The Fallible Study Bible

The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible

1 Chronicles6:6

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

1 Chronicles 6:6 — . 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.

6

Uzzi was the father of Zerahiah, Zerahiah was the father of Meraioth,

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

wə·‘uz·zî hō·w·lîḏ ’eṯ- zə·raḥ·yāh ū·zə·raḥ·yāh hō·w·lîḏ ’eṯ- mə·rā·yō·wṯ

Word by word8 · parsed
וְעֻזִּי֙wə·‘uz·zîUzziH5813
√ ʻUzzîy — Uzzi, the name of six IsraelitesConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular
ʻUzzîy: Uzzi, the name of six Israelites Strong's itself records that six different Israelites bear this name, which is why the Verifier's matches at 1 Chronicles 7:2, 7:3, 7:7 and Nehemiah 11:22 are homonyms from other tribes and other centuries, not this priest. JFB notes that it is in Uzzi's days that the high priesthood is supposed to have passed out of Eleazar's family to Ithamar's; if that tradition is right, this quiet name is the hinge on which the whole priestly succession turns, and the Chronicler records it without a word of comment.
הוֹלִ֣ידhō·w·lîḏwas the father ofH3205
√ yâlad — to bear youngVerbHifilPerfectthird person masculine singular
yâlad: to bear young (Hifil, caused to bring forth) The word that carries the entire chapter. K&D observe that this form is “repeated with every name” through the twenty-two generations of 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 therefore doing genealogical and juridical work at once. K&D also grant that in such lists the Hifil “may express mediate procreation,” so that a grandson can be introduced as begotten by the grandfather. That single concession is the honest limit of this verse: the verb guarantees descent, not the absence of omitted names.
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 Untranslatable; it marks the following name as the definite object of the begetting.
זְרַֽחְיָ֔הzə·raḥ·yāhZerahiahH2228
√ Zᵉrachyâh — Zerachjah, the name of two IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular
Zᵉrachyâh: Zerachjah, the name of two Israelites A genuinely rare lexeme, standing in only four verses of the Hebrew Bible. That rarity is what makes the Verifier's link to 1 Chronicles 6:51 and Ezra 7:4 a real verbal tie rather than a coincidence of common naming: the same short sequence Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth is reproduced in the Chronicler's second copy of this pedigree and again in the pedigree Ezra claims for himself.
וּֽזְרַֽחְיָ֖הū·zə·raḥ·yāhZerahiahH2228
√ Zᵉrachyâh — Zerachjah, the name of two IsraelitesConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular
Zᵉrachyâh: Zerachjah (with conjunctive waw) The son of the first clause becomes the subject of the second. This is the joint of the chain, and the Chronicler makes it by repetition rather than by pronoun, so that every name is written twice: once as received, once as transmitted.
הוֹלִ֥ידhō·w·lîḏwas the father ofH3205
√ yâlad — to bear youngVerbHifilPerfectthird person masculine singular
yâlad: to bear young (Hifil) The identical form repeats within a single verse. The effect is liturgical rather than informative; the reader is meant to feel the cadence of a succession that outlasts any one holder of the office.
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 Repeated before Meraioth, keeping the second clause in exactly the shape of the first.
מְרָיֽוֹת׃mə·rā·yō·wṯMeraiothH4812
√ Mᵉrâyôwth — Merajoth, the name of two IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular
Mᵉrâyôwth: Merajoth, the name of two Israelites Strong's again warns of two bearers. This name resurfaces in the parallel Aaronide list at 1 Chronicles 6:52 and 9:11, in Ezra 7:3, and in the post-exilic priestly rolls of Nehemiah 11:11, 12:15 and 12:19; the Chronicler is writing for a community that still had to prove such descent before it could serve at the altar.

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. Two names, one verb, twice — 1 Chronicles 6:6

The verse has no narrative, no verdict and no praise. It has two proper names, one verb used twice, and two occurrences of the object marker אֶת־ that English cannot render at all. K&D put their finger on the mechanism: the word הוליד is, they say, “repeated with every name” across the twenty-two generations of 1 Chronicles 6:4-15, and the son so begotten, if he outlived his father, inherited the high-priestly dignity. So the flattest sentence in the chapter is also a legal instrument. Henry states the practical stake plainly: the priests and Levites had more reason than any other Israelites to keep their descent clear and provable, because every honour and privilege of their office hung on it. ⚙ Read that way, the two blank-faced אֶת־ markers are the point. They insist these are determinate men, named and countable, not a vague pious ancestry.

ii. The silence over Uzzi — 1 Chronicles 6:6

Uzzi is where the tradition says something broke. JFB reports that “it is supposed” that in his days the high priesthood was, “for unrecorded reasons,” transferred from Eleazar's family to Ithamar's. Gill sources the same claim precisely, to Josephus and to Jewish writers, and traces it forward: it lodged with Eli's house until Solomon restored it to Zadok of the line of Eleazar. K&D weigh this at length and concede it as the “less serious” of two difficulties against reading the list as an unbroken register of serving high priests, since the Old Testament plainly knows another line beginning with Eli. ⚙ Every one of those commentators is importing history the verse does not carry. 1 Chronicles 6:6 says only that Uzzi begat Zerahiah. The Chronicler's silence at precisely the point where the office may have left his line is worth more than a harmonisation: he is recording lineal descent from Eleazar, not a list of men who actually served.

