The Fallible Study Bible

The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible

1 Chronicles6:13

✦ Public-domain source — quoted & attributed⚙ AI synthesis — generated, verify

1 Chronicles 6:13 — . Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.

13

Shallum was the father of Hilkiah, Hilkiah was the father of Azariah,

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

wə·šal·lūm hō·w·lîḏ ’eṯ- ḥil·qî·yāh wə·ḥil·qî·yāh hō·w·lîḏ ’eṯ- ‘ă·zar·yāh

Word by word8 · parsed
וְשַׁלּוּם֙wə·šal·lūmShallumH7967
√ Shallûwm — Shallum, the name of fourteen IsraelitesConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular
Shallûwm: the name of fourteen Israelites The conjunctive waw binds this line to the one before it, so the list has no beginning here. ✦ Pulpit counts at fewest fifteen bearers of the name, identifies this one as the ancestor of Ezra (Ezra 7:2), and reports that 1 Chronicles 9:11 and Nehemiah 11:11 call him Meshullam. ⚙ The lexicon we were given supplies a count of namesakes and no etymology, so we press none.
הוֹלִ֣ידhō·w·lîḏwas the father ofH3205
√ yâlad — to bear youngVerbHifilPerfectthird person masculine singular
yâlad: to bear young (Hifil perfect, third masculine singular) The one verb of the verse, and the load-bearing word of the whole register. The Hifil turns bear into cause to be born, so what English states as a relationship the Hebrew states as a finished act. ✦ K&D observes that הוליד is repeated with every name through 1 Chronicles 6:4-15 and that the son so begotten was, when he outlived his father, the heir of the high-priestly dignity: the verb is carrying an office, not just a birth. ⚙ K&D's further caution matters for anyone counting years from this list: the same verb in genealogical lists may express mediate procreation, a grandson introduced as begotten by the grandfather.
אֶת־’eṯ-H853
√ ʼêth — properly, self (but generally used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or preposition, even or namely)Direct object marker
ʼêth: sign of the definite direct object Grammar without meaning: it enters English as nothing at all, and its only contribution here is to put the son in the accusative.
חִלְקִיָּ֔הḥil·qî·yāhHilkiahH2518
√ Chilqîyâh — Chilhijah, the name of eight IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular
Chilqîyâh: the name of eight Israelites ✦ Cambridge identifies him flatly as the high priest who discovered the book of the Law in Josiah's reign (2 Kings 22:8; 2 Chronicles 34:14). ✦ Pulpit calls him the celebrated one of the seven he counts and adds two more grounds: the reformation he joined under Josiah, and the Passover kept in the eighteenth year of that reign. ⚙ The theophoric ending is visible in the surface form, but our lexicon glosses the name only as a personal name, so we do not build a reading on an etymology we were not given.
וְחִלְקִיָּ֖הwə·ḥil·qî·yāhHilkiahH2518
√ Chilqîyâh — Chilhijah, the name of eight IsraelitesConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular
Anadiplosis: the name that stood as object now stands as subject, with its own waw. The chain is made of exactly this move.
הוֹלִ֥ידhō·w·lîḏwas the father ofH3205
√ yâlad — to bear youngVerbHifilPerfectthird person masculine singular
yâlad: to bear young (Hifil perfect, third masculine singular) The same form again, letter for letter, and the repetition is the register's only rhythm: ✦ K&D notes the word is repeated with every name through 1 Chronicles 6:4-15. ⚙ The second occurrence is where a pair of names becomes a chain, because the man who was the object of the first verb is now the subject of the second. Hebrew has no way to say and so on here; it can only say the verb again.
אֶת־’eṯ-H853
√ ʼêth — properly, self (but generally used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or preposition, even or namely)Direct object marker
The object marker a second time, again silent in English.
עֲזַרְיָֽה׃‘ă·zar·yāhAzariahH5838
√ ʻĂzaryâh — Azarjah, the name of nineteen IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular
ʻĂzaryâh: the name of nineteen Israelites The last word of the verse and the hinge into the next link of the chain. ⚙ The register's difficulty is visible right here: nineteen Israelites carry this name, and the commentators cannot agree which Azariah of this same chapter is meant where the Chronicler pauses to single one out. ✦ JFB leaves it open at 1 Chronicles 6:10 between Johanan and Azariah; ✦ Gill argues for the Azariah who withstood Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:17). That unresolved argument concerns an earlier link, not this one, but it is the same defect: the list repeats names faster than it distinguishes men.

