17 The porters: Shallum, and Akkub, and Talmon, and Ahiman, and their brothers (Shallum was the chief),
18 who hitherto [waited] in the king's gate eastward: they were the porters for the camp of the children of Levi.
19 Shallum the son of Kore, the son of Ebiasaph, the son of Korah, and his brothers, of his father's house, the Korahites, were over the work of the service, keepers of the thresholds of the tent: and their fathers had been over the camp of Yahweh, keepers of the entry.
20 Phinehas the son of Eleazar was ruler over them in time past, [and] Yahweh was with him.
21 Zechariah the son of Meshelemiah was porter of the door of the tent of meeting.
22 All these who were chosen to be porters in the thresholds were two hundred and twelve. These were reckoned by genealogy in their villages, whom David and Samuel the seer did ordain in their office of trust.
23 So they and their children had the oversight of the gates of the house of Yahweh, even the house of the tent, by wards.
24 On the four sides were the porters, toward the east, west, north, and south.
25 Their brothers, in their villages, were to come in every seven days from time to time to be with them:
26 for the four chief porters, who were Levites, were in an office of trust, and were over the chambers and over the treasuries in the house of God.
27 They lodged round about the house of God, because the charge [of it] was on them; and to them pertained the opening of it morning by morning.
Worthy.Bible » Commentaries » Matthew Henry Commentary » Commentary on 1 Chronicles 9
Commentary on 1 Chronicles 9 Matthew Henry Commentary
Chapter 9
This chapter intimates to us that one end of recording all these genealogies was to direct the Jews, now that they had returned out of captivity, with whom to incorporate and where to reside; for here we have an account of those who first took possession of Jerusalem after their return from Babylon, and began the rebuilding of it upon the old foundation.
1Ch 9:1-13
The first verse looks back upon the foregoing genealogies, and tells us they were gathered out of the books of the kings of Israel and Judah, not that which we have in the canon of scripture, but another civil record, which was authentic, as the king's books with us. Mentioning Israel and Judah, the historian takes notice of their being carried away to Babylon for their transgression. Let that judgment never be forgotten, but ever be remembered, for warning to posterity to take heed of those sins that brought it upon them. Whenever we speak of any calamity that has befallen us, it is good to add this, "it was for my transgression,' that God may be justified and clear when he judges. Then follows an account of the first inhabitants, after their return from captivity, that dwelt in their cities, especially in Jerusalem.
1Ch 9:14-34
We have here a further account of the good posture which the affairs of religion were put into immediately upon the return of the people out of Babylon. They had smarted for their former neglect of ordinances and under the late want of ordinances. Both these considerations made them very zealous and forward in setting up the worship of God among them; so they began their worship of God at the right end. Instances hereof we have here.
1Ch 9:35-44
These verses are the very same with ch. 8:29-38, giving an account of the ancestors of Saul and the posterity of Jonathan. There it is the conclusion of the genealogy of Benjamin; here it is an introduction to the story of Saul. We take the repetition as we find it; but if we admit that there are in the originals, especially in these books, some errors of the transcribers, I should be tempted to think this repetition arose from a blunder. Some one, in copying out these genealogies, having written those words, v. 34 (These dwelt in Jerusalem), cast his eye on the same words, ch. 8:28 (These dwelt in Jerusalem), and so went on with what followed there, instead of going on with what followed here; and, when he perceived his mistake, was loth to make a blot in his book, and so let it stand. We have a rule in our law, Redundans non nocet-Redundancies do no harm.