June 23, 2019
Please use the comment section on this page to share insights from today’s reading OR your own personal Bible reading.
Reading along with us in 1 Chronicles? Here’s today’s reading:
1 Chronicles 7 (ESV)
The sons of Issachar: Tola, Puah, Jashub, and Shimron, four. 2 The sons of Tola: Uzzi, Rephaiah, Jeriel, Jahmai, Ibsam, and Shemuel, heads of their fathers’ houses, namely of Tola......Continue Reading
Already registered? Click here to log in.
Not registered? Click here (LHCC members only)
Need help registering or commenting? Watch this video tutorial! 🙂
To comment on this chapter, you must be registered and logged in. Once you are logged in, the comment box will appear at the bottom of this page. LHCC Commenting Policy
Some strange details in this chapter that I don’t quite get.
For Manasseh:
“Asriel was his descendant through his Aramean concubine. She gave birth to Makir the father of Gilead. 15 Makir took a wife from among the Huppites and Shuppites. His sister’s name was Maakah.” So were these foreign wives from non-Jewish tribes?
“These were the sons of Gilead son of Makir, the son of Manasseh. 18 His sister Hammoleketh gave birth to Ishhod, Abiezer and Mahlah.” Why are the sons of a sister mentioned?
Ephraim:
“His daughter was Sheerah, who built Lower and Upper Beth Horon as well as Uzzen Sheerah.” Does this mean that this woman was a contractor? an actual builder? Kind of cool to hear what we would consider non-gender stereotypical skills.
As to your first question, it is not clear whether the wives were from non-Jewish tribes, but we can presume that they were. Certainly the Aramean concubine was non-Jewish, but those descending from her and Manasseh would be. The Huppites and Shuppites are mentioned under Benjamin as having descended from Ir. Ir is not mentioned before this or at least I could not find him in this chapter. We can presume he was Jewish making the Huppites and Shuppites clans amongst the Benjamites so therefore the wives coming from them would be Jewish too.
As to your second question, again presuming, the reason certain people are mentioned in these genealogies, at least sometimes, has to do with either their fame or the fame of their descendants or both. So maybe being Gilead’s sister was more noteworthy than whoever the father was. You also wonder if each tribe was responsible for making account of their families and clans and in their accounting they emphasized certain things. Alot of women are mentioned under Manassah.
And your third….built could be used for actually building or coordinating/orchestrating the building, which is consistent with what a general contractor would do. We are just talking about towns being built up, and not sure their size. Which holds in question how hands on her efforts were. And as a whole, the Jewish nation was clearly patriarchal, but they also had regard for women, as I believe God intended.
A few interesting things here
1) We get census information mixed in with the genealogies this time
2) Poor Naphtali gets one verse. Was his line ended that quickly?
3) Lots of sisters/wives/daughters mentioned throughout here.
As mentioned above, it is interesting how different things are emphasized in these genealogies. In this chapter, for the first time we have how many fighting men were in certain tribes. So is that what was noteworthy of them or is that what that tribe emphasized in chronicling their own families….?
27Nun his son, Joshua his son. 28Their possessions and settlements were Bethel and its towns
1 Chronicles 7:23-24 (ESV)
23 And Ephraim went in to his wife, and she conceived and bore a son. And he called his name Beriah, because disaster had befallen his house. 24 His daughter was Sheerah, who built both Lower and Upper Beth-horon, and Uzzen-sheerah.
The account of Sheerah who is a city/town builder is interesting. She is a descendant of Ephraim, one of the two sons of Joseph. Joseph had married an Egyptian, Asenath, while in Egypt (Gen 46:20). In today’s culture, she is the result of interracial marriage. For some reason, God includes a brief statement about her for us to read generations to come.
Notice that Ephraim’s sons are killed by the men of Gath, which is a city in Philistia. The sons attempted to steal cattle from the men of Gath. What confuses me is that Ephraim and Manasseh are sons of Joseph, who are born in Egypt and presumably died in Egypt. I don’t understand how Ephraim’s sons would have contact with the people of Gath during their lifetime.
The ESV Study Bible states that this is most likely not the patriarch Ephraim but a descendant of the same name. But I am not confident of this because the genealogy seems the same between this chapter and Numbers 26:35 which clearly talks about the patriarch Ephraim.
I have not found a good way to resolve what God has included here unless it is some type of scribal error, or the Gath mentioned here is not Philistia but somewhere that is close to Egypt and specifically Goshen. This is just a theory. However, if this theory is true, the names Beth-horon and Uzzen-sheerah most likely were places established after the Israelites conquer the promised land. If that is the case, perhaps the writer is saying that the descendants of Sheerah built these cities.
Matthew Henry suggests that the understanding of the text could be wrong, that it is not Ephraim who are the aggressors, but it is Gath that descends to Goshen and trying to steal livestock. If so, then the sons of Ephraim are killed trying to defend the livestock. I do not know enough of the Hebrew language to counter his writing. Below is an excerpt from his teaching.
It is uncertain who were the aggressors here. Some make the men of Gath the aggressors, men born in the land of Egypt, but now resident in Gath, supposing that they came down into the land of Goshen, to drive away the Ephraimites’ cattle, and slew the owners, because they stood up in the defence of them. Many a man’s life has been exposed and betrayed by his wealth; so far is it from being a strong city. Others think that the Ephraimites made a descent upon the men of Gath to plunder them, presuming that the time had come when they should be put in possession of Canaan; but they paid dearly for their rashness and precipitation. Those that will not wait God’s time cannot expect God’s blessing. I rather think that the men of Gath came down upon the Ephraimites, because the Israelites in Egypt were shepherds, not soldiers, abounded in cattle of their own, and therefore were not likely to venture their lives for their neighbours’ cattle: and the words may be read, The men of Gath slew them, for they came down to take away their cattle. Zabad the son of Ephraim, and Shuthelah, and Ezer, and Elead (his grandchildren), were, as Dr. Lightfoot thinks, the men that were slain. Jacob had foretold that the seed of Ephraim should become a multitude of nations (Genesis 48:19), and yet that plant is thus nipped in the bud. God’s providences often seem to contradict his promises; but, when they do so, they really magnify the promise, and make the performance of it, notwithstanding, so much more illustrious. The Ephraimites were the posterity of Joseph, and yet his power could not protect them, though some think he was yet living. The sword devours one as well as another.
Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, WORDsearch CROSS e-book, 856.
The other point I picked up here is the level of grief the father, Ephraim, must have experienced. He had his family line wiped out. I cannot even begin to fathom the depth of grief he went through having to bury his children.