1 Chronicles24:1–19

Numbers 3:4: the same four names, the same two deaths verbal / quotation: confirmed

Verses 1 and 2 stand very close to Numbers 3:2-4, which lists Aaron's four sons in the same order and reports the death of Nadab and Abihu before their father with no children. Ellicott judges the dependence directly: Numbers 3:4 is that "from which our text appears to be derived," and he notes what Chronicles drops, since Numbers adds "before the face of Aaron their father." K&D and Pulpit cite the same passage alongside Leviticus 10:1-2 for the cause of the deaths, which Chronicles itself never states. The Verifier's computed basis supports a genuine lexical link; the literary dependence is Ellicott's claim, named as his.

Numbers 3:4 · Numbers 3:2 · Leviticus 10:1-2

basis: Verifier: Numbers 3:4 (0.70) and Numbers 3:2 (0.66) share H30 ʼĂbîyhûwʼ (in 12 vv), H5070 Nâdâb (in 20 vv), H385 ʼÎythâmâr (in 20 vv) with this unit. All three are rare proper lexemes, and the three co-occur here in the same order as there. Ellicott states the Chronicler's text appears to be derived from Numbers 3:4. Leviticus 10:1-2 is carried on the named authority of Ellicott, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D only, and has no computed lexeme basis in the candidate list.

Exodus 6:23 and 1 Chronicles 6:3: the roster the Chronicler starts from structural / thematic: confirmed

Both Ellicott and Cambridge send the reader from v. 1 to Exodus 6:23 and 1 Chronicles 6:3, where the same four sons are named. Ellicott's comment on the Chronicler's habit is the point of the link: "As usual, the writer starts ab ovo." K&D agrees that vv. 1-2 exist only as "an introductory notice of Aaron's descendants" to make the later division intelligible. This is a standing genealogical formula being reused, which is why it is not tiered as a quotation.

Exodus 6:23 · 1 Chronicles 6:3 · Exodus 28:1

basis: Verifier: Exodus 6:23 (0.66), 1 Chronicles 6:3 (0.66) and Exodus 28:1 (0.70) each share H30 ʼĂbîyhûwʼ (in 12 vv), H5070 Nâdâb (in 20 vv), H385 ʼÎythâmâr (in 20 vv). The shared lexemes are real and rare, but they are simply the four names themselves in a standing genealogical formula, so the link is a shared register rather than a quotation. Deliberately tiered below verbal.

1 Chronicles 9:10: three course names still standing after the exile verbal / quotation: confirmed

The Chronicler's own list of post-exilic Jerusalem priests names Jedaiah, Jehoiarib and Jachin together, three of the twenty four courses drawn here. K&D notes the pairing: "The names Jehoiarib and Jedaiah occur together also in 1 Chronicles 9:10." Pulpit reports that Jehoiarib is spelled this way "only here and in 1 Chronicles 9:10; elsewhere always Joiarib," and Cambridge sends Jachin to the same verse and its parallel at Nehemiah 11:10. The lexeme behind Jehoiarib is the rarest in this unit.

1 Chronicles 9:10 · Nehemiah 11:10

basis: Verifier: 1 Chronicles 9:10 (0.72) shares H3080 Yᵉhôwyârîyb (in 2 vv, the rarest lexeme in this unit), H3048 Yᵉdaʻyâh (in 11 vv) and H3199 Yâkîyn (in 8 vv). Three course names of the twenty four in a single verse, one of which occurs in only two verses in the whole Hebrew canon: a real lexical link, not a motif. Nehemiah 11:10 is added on Cambridge's and Pulpit's named authority, without a computed basis.

The Nehemiah lists: the same courses under different spellings structural / thematic: confirmed

Several of the drawn names reappear among the priestly families of the return, and the differences matter as much as the matches. Cambridge tracks them one by one: Mijamin also at Nehemiah 10:7 and 12:5; Bilgah "appears as a priest or priestly family in the time of the Return, and (under the form 'Bilgai,' Nehemiah 10:8) in the time of Nehemiah"; Shecaniah appearing as Shebaniah, since "The confusion of B and C is very easy in Hebrew"; Harim appearing as Rehum. Pulpit adds the awkward fact that the Nehemiah 12 list has only twenty two names, "deficient by two." ⚙ Continuity of institution is well evidenced here; verbatim continuity of the list is not.

Nehemiah 12:5 · Nehemiah 10:8 · Nehemiah 12:18

basis: Verifier: Nehemiah 12:5 (0.58) shares H4326 Mîyâmin (in 4 vv) and H1083 Bilgah (in 3 vv); Nehemiah 10:8 (0.53) shares H8098 Shᵉmaʻyâh (in 39 vv) and H4590 Maʻazyâh (in 2 vv); Nehemiah 12:18 (0.36) shares H8098 and H1083. The lexemes are rare enough to support a verbal tier, but Cambridge documents variant forms (Bilgai, Shebaniah, Rehum) and Pulpit counts only twenty two names in the parallel, so the honest tier is structural: the same institution surviving, not the same text quoted.