The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.

⚙

Grand Commentary — the unit, read whole

synthesis · verify

AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.

i. One verb, said twice — 1 Chronicles 6:13

Eight words, and only one of them is a verb: הוֹלִ֣יד (hō·w·lîḏ, H3205, Hifil perfect), which occurs at the start of each half of the line. Everything else is a name, a conjunction, or the object marker אֶת־, which English cannot render at all. ✦ K&D puts the weight exactly there: in 1 Chronicles 6:4-15 the descendants of Eleazar are enumerated with the word he begat repeated with every name, and the son so begotten was, when he outlived his father, the heir of the high-priestly dignity. So the verb is not biological bookkeeping; it is how an office travels. ⚙ Our own reading of the syntax adds only this: because הוֹלִ֣יד is a Hifil, the fathers here are causes, not merely relatives, and because each son arrives marked by אֶת־ as the object of that causing, no man in this verse is self-made. Shallum acts, Hilkiah is acted upon, then Hilkiah acts. The grammar is the whole argument.

ii. The two names Scripture will not leave alone — 1 Chronicles 6:13

✦ Cambridge spends its entire note on one word: Hilkiah is the high priest who discovered the book of the Law in Josiah's reign, citing 2 Kings 22:8 and 2 Chronicles 34:14. ✦ Pulpit agrees and presses further, calling this Hilkiah the celebrated one of the seven bearers of the name on three grounds, the finding of the book, the zeal of the reformation under Josiah, and the Passover of Josiah's eighteenth year; the same note identifies Shallum as the ancestor of Ezra (Ezra 7:2) and reports that elsewhere he is called Meshullam. The Verifier independently ties this verse to 2 Kings 22:14 and 2 Chronicles 34:22 by the shared lexemes H7967 Shallûwm and H2518 Chilqîyâh, and to Ezra 7:1 by H2518 with H5838. ⚙ We note honestly that shared lexemes are shared names, and names are the weakest kind of verbal evidence: the identification of the person is Cambridge's and Pulpit's, made by argument, not something the Verifier can establish.

iii. The gap the sources argue about — 1 Chronicles 6:13

The apparatus does not speak with one voice about this part of the list, and we will not pretend it does. ✦ Barnes says the genealogy just above this verse is most certainly defective, because it gives three generations where the kings of Judah require nine, and proposes that what we have is the descent of Jehozadak rather than a roll of high priests, with names omitted to bring the list to a multiple of seven. ✦ K&D defends it: twenty-two generations across the 863 years he reckons from Aaron's death to the captivity yields an average he calls high but not impossible, and he allows that הוליד may skip a generation. ✦ Gill reports a third tradition altogether, from Josephus and the Jewish writers, that in the days of Uzzi the priesthood passed to the house of Ithamar and returned to the line of Eleazar only with Zadok under Solomon. ⚙ Three explanations, one shared premise: the chain as written does not obviously reach from end to end. We record the disagreement rather than resolving it, and the thread below is flagged accordingly.

Read under Sola Scriptura — this tool’s own fallible reading (⚙)

⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, under Sola Scriptura, offered to be tested and not to be trusted. Read as a sentence, 1 Chronicles 6:13 says almost nothing: two men fathered two men. Read as a shape, it says something the sentence cannot. The single verb has to be repeated because the subject of the first clause cannot perform the second; he is gone by then. A genealogy is the only literary form that counts by subtraction. ✦ Barnes finds holes in this stretch of the list, ✦ K&D stretches twenty-two generations across 863 years, ✦ Gill relays a tradition that the office left Eleazar's line entirely for a season. The three arguments are incompatible, and all three concede the same thing: continuity here is a problem to be solved, because it is being carried by men who die. ⚙ The line we set beside this reading is commentary and not Scripture, and should never be quoted as a verse: every he begot in this chapter is also a burial. If that is more weight than one genealogical couplet can bear, say so. We would rather be corrected than believed.

Every 'he begot' in this chapter is also a burial.

⚙

Canonical Threads — out to the whole of Scripture

cross-refs · verify

AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.

