Deeper Commentary

1Ch 24:1 These were the divisions of the sons of Aaron. The sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar-
This continues the major Biblical theme, that the firstborn is often not used by God and is replaced. This is His style, to exalt the under dogs.

1 Chron. 24:4 describes David carefully dividing up the priests according to their numbers, how many to each course etc. Again the impression is of a man obsessed with numbers. Or again in 1 Chron. 25:1 "The number of them that did the work was...", and the number of Heman's sons is noted as being 14 in 1 Chron. 25:5 and the whole of 1 Chron. 25 carefully records exact numbers... "The number of them was 288" (1 Chron. 25:7) etc. The exact numbers were clearly important to David as he was counting carefully.

The Levites who were numbered are called "valiant men" (1 Chron. 26:8), the same term used of how David had wrongly numbered the valiant men of Israel in 2 Sam. 24. He is repeating the same mistake which at the time he had repented of. 1 Chron. 27:1-15 lists the leaders of the military divisions David established, with 24000 different men serving every month. Clearly this was yet another attempt to in essence number Israel militarily. David in 1 Chron. 27:23 claims to have learnt from the mistake Joab made when numbering all Israel... But the error was clearly David's and Joab tried to stop him. David is rewriting even a recent narrative to exonerate himself, when at the time he took some responsibility, arguing with God that the sheep were innocent and only he was guilty. Then in 1 Chron. 28:1 we read David had appointed captains over hundreds and over thousands. This was another way of numbering Israel. Not to the last man, as he had attempted to earlier, but good enough so as to have an accurate rough idea of his numbers. He was repeating the essence of his sin... David also appointed officers over his donkeys, his fields, olive trees etc. This was another way of taking an account of his total wealth. And he does it in the last year of his life, probably in the last months. He is totally obsessed with counting his human strength even when he is facing his own death. So many men have done the same, rather than focusing on the things of God's future Kingdom and His Son. Yet still David will be saved...

And yet in 1 Chron. 28:9 David rightly says that God searches or seeks for every human heart and he has much to say about the need foe the right heart in 1 Chron. 29. He had searched and found David's heart. In the midst of all David's unspiritual numbering, he still had a heart for God. And that was what saved him. Yet right after saying that he tells Solomon to "be strong" and build the temple, wrongly speaking of spiritual strength as doing something which God had not commanded and was opposite to His stated plan. This is a classic example of religious men urging that fulfilling their wrong narrative is in fact spiritual strength. "Strong in the truth" is a phrase that has so often been mispurposed. 1 Chron. 28:12 says David claimed the Spirit had given him a plan to build treasuries for the wealth of the temple. But God despises human wealth... The David who had once been a poor man who despised wealth ends his days demanding that all the gold and silver temple vessels be weighed, even the weight of the lamps separate from the candlesticks (1 Chron. 28:15 etc.). There is no such commandment in the law of Moses. He again is obsessed with numbers and miserably failed to learn the lesson of not numbering Israel. And all this was done by him in his last few months of life, as bizarre as the wealthy man dying in a hospice who is obsessed with counting up his wealth...

1Ch 24:2 But Nadab and Abihu died before their father, and had no children; therefore Eleazar and Ithamar executed the priest’s office-
Despite having gone up Sinai and witnessing the theophany of Ex. 24:9, their desire to 'play God' for personal power had been stronger than their awe at God's presence and majesty. Visible acts of God are often desired by His servants, but they do not of themselves inculcate spirituality. The language here clearly alludes to Num. 3:4: "Nadab and Abihu died before Yahweh... and they had no children". But "Before Yahweh" is replaced with "before their father". Aaron was the manifestation of Yahweh and is thus spoken of as Him, just as the Lord Jesus can be spoken of likewise. The other references to their death repeatedly speak of it as being 'before Yahweh'. Why does Chronicles alone imply that Aaron was present with them when they made the offering? Perhaps it is to highlight the weakness of Aaron and indeed of the whole priesthood; for these genealogies were likely prepared whilst Judah were in captivity and the priesthood no longer functioned because of their sins.

"And had no children" may not be intended literally. The genealogy is speaking of the Levites who did Divine service, and the idea is that their children did not serve God. And so we see His perspective on family life over the generations of history- if our children don't enter into His service, it's as if we had no children.

1Ch 24:3 David with Zadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of the sons of Ithamar, divided them according to their ordering in their service-
"According to their duties" (GNB). We are the new priesthood; each of us have specific duties or ministries intended for us. Man is never better than when he perceives his calling before God, and does it. Pray earnestly that you will realize what were the good works before ordained for you to do (Eph. 2:10).

1Ch 24:4 There were more chief men found of the sons of Eleazar than of the sons of Ithamar. They were divided like this: of the sons of Eleazar there were sixteen, heads of fathers’ houses; and of the sons of Ithamar, according to their fathers’ houses, eight-
We must remember that we are reading here of how David wished to divide up the descendants of these family groups, so that they could perform certain duties in the new temple system he was planning. "There were... found" would therefore refer to how at his time, there were found more of Eleazar than Ithamar. Perhaps not all were willing to participate in his grandiose plans, or maybe simply the genealogical records had been lost for some.  

