The Pulpit Commentary
The twenty-four classes of priests.

The Hebrew of this verse reads, And to the sons of Aaron, their divisions מַחְלְקוֹתָם); the sons of Aaron: Nadeb and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. The word "divisions" is the same word that is translated "courses" in 1Ch_24:6, and which verse also would read literally, "And David divided them divisions to the sons of Levi, to Gershon, Kohath, and Merari." Our present verse evidently continues both the subject and construction of that verse. Of the four sons (Exo_6:23), two died without issue, viz. Nadab and Abihu (1Ch_24:2); and the other two have to supply the "chief men of the house," viz. Eleazar sixteen, and Ithamar eight (1Ch_24:4).

The Pulpit Commentary
(Comp. Leveticus 1Ch_10:1, 1Ch_10:2, for the death of these; and for their being childless, Num_3:2-4; Num_26:60, Num_26:61.)

The Pulpit Commentary
The Hebrew of this verse reads, And David divided them, and Zadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahimalech of the sons of Ithamar, according to their offices (לַכְסֻדָּתָם), in their service (בַּעְבֹדָתָם). And the evident purport of it is that the three, David, Zadok, and Ahimelech, conjointly made the arrangements. This is virtually repeated in 1Ch_24:6, 1Ch_24:31 (see also 1Ch_25:1 for an analogous case). For the "Ahimelech" of this verse and 1Ch_24:6, 1Ch_24:31, should be read "Abiathar," as shown in 1Ch_18:16, by comparison of 1Sa_22:20; 2Sa_20:25; 1Ki_1:7, 1Ki_1:8; Mar_2:26.

The Pulpit Commentary
The simpler translation of this verse might run thus: And there were found (of) sons of Eleazar, more for chief men, than (of) sons of Ithamar, and they divided them—to sons of Eleazar, sixteen chiefs of fathers' houses; and to sons of Ithamar, eight.

The Pulpit Commentary
Translate, And they divided them by lots, these with those; i.e. as there was no ground of choice between the two families, which differed only in number, and as the highest ecclesiastical places had been filled already by both of them, the impartiality of the "lot" was resorted to, for the settling of the order in which they would take the services now in question (1Ch_25:8). The governors; read rather, the princes. The distinction intended between "the holy princes," or "princes of the sanctuary," on the one hand, and "the princes of God" on the other, is not very clear. One instance of the former expression is found in Isa_43:28. Keil supposes there may be no distinction between them, but adds that if there is, he would take the "princes of God" to stand for the regular high priests exclusively, viz. those who could enter into the most holy place before God. The "princes of God" is a title evidently illustrated by the word "Israel" (Gen_32:28).

The Pulpit Commentary
The person who acted as clerk or secretary on the occasion, and the whole number of the witnesses, and the lot-taking itself, are here given. The present Hebrew text repeats the word אָחֻז (taken) twice, before the name of Ithamar, at the end of the sentence. The evident and easy correction of the first occurrence of which into אֶחָד (one) will make the clause and sense correspond with what goes before. Bertheau, however, and Keil, and some others do not accept this correction, and would keep the present Hebrew text, the first-named, moreover, contending that the repetition of the word for "taking" points to two lots being represented by each house of Ithamar, whose total number was only eight, for one of Eleazar, whose total was sixteen. Not only does the repetition of the present Hebrew text not avail to authorize such a supposition, but the supposition itself would be unsupported and gratuitous. What is really told us amounts to this only, that the drawing was first from the collection of families under the name of Eleazar, and then from that descended from Ithamar. For anything we are here told, the urn of Ithamar can have held out only half as long as that of Eleazar, and it can be only conjecture to suppose that two lots were drawn from the urn of Eleazar for every one from that of Ithamar, so as to make them run out together at the end. Could any one of the names from sixteen to twenty-four that are recorded in this chapter as "coming forth" in the shape of a "lot," be identified as belonging to families descended from Ithamar, the question might be solved. Ahimelech the son of Abiathar; read, as above, 1Ch_24:3, 1Ch_18:16, etc; Abiathar the son of Abimelech.

The Pulpit Commentary
Jehoiarib. Written thus only here and in 1Ch_9:10; elsewhere always Joiarib. He then is the head of the first of the twenty-four courses of priests in David's time, and according to his plan. (For the evidence of the return of some of this family from the Exile, see Neh_11:10, though the text of this clause is very suspicious; Neh_12:6, Neh_12:19; see also interesting article under this name, with tables, Smith, 'Bible Dictionary,' 1:946.) Jedaiah. (For the return of some of the descendants of this family, see Ezr_2:36; Neh_7:39; comp. also Neh_12:6, Neh_12:7, Neh_12:19, Neh_12:21.)

The Pulpit Commentary
Harim, 15). The sons of Harim mentioned in Ezr_2:32; Ezr_10:31; Neh_7:35; Neh_10:27, were not a priest-family. Seorim. This name does not occur again.