iii. A list built to be checked — 1 Chronicles 6:6

Barnes summarises the whole passage as the genealogy of the high priestly stem down to the captivity. K&D do the arithmetic and find it strained: roughly 863 years from Aaron's death to Jehozadak's deportation, spread over twenty-two generations, gives an average near thirty-nine years apiece, which they call high but not impossible, and they allow that the recurring הוליד may express mediate descent, a grandson entered as begotten by the grandfather. ⚙ That admission matters for how this verse should be trusted. Its claim is that Meraioth descends from Uzzi through Zerahiah. Its claim is not that no name was ever passed over. The rare name Zerahiah, standing in only four verses of the Hebrew Bible, reappears in the Chronicler's own second copy of this pedigree at 1 Chronicles 6:51 and in the pedigree Ezra recites for himself at Ezra 7:4, which is what a list looks like when it is kept precisely because people expect to check it.

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

⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested. A verse like this one is usually skipped, and the skipping is the mistake. Scripture here is doing the least glamorous thing it ever does: keeping a receipt. The whole apparatus of Israel's approach to God, who may burn incense, who may enter the holy place, who may bear the blood, rests on a written chain of fathers and sons that any Israelite could audit. That is a mercy and a burden at once. A mercy, because access to God was not left to claim or charisma; a burden, because when the chain was lost the office was lost with it, and Ezra 2:62 records men struck from the priesthood for exactly that. So the repeated הוֹלִיד is quietly a countdown. Every generation it names is a generation that died, which is precisely the argument Hebrews 7:23 will make against the whole system: there were many priests because death prevented them from continuing. ⚙ The Chronicler is not aware of writing that argument. But he is compiling its evidence, name by name, and the evidence is unanswerable. A priesthood that must be transmitted is a priesthood whose every holder is temporary.

Every name in the chain is a receipt, and every receipt is an obituary. (This line is machine synthesis, not Scripture.)

⚙

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.

The Chronicler copies himself: the same three names at 6:51 verbal / quotation: confirmed

The Chronicler gives the Aaronide descent twice in this one chapter, and in the second copy the same short sequence returns in the same order across two verses: Uzzi and Zerahiah at 6:51, Meraioth at 6:52. The Verifier records the shared lexemes at each, and זְרַחְיָה (Zᵉrachyâh, H2228) stands in only four verses of the Hebrew Bible, which is what makes the tie verbal rather than accidental. ⚙ The doubling is a sourcing fact about the book: the Chronicler had this pedigree in a fixed written form and reproduced it, rather than composing it fresh each time.

1 Chronicles 6:51 · 1 Chronicles 6:52

basis: Verifier: 1 Chronicles 6:51 shares H5813 ʻUzzîy (in 11 vv) and H2228 Zᵉrachyâh (in 4 vv); 1 Chronicles 6:52 shares H4812 Mᵉrâyôwth (in 7 vv). H2228 is rare, and all three names recur in the same adjacent order, so this is a reproduction of the same written list within one book, not a quotation claim about two independent authors

Ezra's own pedigree runs through this verse verbal / quotation: confirmed

When Ezra introduces himself as priest and scribe, he recites his descent backward through exactly this stretch of the line: Meraioth, Zerahiah, Uzzi. The Verifier confirms the shared rare lexeme. ⚙ The practical force is that 1 Chronicles 6:6 is not antiquarian. It is the documentary basis on which a named post-exilic man claimed the right to handle the law and the altar, which is precisely the concern Henry identifies when he says the honours and privileges of the office depended on descent.

Ezra 7:3 · Ezra 7:4

basis: Verifier: Ezra 7:4 shares H5813 ʻUzzîy (in 11 vv) and H2228 Zᵉrachyâh (in 4 vv); Ezra 7:3 shares H4812 Mᵉrâyôwth (in 7 vv). Three rare-to-uncommon lexemes across two adjacent verses in the same sequence; the link is verbal in the strict sense of a reproduced name chain, with no claim that either text cites the other

Meraioth among the priests who came back structural / thematic: confirmed

The name Meraioth resurfaces in the rolls of priests who returned from exile and in the register of those who lived in Jerusalem. The Verifier records the shared lexeme מְרָיוֹת (H4812), present in seven verses. ⚙ Strong's itself notes that two Israelites bear this name, so identity across these lists is not automatic; the honest claim is the recurrence of a priestly-house name in the post-exilic community, which is the motif rather than a proven identification of the same man.