1Ch 24:5 Thus were they divided impartially by drawing lots; for there were princes of the sanctuary, and princes of God, both of the sons of Eleazar, and of the sons of Ithamar-
This may be one of several places in the Old Testament where the lines of Judah and Levi overlapped, so that these men were in fact king-priests. This is what we are designated in Rev. 5:10. The Lord Jesus, although directly in the line of Judah, was likewise a king-priest. These historical points of overlap between the two tribes were surely to psychologically prepare the people for the coming of their king-priest Messiah. Our sensitive Father likewise seeks to prepare the way for us to accept things.

1Ch 24:6 Shemaiah the son of Nethanel the scribe, who was of the Levites, wrote them in the presence of the king, and the princes, and Zadok the priest, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, and the heads of the fathers’ households of the priests and of the Levites; one father’s house being taken for Eleazar, and one taken for Ithamar-
"The king" is David. He took this division of the Levites very seriously, because his planned grandiose temple system required a huge amount of labour. "The alternate drawing here described could have lasted only for the first sixteen lots; in the last eight drawings the descendants of Eleazar must have drawn against each other only".

1Ch 24:7 Now the first lot came forth to Jehoiarib, the second to Jedaiah-
According to Ezra 2:37, only four courses of priests returned from exile, when there were supposed to be 24 of them, namely Pashhur, Jedaiah, Immer, and Hardin (1 Chron. 24:7, 8,14). The priesthood had been deeply corrupt at the time of the exile, and it seems most of them preferred to remain in Babylon.

Joiarib was drawn to serve first in 1 Chron. 24:7, but presumably the lots came out differently when they were drawn at the restoration, and in Neh. 12:6 he was drawn 17th out of 22 orders.

1Ch 24:8 the third to Harim, the fourth to Seorim-
The planned temple system required much labour, it was a glorification of works rather than faith, and so the Levites had to come and serve there for a certain amount of time each year. And the various jobs to be done likewise had to be split up. So there was a system of lots to arrange these things.

1Ch 24:9 the fifth to Malchijah, the sixth to Mijamin-
"Malchijah", 'Yah is king', was the name of 10 separate Israelites. It reflected an awareness amongst the faithful that the human system of kingship was not at all what God really wanted, and Yahweh was Israel's true king. As the generations went by, it would have been hard to retain this awareness; although it was revived by the removal of the royal line of kings at the exile.

1Ch 24:10 the seventh to Hakkoz, the eighth to Abijah-
From whence came Zacharias, father of John the Baptist (Lk. 1:5). If the temple records of the genealogies drawn up by David (:6) were destroyed when Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians, then what we are reading here in Chronicles may have been an inspired replacement for them, and it was clearly in usage in the time of Jesus.

1Ch 24:11 the ninth to Jeshua, the tenth to Shecaniah-
In Neh. 10:4; 12:14 “Shebaniah”. It is easy in written Hebrew to confuse B and C, so we have here an example of where there may have been slight copying errors in the Divinely inspired text. 

1Ch 24:12 the eleventh to Eliashib, the twelfth to Jakim-
'God will restore' and 'God will raise up', names appropriate to the restoration.

1Ch 24:13 the thirteenth to Huppah, the fourteenth to Jeshebeab-
These names are completely secular in meaning, and are a tacit reflection of the fact that the priesthood and Levitical service was largely seen as a merely secular job for much of Israel's history. The nation's apostacy can largely be blamed upon the spiritual failure of the priesthood in practice.

1Ch 24:14 the fifteenth to Bilgah, the sixteenth to Immer-
The descendants of Bilgah were some of the few faithful priests who returned at the time of Neh. 10:8; 12:5.

1Ch 24:15 the seventeenth to Hezir, the eighteenth to Happizzez-
AV "Aphses", an Egyptian name, hinting (as noted on :13) at the corruption of the priesthood.

1Ch 24:16 the nineteenth to Pethahiah, the twentieth to Jehezkel-
Or "Ezekiel". Perhaps these names of the orders were later changed when David's list was rewritten at the time of the restoration, to reflect faithful characters like Ezekiel.

1Ch 24:17 the twenty-first to Jachin, the twenty-second to Gamul-
"Gamul" means 'weaned' (s.w. Gen. 21:8). This was the name given at birth, and in this case it stuck. It confirms the suggestion I have often made, that sometimes in these genealogies we read the birth names, at others, the names they were given later in life. And therefore the same person can have more than one name.

1Ch 24:18 the twenty-third to Delaiah, the twenty-fourth to Maaziah-
'Yah has delivered' and 'Yah has rescued / saved', names appropriate to the restoration.

