The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Chronicles — Section 388

the one bo.nd, and " the princes of God " on the return of some of the descende.n ts of the other, is not very clear. One instance of this family, see Ezre. ii. 36; Neh. vii. ll9; the former expression is found in Isa. xliii. comp. also Neh. xii. 6, 7, 19, 21.) 28. Keil supposes there may be no dis- Yer. 8.-Xarim (see Barrin<>ton'e 'Genea- tinction between them, but e.dds that if logies,' i. 94, 99, 151, 169; se~ e.leo for th0 there is, he would tRke the " princes of mention of descendants, Ezra ii. 39; x. 21 : God " to ste.nd for the regular high priests Neh. vii. 42; x. 5; xii. 4 (where the name exclu•ively, viz. those who could enter into appears as Rehum), 15). The sons of He.rim the most holy pie.ea before God. The mentioned in Ezra ii. 32: x. 31; Neh. vii. "princes of God" is a title evidently illus- 35: x. 27, were not e. priest-family. Seorim. trated by tl!.e word "Israel" (Gen. xxxil. This no.me does not occur again. 28). Ver. 9.-lltalchije.h. An earlier priest of Ver. 6.-Tbe person who e.cted as clerk this se.me no.me is mentioned in eh. ix. 12, or secretary on the occe.sion, e.nd the whole who is ago.in mentioned in Neh. xi. 12; Jer. number of the witnesses, e.nd the lot- xxi. I : xxxviii. 1. The name in our present tl\king itself, e.re here given. The present verse is probably the ea.me (but used to mark Hebrew text repeats the word 11:11$ (taken) a family e.nd not the individual) as that foun,l twice, before the name of Ithame.r, e.t the in Neh. x. 3 (see also Neh. xii. 42), The end of the sentence. The evident and easy Malchijah of Neh. iii. 11 e.nd Ezra x. 25 is correction of the first occurrence of which the no.me of an Isre.elitish layman. Mijamin. into 1nN (one) will make the clause e.nd sense In like me.oner, this as a family name reap- corrcsp~nd with what goes before. Ber- pears in Neh. x. 7; xii. 5 (in the form theau, however, and Keil, e.nd some others Miamin), 17, 41 (in the form Minicimin); do not accept this correction, e.nd would see also 2 Cbron. xxxi. 15, where the keep the present Hebrew text, the first• Septuagint, !he Yulgo.te, e.nd the Peshito named, moreover, contending the.t the repe- Syria.a road Benjamin. The name as of a tition of the word for " taking" points to layman also appears in Ezra x. 25. two lots being represented by each house of Ver. 10.-Xe.kkoz. The first half of this Itho.me.r, whose total number wo.s only word is the definite article, as m,iy be seen eight, for one of Eleazar, whose total was in Neh. iii. 4, 21 and Ezi-e. ii. 61, where sixteen. Not only does the repetition of the no.me is found, as in the cases above, for the present Hebrew text not o.vail to autho- the priest-family. Abija.h (see a.gain N eh. rize such e. supposition, bnt the supposition x. 7 : Luke i. 5). To this course, therefore, itself would be unsupported e.nd gratuitous. Zacharias, father of John the Baptist, be- What is really told us amounts to this only, longed. tbe.t the drnwing was first from the collec- Yer. 11.-Jeehue.h. In Ezre. ii. 36 and tion of families under the no.me of Elee.ze.r, Neh. vii. 39 certain "children of Jedo.iah," and then from the.t descended from !the.mar. who returned from Babylon, are mentioned For anything we e.re here told, the urn of RB belonging to the " house of J eshuo.," lthame.r cau he.ve held out only ho.If as long and distinguished presumably thereby from as that of Elce.zar, and it can be only con- children of another J ede.ie.h. This accords jecture to suppose that two lots were drawn with the fa.et that in Neh. xii. 6, 7, and e.guiu from the uru of Eleo.z11r for every one from in 19, 21, two families of the name J edo.io.h th11t of Itho.mo.r, so o.s to make them run are given in the priest-lists. We may, out together at t.he end. Could o.ny one of therefore, conclude that families descended the nanies from sixteen to twenty-four the.t from the J eshuo.h of our present verse were o.re recorded in this ch11pter as "coming among those who returned from captivity forth" in the shape of a " lot," be identified (Ezre. ii. 36; Neh. vii. 39). Sheoanie.h (see o.s belouging to families descended from Neh. xii. 3, where spelt Shechaniah). Of Itho.mar, the question might be solved. those similarly named in Ezra viii. 3, 5, the Ahimeleoh the son of Abiathe.r i read, as former may possibly have been descendunts above, ver. :-1, eh. xviii. 16, etc., .iib-iathar of this Shece.nillh, the latter not so. the son of Ahimelech. Ver. 12.-Eliashib, Not the progenitor Yer. 7.-J'ehoiarib. Written thus only of the Elie.shib of Neh. iii. 1, 20, 21: for here e.nd in eh. ix. 10: elsewhere alwe.ys see eh. xii. 10, 22, 23, for the pedigree of the Joiarib, He then is the head of the first latter. J'e.kim. This no.me does not re- of the twenty-four courses of priests in appear. David's time, and according to his ple.n. Ver. 13.-Xuppe.h , , , J'eehebeab. The (For the evidence of th~ return of so~e of former of these no.mes is not found age.in this family from the Exile, see Neh, x1. 10, among priest-names, and the latter not though the text of this clo.us_e is v~ry at all. su 8 picious : xii. 6, Hl: se~ also JDterest_rng Ver. 14.-Bilgah,,, Immer. The article under this name, with tables, Smith, former name reappears, not for the same per- 'Bible Diotionary,' i. 9!6.) leclaiah. (For son, in Neh. xii. 5, 18; e.ud, undl'r o. slightly  300 THF. FIRS'l' BOOK OF THE CHRONICLES. (en. nrv. 1-31.