Hilkiah of the found book: the same name at Josiah's reform structural / thematic: confirmed

The Verifier links this verse to 2 Kings 22:14 and its Chronicles parallel 2 Chronicles 34:22 by two shared Hebrew lexemes, both of them personal names: שַׁלּוּם (H7967, in 26 verses) and חִלְקִיָּה (H2518, in 31 verses). ✦ Cambridge supplies the identification the lexeme count cannot: this Hilkiah is the high priest who discovered the book of the Law in Josiah's reign (2 Kings 22:8; 2 Chronicles 34:14). ✦ Pulpit adds the reformation and the Passover of Josiah's eighteenth year to the same man's record. ⚙ We under-claim deliberately: nothing in the brief establishes that the Shallum standing near Hilkiah at 2 Kings 22:14 is the Shallum of this verse, so the link we assert is a shared scene and a named identification of one man, not a verbal parallel.

2 Kings 22:14 · 2 Chronicles 34:22 · 2 Kings 22:8

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H7967 Shallûwm (in 26 vv) and H2518 Chilqîyâh (in 31 vv). Neither lexeme is rare and neither passage quotes the other, so no verbal tier is available; the identification of the person is Cambridge's, cited by name.

The register runs on into Ezra's own pedigree structural / thematic: confirmed

Ezra 7:1 shares two lexemes with this verse, H2518 Chilqîyâh (in 31 verses) and H5838 ʻĂzaryâh (in 44 verses), which is exactly the pair this line joins together. ✦ Pulpit states the consequence plainly: the Shallum of this verse is named as ancestor of Ezra (Ezra 7:2). ⚙ If that identification holds, the couplet is not an archive entry but a link in the pedigree of the man who brought the Law back from Babylon, and the Chronicler's list is still running when the exile ends. We mark it structural because names, however many of them coincide, are not quotation.

Ezra 7:1

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H2518 Chilqîyâh (in 31 vv) and H5838 ʻĂzaryâh (in 44 vv). Common name-lexemes, so the tier stays structural; the genealogical continuation is Pulpit's claim, attributed.

The same chain copied twice, with one name changed flagged: verify source

1 Chronicles 9:11 shares H2518 Chilqîyâh and H5838 ʻĂzaryâh with this verse, but not H7967 Shallûwm. ✦ Pulpit accounts for precisely that absence: Shallum is, he says, called Meshullam in 1 Chronicles 9:11 and Nehemiah 11:11. ⚙ The Verifier's silence on H7967 at 9:11 is therefore consistent with Pulpit's claim rather than evidence against it, which is a pleasant thing to be able to say and still not proof. The two-name overlap is real and computed; the equation Shallum equals Meshullam rests on Pulpit's identification alone, so the badge is flagged rather than confirmed.

1 Chronicles 9:11

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H2518 Chilqîyâh (in 31 vv) and H5838 ʻĂzaryâh (in 44 vv); H7967 is absent at 1 Chronicles 9:11. The thread's point, that Shallum appears there as Meshullam, is a commentator's identification (Pulpit) and is not computed, so the link is flagged for verification.

How many generations are missing here flagged: verify source

The Verifier joins this verse to its immediate predecessor 1 Chronicles 6:12 by H7967 Shallûwm alone, which is simply the seam of the list. The seam is where the sources fight. ✦ Barnes holds the genealogy at this point is most certainly defective, three generations standing where the kings of Judah demand nine across not much less than 200 years, and explains the register as the descent of Jehozadak with names dropped, probably to make the roll from Phinehas a multiple of seven. ✦ K&D answers with arithmetic, 440 years from Aaron's death to the temple plus 423 to the fall of Jerusalem, and grants that הוליד may cover mediate procreation. ✦ Gill reports from Josephus and the Juchasin that the priesthood passed to Ithamar's line under Uzzi and returned with Zadok. ⚙ We do not choose. The text is not in doubt; the reconstruction is, and it is contested inside our own apparatus.

1 Chronicles 6:12

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H7967 Shallûwm (in 26 vv) links this verse to 1 Chronicles 6:12. Flagged because the historical claim carried by the thread, the completeness of the high-priestly succession at this point, is directly disputed among the sources themselves (Barnes: defective; K&D: defensible; Gill, reporting Josephus: transferred to Ithamar's line).