1Ch 24:19 This was their ordering in their service, to come into the house of Yahweh according to the ordinance given to them by Aaron their father, as Yahweh, the God of Israel, had commanded him-
It is not defined here for how long each order of priests served. 2 Kings 11:9 speaks of the priests 'coming in' and going out on the Sabbath, as if they served for a week at a time; Josephus supports this (Antiquities 7.14.7). Yet if there were 24 lots, perhaps they served for just over 2 weeks each. But the lots may also have been drawn with respect to what work they did, not only what time of the year they came to the temple to work. 

1Ch 24:20 Of the rest of the sons of Levi: of the sons of Amram, Shubael; of the sons of Shubael, Jehdeiah-
Having listed the priests, we now read of the other Levites who were to support them in their work, although not themselves being priests. In 1 Chron. 25 we have listed the musicians, in 1 Chron. 26:1-19 the doorkeepers, and in 1 Chron. 26:20-32 the scribes and guards of the treasures.

1Ch 24:21 Of Rehabiah: of the sons of Rehabiah, Isshiah the chief-
"Isshiah", 'lent to Yah', was perhaps named after the influence of Hannah (who was not a Levite), who considered her giving of Samuel to the Levitical ministry as a lending of him to Yahweh (1 Sam. 1:28). 

1Ch 24:22 Of the Izharites, Shelomoth; of the sons of Shelomoth, Jahath-
The four families arising from Kohath are listed in order, Amram (:20), Izhar (:22), Hebron (:23) and Uzziel (:24).

1Ch 24:23 The sons of Hebron: Jeriah, Amariah the second, Jahaziel the third, Jekameam the fourth-
I discussed on :13,15 how and why some of the names in this list are completely secular. But these all have the name of God in them.

1Ch 24:24 The sons of Uzziel, Micah; of the sons of Micah, Shamir-
Micah, 'who is like Yah?', was an appropriate name for a child born in a faithful family whilst Israel was in Egypt, surrounded by false gods which they largely accepted.

1Ch 24:25 The brother of Micah, Isshiah; of the sons of Isshiah, Zechariah-
"Isshiah", 'lent to Yah', was perhaps named after the influence of Hannah (who was not a Levite), who considered her giving of Samuel to the Levitical ministry as a lending of him to Yahweh (1 Sam. 1:28). 

1Ch 24:26 The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi. The sons of Jaaziah: Beno-
"Mahli" and "Mushi" mean 'sickly' and 'sensitive' respectively.  This confirms the suggestion I have often made, that names were given in response to later character and life experience. Sometimes in these genealogies we read the birth names, at others, the names they were given later in life. And therefore the same person can have more than one name.

1Ch 24:27 The sons of Merari: of Jaaziah, Beno, and Shoham, and Zaccur, and Ibri-
"Merari" means "bitter"; from these rather unpromising beginnings were to arise those who gave their lives to the service of God and His people. And we see similar transformation in the lives of so many.

1Ch 24:28 Of Mahli: Eleazar, who had no sons-
1 Chron. 23:23 says that Mushi, brother of Mahli, had a son who has the same name as his brother, Mahli (1 Chron. 23:21); which meant 'sickly', so perhaps he died, and he raised up a son in his brother's name, seeing that Mahli's young son Eleazar died childless (1 Chron. 24:28). This may be as in the spirit of 1 Chron. 23:22 (see note there). We marvel at how the huge amount of data given in these lists contains no contradictions; which would only be possible in a Divinely inspired account.

1Ch 24:29 Of Kish; the sons of Kish: Jerahmeel-
"Jerahmeel" means "God will be compassionate", and that was how Jerahmeel was, reflecting God's compassion in hi own compassion. For we read in 1 Chron. 23:22 that "Eleazar died, and had no sons, but daughters only; and their brothers the sons of Kish took them as wives". The levirate law of Num. 36:5-12 was that a man should marry his relative's widow to raise up children to keep the inheritance through in dead man's name. But the Levites had no inheritance. So they were obeying the spirit rather than the letter of the law. To take extra wives and have extra children was a financial burden, so they did this in obedience to the spirit of the law and respect for Eleazar. And that is recorded and remembered in the record to this day.

1Ch 24:30 The sons of Mushi: Mahli, and Eder, and Jerimoth. These were the sons of the Levites after their fathers’ houses-
Mushi seems to have had a son called "Mahli", the name of his brother, because the 'sickly' Mahli had died; see on :28.

1Ch 24:31 These likewise cast lots even as their brothers the sons of Aaron in the presence of David the king, and Zadok, and Ahimelech, and the heads of the fathers’ households of the priests and of the Levites; the fathers’ households of the chief even as those of his younger brother-
These lists have repeat the list of Levitical family groups found in 1 Chron. 23:6-23, but omitting the Gershonites (1 Chron. 23:6-11). "Gershon" can mean 'expelled', maybe meaning that like Reuben he was expelled from the role of firstborn [he is mentioned first as if he was the firstborn]. This is a theme of the Genesis record. Perhaps because of these weaknesses, the line to the high priest ran through Kohath.