The Pulpit Commentary
Malehijah. An earlier priest of this same name is mentioned in 1Ch_9:12, who is again mentioned in Neh_11:12; Jer_21:1; Jer_38:1. The name in our present verse is probably the same as that found in Neh_10:3 (see also Neh_12:42). The Malchijah of Neh_3:11 and Ezr_10:25 is the name of an Israelitish layman. Mijamin. In like manner, this as a family name reappears in Neh_10:7; Neh_12:5 (in the form Miamin), 17, 41 (in the form Miniamin); see also 2Ch_31:15, where the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Peshito Syriac read Benjamin. The name as of a layman also appears in Ezr_10:25.

The Pulpit Commentary
Hakkoa The first half of this word is the definite article, as may be seen in Neh_3:4, Neh_3:21 and Ezr_2:61, where the name is found, as in the cases above, for the priest-family. Abijah (see again Neh_10:7; Luk_1:5). To this course, therefore, Zaharias, father of John the Baptist, belonged.

The Pulpit Commentary
Jeshuah. In Ezr_2:36 and Neh_7:39 certain "children of Jedaiah," who returned from Babylon, are mentioned as belonging to the "house of Jeshua," and distinguished presumably thereby from children of another Jedaiah. This accords with the fact that in Neh_12:6, Neh_12:7, and again in 19, 21, two families of the name Jedaiah are given in the priest-lists. We may, therefore, conclude that families descended from the Jeshuah of our present verse were among those who returned from captivity (Ezr_2:36; Neh_7:39). Shecaniah (see Neh_12:3, where spelt Shechaniah). Of those similarly named in Ezr_8:3, Ezr_8:5, the former may possibly have been descendants of this Shecaniah, the latter not so.

The Pulpit Commentary
Eliashib. Not the progenitor of the Eliashib of Neh_3:1, Neh_3:20, Neh_3:21; for see 1Ch_12:10, 1Ch_12:22, 1Ch_12:23, for the pedigree of the latter. Jakim, This name does not reappear.

The Pulpit Commentary
Huppah… Jeshebeab. The former of these names is not found again among priest-names, and the latter not at all.

The Pulpit Commentary
Bilgah… Immer. The former name reappears, not for the same per-sen, in Neh_12:5, Neh_12:18; and, under a slightly altered form, Bilgai, in Neh_10:8. The latter is the name of a family known already (1Ch_9:12), and which became much better known (Ezr_2:37; Ezr_10:20; Neh_3:29; Neh_7:40; Neh_11:13; Jer_20:1). The notices parallel to one another (Ezr_2:59; Neh_7:61) are interesting, but obscure. They probably speak of a place called Immer, but even this is not quite clear.

The Pulpit Commentary
Hezir… Aphses. The former name, as that of a layman, is found again in Neh_10:20. Of the latter, spelt in the Hebrew Hapizez, nothing more is known.

The Pulpit Commentary
Pethahiah… Jehezekel. The former name reappears as one of those who separated themselves from the alliances they had contracted in the land of their captivity (Ezr_10:23; Neh_9:5). The latter is in its characters (יָחָזְקֵאל) the same with those of Ezekiel, though here Englished Jehezekel!

The Pulpit Commentary
Jachin… Gamul. The latter of these names is not found again in any connection with a priest-family. Of the former we read as well in 1Ch_9:10 as in Neh_11:10, and probably he is the Achim of Mat_1:14.

The Pulpit Commentary
Delaiah… Maaziah. The spelling of the former of these names, as it appears here and in Jer_36:12, Jer_36:25, differs by the addition of a shurek (וּ) from the name, spelt the same in the English Version, found in 1Ch_3:24; Neh_6:10; Neh_7:62; Ezr_2:60. The latter name recurs in Neh_10:8, etc; though without a final shurek.

The Pulpit Commentary
The order has been thus given of the twenty-four classes or courses of the priests. Each course served a week from the seventh day to the seventh (2Ki_11:9; 2Ch_23:8). An interesting allusion to this order of courses is tacitly made in Eze_8:16-18, where the twenty-fifth idolater may be supposed to be the high priest. Some have, on very insufficient grounds, supposed that this "ordering" of courses was not really the institution of David, but attributed to him after the Exile for the sake of the authority of his name. In Neh_12:1-7, moreover, the names do not appear as even twenty-four, but twenty-two—deficient by two!—a thing most easily to be accounted for. In addition to the direct scriptural witness on this subject, Josephus's ('Ant.,' Neh_7:14) testimony confirms the account of our present chapter, while Movers and Dehler (in Herzog's 'R.E.,' 12:185) effectively combat the positions of De Wette and Gramberg, and of Herzberg, in his 'History of the People of Israel.'

The Pulpit Commentary
The distribution of the other Levites.