A priesthood that needs a next name typological

⚙ A figural reading, offered as such. The formal feature of this verse is that its verb must be said again, because the man who says it first cannot say it twice. The letter to the Hebrews makes that same feature, the sheer number of levitical priests and the reason for it, into an argument about a priest who needs no successor. ✦ Henry, commenting on the chapter as a whole, moves in the same direction when he says that though believers and ministers may be very useful to the church, none but our great High Priest can make atonement for sin. The connection is one of pattern, not of wording, and it cannot be otherwise: the link crosses Testaments and languages, so no shared Strong's lexeme exists to support it and no verbal tier is honest here.

Hebrews 7:23-24 · 1 Chronicles 6:12

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): shared Strong's numbers are impossible by construction, so no verbal basis is claimed. The basis is the form of the Hebrew text itself, a repeated Hifil of H3205 carrying an office from one mortal holder to the next, read figurally against the argument of Hebrews 7. Widely held as an apostolic reading; the application to this particular verse is ours.

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

The verb that has to be repeated ancient/widely-held

⚙ Twenty-two times in this chapter, by ✦ K&D's count of 1 Chronicles 6:4-15, the word הוֹלִ֣יד is written, and K&D explains why it matters: the son so begotten was, when he lived after his father, the heir of the high-priestly dignity. The office could only be inherited because its holder could only die. This verse is two beats of that machinery, Shallum to Hilkiah to Azariah. Hebrews takes hold of exactly this feature of the levitical order, that its priests were many because death kept ending their tenure, and sets against it a priesthood that does not pass on. ✦ Henry, on this chapter, reaches the same point pastorally: none but our great High Priest can make atonement for sin, nor can any be accepted but through his atonement. The reading is the ordinary apostolic one, not an invention of ours; what we add is the observation that the Chronicler's grammar, a causative verb endlessly repeated, is already stating the problem Hebrews answers.

Hebrews 7:23-24 · 1 Chronicles 6:13

The priest who found the book novel

✦ Cambridge and ✦ Pulpit both stop at the name Hilkiah to say the same thing: this is the high priest who discovered the book of the Law in Josiah's reign (2 Kings 22:8; 2 Chronicles 34:14), and who then joined the reformation and kept the Passover of the eighteenth year. ⚙ Our figural reading, which we mark novel because we have not found it in the sources supplied to us: the high point of this priestly line is not a sacrifice offered but a word recovered and handed back to the people. The office at its best is custodial, and the custodian keeps losing what he was given. John's prologue names a priest who does not hold the word in trust but is it, so that what Hilkiah found in a neglected house cannot be mislaid again. Test this one carefully; the verse itself says only that Shallum begot Hilkiah.

2 Kings 22:8 · John 1:14

Apparatus & Provenance

The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.

Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:

  • Albert Barnes, Notes on the Bible (1834)
  • Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, — (1880s)
  • Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1860s)
  • The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

Text: BSB (CC0) with the Berean interlinear and Strong's numbers, as supplied in the brief; the unit is a single verse of eight words, 1 Chronicles 6:13. The lexicon we were given glosses all three personal names only by count (Shallum, the name of fourteen Israelites; Hilkiah, of eight; Azariah, of nineteen) and supplies no etymology, so no reading here is built on the meaning of a name, including the visible theophoric ending on two of them.

Sources: almost every commentator in the apparatus is commenting on the surrounding register rather than on this line. Henry's note covers 6:1-81, Gill's opens at the children of Amram, JFB's is attached to verse 10, and K&D's treats 1 Chronicles 6:4-15 as a whole; only Cambridge and Pulpit address the two names of this verse directly. We have said so wherever we lean on them. Poole has no text on this verse. Geneva supplies the verse and a section heading, nothing exegetical. The K&D entry is capped in the brief with roughly 16,000 further characters unquoted; we quote only from the visible portion and summarize the rest as summary, never as quotation.

Uncertain: whether this stretch of the high-priestly list is complete. Barnes says it is not, K&D argues it can be, Gill reports a tradition of the office passing to Ithamar's line and back. The two threads touching that question are flagged for verification rather than confirmed. Also uncertain, and marked so in the thread: whether the Shallum of 2 Kings 22:14 and the Meshullam of 1 Chronicles 9:11 are this Shallum. Both identifications belong to named commentators, not to the Verifier, whose computed bases here are shared name-lexemes of ordinary frequency and therefore support no verbal tier anywhere in this unit.

✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)