both a Levite (by birth) and an Ephraimite (by location of neighbourhood). However Robert Young, in his Analytical Concordance, lists 8 different Elkanahs in scripture and appears to treat the Levite as other than Samuel's father due to a gap of 320 ...


2

In this post I will not address the problem with the NASB's choice to translate "head of thirty" both in v. 11 and v. 20, for this @ba has already provided an illuminating answer. My intention is only to provide what I think is the best and most accurate translation for v. 11 and v. 20, and I hope this will shed some light on this very confusing topic. ...


1

Great question. In this case it is quite obvious that the verse in Chronicles is the original text. The text as is preserved in Chronicles reads smoothly: Jashobeam, the Hakmonite (literally: son of Hakmoni) is a chief officer for David and killed 300 people with his spear. The text in Samuel however is badly corroded and fragmented that it is barely ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible