The sons of Ezer; Bilhan, and Zavan, and Jakan. The sons of Dishan; Uz, and Aran.
Jump to: Barnes • Benson • BI • Cambridge • Clarke • Darby • Ellicott • Expositor's • Exp Dct • Gaebelein • GSB • Gill • Gray • Haydock • Hastings • Homiletics • JFB • KD • Kelly • KJT • Lange • MacLaren • MHC • MHCW • Parker • Poole • Pulpit • Sermon • SCO • TTB • WES • TSK
EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)1 Chronicles 1:30.
Shammah—the great tribe Beni Shammar. In the same way, the names of the other kings and dukes are traced in the modern tribes of Arabia. But it is unnecessary to mention any more of these obscure nomads, except to notice that Jobab (1Ch 1:44), one of the kings of Edom, is considered to be Job, and that his seat was in the royal city of Dinahab (Ge 36:32; 1Ch 1:43), identified with O'Daeb, a well-known town in the center of Al Dahna, a great northern desert in the direction of Chaldea and the Euphrates [Forster].1 Chronicles 1:42 is the same with Genesis 36:20, with some little variation of names. The sons of Ezer; Bilhan, and Zavan, and Jakan. The sons of Dishan; Uz, and Aran.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)Verses 42-50. - G. LIST OF KINGS OF EDOM. These verses contain a list of kings who reigned in Edom, during a period expressly notified as anterior to the institution of kings in Israel. Some further point of practical use than has been yet ascertained may lie in the preservation of these snatches of Edom's history. Something surely hangs on the emphatic but otherwise gratuitous statement, that kings were unknown in Israel when this line reigned in Edom. It may turn out to cover the fulfilment of some obscure point of prophecy, or to subserve some important chronological purpose; but wedged in as it is, it cannot be permitted to count for nothing. That it stands in identical words in Genesis 36:31 increases not a little the attention to be paid to it. It has hence been asserted far too dogmatically, as by Spinoza, that the Book of Genesis was no work of Moses; or again, that the passage, in the course of some transcription of manuscripts, had found its way from Chronicles, through a marginal note, at last into the text of Genesis (see Kennicott). But these positions are only forced by the assumption that kings must have reigned in Israel before the sentence could have been written, which is an unnecessary assumption. Kings had been promised to Jacob (Genesis 35:11), as among his posterity, and had been prophesied of by Moses (Deuteronomy 28:36). It may have been that Edom, secure in her kings for generations, had been wont to make her boast of them. in comparison of and in presence of her neighbours, and the remark may have thence originated. Lastly, it has been correctly pointed out that the structure of the sentence in the original does not at all necessitate the suggestion (of which in the English Version there is confessedly the appearance), that kings had already been in Israel. At the same time, too great stress must not be laid upon this, for the slight alteration of translation that would suit the time for Genesis, would throw it out again for our text here, and yet the words of the original are identical. These kings are eight in number; the parentage or the land of each is given. It is to be noticed that the line of royalty is not hereditary, and that several dukes, or heads of tribes, or princes of districts, rule under the king. The names, whether of persons or places, agree in the Authorized Version as they occur here and in Genesis 36:31-39, except that Saul is here spelt Shaul, and that we have here Hadad and Pai for Hadar and Pan there. These two differences are occasioned by the Hebrew text, and are the only differences between the two Hebrew texts, except that חושָׁם here is given חֻשָׁם there, and that the incorrect spelling here of עֲיִות is found right (עֲוִית) in Genesis. The superfluous statement, Hadad died also, which begins our fifty-first verse, is not found in Genesis. In the Septuagint the variations between the two places are greater, as well as those from the Hebrew text in either place. Thus we have Asom, Gethaim, Sebla, Roboth, Balaennor, Achobor, Adad, here, for Asom, Getthaim, Samada, Robboth, Ballenon, Achobor, Arad, there. There is also an entire omission here of the name of the wife of the last king, with those of her mother and grandmother, all of which are given in the passage of Genesis, as found in the Hebrew text. 1 Chronicles 1:36 there are first enumerated five sons of his son Eliphaz, as in Genesis 36:11, for צפי is only another form of צפו (Gen.). Next to these five names are ranged in addition ועמלק ותמנע, "Timna and Amalek," while we learn from Genesis 36:12 that Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz, who bore to him Amalek. The addition of the two names Timna and Amalek in the Chronicle thus appears to be merely an abbreviation, which the author might well allow himself, as the posterity of Esau were known to his readers from Genesis. The name Timna, too, by its form (a feminine formation), must have guarded against the idea of some modern exegetes that Timna was also a son of Eliphaz. Thus, then, Esau had through Eliphaz six grandchildren, who in Genesis 36:12 are all set down as sons of Adah, the wife of Esau and the mother of Eliphaz. (Vide com. to Genesis 36:12, where the change of Timna into a son of Eliphaz is rejected as a misinterpretation.)
Links1 Chronicles 1:42 Interlinear
1 Chronicles 1:42 Parallel Texts
1 Chronicles 1:42 NIV
1 Chronicles 1:42 NLT
1 Chronicles 1:42 ESV
1 Chronicles 1:42 NASB
1 Chronicles 1:42 KJV
1 Chronicles 1:42 Bible Apps
1 Chronicles 1:42 Parallel
1 Chronicles 1:42 Biblia Paralela
1 Chronicles 1:42 Chinese Bible
1 Chronicles 1:42 French Bible
1 Chronicles 1:42 German Bible