Isaiah 43:28: princes of holiness structural / thematic: confirmed

The phrase שָׂרֵי־קֹדֶשׁ in v. 5 is glossed by three independent voices from the same verse of Isaiah. Ellicott: "'Princes of the sanctuary' (Isaiah 43:28) the phrase is equivalent to 'princes of the priests' (2 Chronicles 36:14)." Cambridge agrees that the princes of the sanctuary "are probably the same as the princes of God and as the chiefs of the priests." K&D makes the same equation and then adds a caution worth keeping: these cannot simply be identified with the chief priests of the gospels, since the view that those were the heads of the twenty four courses "cannot be made good."

Isaiah 43:28 · 2 Chronicles 36:14

basis: Not among the Verifier's computed candidates, so no shared-lexeme frequency is recorded here. The link rests entirely on the converging named authority of Ellicott, Cambridge and K&D, all of whom gloss the phrase of v. 5 by Isaiah 43:28 and 2 Chronicles 36:14. Tiered structural on commentator authority alone, and flagged as such in the basis rather than dressed as a computed verbal link.

Luke 1:5: the eighth lot, and the day it came round again structural / thematic: confirmed

The single genuine New Testament link in this unit is the eighth name in v. 10. Ellicott: "To this class or course of the priests belonged Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist." Cambridge, Geneva, Gill and Pulpit record it independently; Ellicott also points to Luke 1:8-9 for the further lot cast within the course to decide who burned incense. Ellicott and K&D both add Josephus as a witness that the courses of this chapter were still running in the first century, and K&D quotes him: the division "continued until this day." ⚙ Note the tier: Luke is Greek and this is Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme is possible and no verbal claim may be made. What connects them is the institution, not the wording.

Luke 1:5 · Luke 1:8-9

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so shared Strong's numbers cannot exist and a verbal tier is impossible by definition. The basis is institutional and is recorded by five independent voices in the brief at v. 10 (Ellicott, Cambridge, Geneva, Gill, Pulpit): Luke names Zechariah as of the course of Abijah, which is the eighth lot drawn here. Ellicott adds Josephus, Ant. vii. 14, 7, that David's arrangement lasted to his own day.

Matthew 1:14: is Jachin the Achim of the genealogy? flagged: verify source

At v. 17 Pulpit offers a further New Testament link: of Jachin, "probably he is the Achim of Matthew 1:14." ⚙ No other voice in the brief repeats it. The proposal rests on a shortened Greek form of a Hebrew name inside a genealogy of Joseph's line, which is a different family from a priestly course of David's roster, and it cannot be checked by shared lexemes across the Testaments. We record it because Pulpit says it, and flag it rather than lend it weight.

Matthew 1:14 · 1 Kings 7:21

basis: Pulpit alone, at v. 17. Cross-Testament, so no shared Strong's lexeme can exist; the claim rests on a conjectural equivalence between a Greek shortened name in Matthew's genealogy and H3199 Yâkîyn. No corroboration in the brief and no Verifier candidate. 1 Kings 7:21 is included only because Ellicott identifies the same name with the temple pillar, which is a separate and better attested observation.

Twenty four courses, because priests keep dying ancient/widely-held

⚙ The chapter is built on mortality. It opens with two priests dead before their father and no sons to follow them, and it answers that with a rota of twenty four houses so that the service never depends on one life. Matthew Henry reads the arrangement toward Christ directly: "Christ is High Priest over the house of God, to whom all believers, being made priests, are to be in subjection," and "In the mystical body of Christ, every member has its use, for the good of the whole." Hebrews makes the same contrast from the other side, that the Levitical priests were many because death kept them from continuing, and that one priest holds his office permanently. ⚙ The rota is not abolished by that reading; it is explained by it. A roster is what you build when the man in the sanctuary this week will not be there forever.

Hebrews 7:23-24 · Hebrews 10:11-12 · 1 Peter 2:5

The eighth lot and the silence in the temple ancient/widely-held

Abijah is the eighth name drawn in v. 10, and Ellicott, Cambridge, Geneva, Gill and Pulpit all note the same thing: this is the course of Zechariah in Luke 1:5. Ellicott further ties the lot of v. 5 to the lot of Luke 1:8-9, by which it fell to Zechariah to burn incense. ⚙ So the New Testament opens inside this administrative chapter. A pebble drawn in David's court set the week; a second lot within the week set the man; and the gospel begins with an old priest standing in a place that a thousand years of drawing had reserved for him. The system David built to stop men choosing their own precedence is the system by which the announcement found its man. This is the reading the brief's voices already hold, not a novelty.

Luke 1:5 · Luke 1:8-9

The ninth name is Jeshua novel

Ellicott notes of v. 11 that Jeshuah is "Heb., Yeshua'; in Greek, Jesus", and Cambridge says it plainly: "This is the Hebrew name expressed by Ihsous in Greek, and by 'Jesus' in English," adding that the high priest under whom the second temple was built bore it. ⚙ The name identity is sourced and certain. What is not sourced is any weight placed on it here: no writer in this brief reads the ninth course as a figure of Christ, and the Chronicler shows no interest in the name's meaning. We record it as what it is, a name shared with the priest of the return and with the Lord, standing unremarked in the middle of a duty roster. Marked novel, and offered as an observation to be tested rather than a typology to be preached.

Ezra 3:2 · Zechariah 3:1 · Zechariah 6:11-13