The rest of the sons of Levi designated here are explained sufficiently clearly by 1Ch_24:30. They were those who were not of the sons of Aaron, not priests, but whose "office was to wait on the sons of Aaron for the service of the house of the Lord" (1Ch_23:28), for certain specified work, some of which was of the more menial character. These, of course, do not exhaust the whole of the non-priestly Levites; for we read distinctly in the following two chapters of other detachments of the non-priestly Levites, whose office was as singers, doorkeepers, and treasure-keepers. And this consideration may of itself possibly be a sufficient account of the absence of any of the family of Gershonites in the list of the present chapter, though they do appear to view for other work in 1Ch_26:21, etc. Amram… Shubael. The latter of these two names marks the line of Moses, in his eider son, Gershon, whose son was Shebuel (1Ch_23:15, 1Ch_23:16), as the former is the name of the father of Moses, and eldest son of Kohath.

The Pulpit Commentary
Rehabiah. This name marks the line of Moses, in the person of his younger son, Eliezer, father of Rehabiah. And the practical result of these two verses is to give us the two "chiefs," or heads, or representatives, Jehdeiah and Isshiah, both Amramites.

The Pulpit Commentary
Jahath. Here follows in order after the Amramites, Jahath, a descendant from Izhar, Kohath's second son (1Ch_23:12, 1Ch_23:18), through Shelomoth (otherwise Shelemith). This Jahath furnishes for us the third name of this series of "other sons of Levi." And Keil plausibly argues, from the absence of these three names from the list of 1Ch_23:6,1Ch_23:23, that, while that list is occupied with fathers' houses, this list is occupied with the official classes of the Levites who were to be engaged in the way already stated.

The Pulpit Commentary
This verse is manifestly imperfect. What is necessary to fill up the evident gaps is to be found, however, in 1Ch_23:19; also the pointed allusion to the time of David, in 1Ch_26:31, is deserving of especial notice. The four names of this verse, then, are descendants of Kohath's third son, Hebron (1Ch_23:12).

1Ch_24:24, 1Ch_24:25

These verses give us Shamir and Zechariah, descendants of Uzziel, Kohath's fourth son (1Ch_23:12), the former through Michah (1Ch_23:20), and the latter through Michah's brother, Isshiah (1Ch_23:20), called here "sons of Uzziel," but presumably not intended for immediate sons (Exo_6:22). In all these fourteen heads were drawn from the four sons of Kohath.

The Pulpit Commentary
We now pass from the Kohath family to that of Merari. For the oft-repeated Mahli and Mushi, they belonged to the time of Moses (Exo_6:19; Num_3:33). The elder of these, Mahli, as already seen in 1Ch_23:21, 1Ch_23:22, had two sons, Eleazar and Kish, the sons of the latter of whom took the daughters of Eleazar, who had no sons, and thus kept only one house surviving, the head of which was (1Ch_23:29) Jerahmeel. This would seem to complete all that needs to be said of the Mahli line. Meantime, however, we are confronted by the contents of the latter half of our 1Ch_23:26 and 1Ch_23:27. These purport to give, amid some confusion of expression, sons of Merari by Jaaziah his son (Beno). No anterior authority, however, can be found for this Jaaziah. Neither of him nor of any of the three names (omitting Beno, which is evidently to be translated "his son") here linked on to his, is anything known. While we accept the text as it at present is, we have an additional branch with three families to add to the account of Merari—the branch of Jaaziah, the three families of Shoham, Zaeeur, Ibri. Even so we have in 1Ch_23:27 to obliterate arbitrarily the conjunction van, prefixed to the name Shoham. Under these circumstances, Keil impatiently rejects these clauses altogether, as an interpolation, though one of which he can give no account, and adds up, in consequence, the families of Levi (exclusive of the priests) to twenty-two instead of the unexplained twenty-five of the present text. On the other hand, Bertheau retains the present reading, and accepts Jaaziah as a third branch of the family of Merari. If this were so, it is surprising that nowhere else is room found for the slightest mention of Jaaziah, nor any other mention of these supposed descendants.

The three sons of Mushi here given agree with 1Ch_23:23. It is to be observed that, in the foregoing verses, we have no expressed sum of the families or heads to which they add up. Hence Bertheau finds twenty-five in all, which he would reduce to the twenty-four he wants by omitting, without any adequate justificacation, the Mahli of 1Ch_23:30. Others, omitting the three names of Shoham, Zaccur, Ibri, bring the twenty-five to twenty-two. Keil finds only fifteen "heads" or "classes," but surmises that the Hebronite and Mushite "fathers' houses" may have been numerous enough to find more than one "class;" and thereby to make up the twenty-four classes which he desires as well for symmetry's sake as for the patent suggestions of 1Ch_23:31.

The Pulpit Commentary
Over against… over against. This translation of the Hebrew (לְעמַּת) is obscure and awkward. The meaning is "equally with," or "correspondingly with" (1Ch_26:12, 1Ch_26:16, etc.). The root means "communion," and the word is found only in the constructive state. The Vulgate shows the translation, Omnes sors aequaliter dividebat; tam majores quam minores.