Nehemiah 11:11 · 1 Chronicles 9:11

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H4812 Mᵉrâyôwth (in 7 vv). Downgraded from verbal because Strong's records two distinct Israelites of this name and the surrounding chains differ; the confirmed link is the shared motif of the Aaronide house re-registered after the captivity

The tradition that the office left this line at Uzzi flagged: verify source

JFB report that in Uzzi's days the high priesthood is supposed to have passed from Eleazar's family to Ithamar's. Gill gives the source: Josephus and later Jewish writers, and he says the office stayed with Eli's house until Solomon restored it to Zadok. K&D acknowledge the competing line of Eli and treat the resulting tension as a real difficulty for reading this register as a list of serving high priests. ⚙ The verse itself says none of this. The refs below are where Scripture does speak of the transfer, and the reader should notice that neither of them names Uzzi.

1 Samuel 2:35 · 1 Kings 2:27

basis: Provenance is extra-biblical and contested: Gill cites Josephus (Antiquities v.11.5) and the Juchasin; JFB call it a supposition for unrecorded reasons; K&D record it as a serious difficulty rather than a settled result. No shared Strong's lexeme links 1 Chronicles 6:6 to either ref; the connection is historical reconstruction only

Many priests, because death kept them from continuing structural / thematic: confirmed

Hebrews argues that the Levitical priests were many in number for one reason: death prevented each of them from remaining in office. 1 Chronicles 6:6 is a specimen of exactly the evidence that argument runs on, two transfers of the office in a single line of Hebrew. ⚙ This is a cross-Testament link between a Greek text and a Hebrew one, so no shared Strong's lexeme exists and no verbal claim is made; the connection is the shared structure of succession-by-death against succession-by-indestructible-life.

Hebrews 7:23 · Hebrews 7:24

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so shared Strong's numbers are impossible by definition and the tier can never be verbal. The recorded basis is structural: the repeated Hifil of H3205 yâlad names a priesthood transmitted at each death, which is the very mechanism Hebrews 7:23-24 contrasts with a priesthood held aparabatos, without succession

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

The High Priest without a genealogy ancient/widely-held

⚙ This verse is nothing but genealogy: two names, two acts of begetting, two object markers. Hebrews describes the priest of the higher order in precisely the negative of it, without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, and grounds his priesthood not in a legal requirement about ancestry but in the power of an indestructible life. The contrast is not that Christ's descent is unrecorded; the evangelists record it. The contrast is that his priestly title does not rest on the record. ⚙ Henry, commenting on this very chapter, moves the same way when he observes that the Spirit now calls ministers to their work without limit as to the families they came from, and that none but our great High Priest can make atonement for sin. That is the apostolic reading, not a novelty.

Hebrews 7:3 · Hebrews 7:16

A succession of the dying, and one who continues ancient/widely-held

⚙ Read the Hifil twice in one verse and you have watched the office move twice, which means you have watched a man die twice. Barnes frames the whole passage as the high priestly stem carried down to the captivity, and that is where it ends: with Jehozadak, whom K&D describe as carried away into Babylon. The line is a record of transmission that terminates in deportation. Hebrews takes the same fact and turns it into an argument: the former priests were many because death prevented them from continuing, but this one holds his priesthood permanently, and therefore he is able to save completely those who draw near to God through him. ⚙ The Chronicler's dry verb is the premise; the apostle supplies the conclusion.

Hebrews 7:23 · Hebrews 7:25

The covenant kept by a written name novel

⚙ Israel's access to God ran through a list that could be checked, and Ezra 2:62 shows what happened when a claimant's name could not be found in it: he was excluded from the priesthood as unclean. That is the system this verse maintains, name by name. The New Testament's answer is not that the register was a mistake but that it was a shadow of a better one, a book in which names are written and from which they are not blotted out. ⚙ This particular pairing, the priestly genealogical register with the Lamb's book of life, is a reading this tool offers rather than one it finds settled in the commentators before it; the voices in this unit do not draw it, and it should be tested as a novel suggestion, not received as their judgment.

Ezra 2:62 · Revelation 21:27

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:

  • Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory (1871)
  • John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
  • Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1860s)
  • Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)

Text: BSB (CC0) with the Berean interlinear and Strong's parsings; eight Hebrew words, of which two are the untranslatable object marker אֶת־ and two are identical Hifil perfects of ילד. There is no textual difficulty in the verse itself.

Sources: Poole has no note on this verse, and the Geneva entry in the brief supplies only the verse text with a heading, so neither is quoted. The Gill entry is his note on the whole block from 1 Chronicles 6:3 onward, not on v. 6 alone, and the excerpt used here is the sentence within it that names Uzzi explicitly. The K&D entry is capped in the brief with roughly 16,200 further characters unread; every K&D claim cited here comes from the portion actually present, and no inference has been drawn from the unread remainder.

Uncertain: (1) whether the Uzzi of this verse is the point at which the high priesthood passed to Ithamar's line rests on Josephus and later Jewish tradition, flagged accordingly in the threads; (2) whether the register is complete, since K&D themselves allow that the repeated Hifil may express mediate descent and that a generation could be omitted; (3) the identity of the Uzzi and Meraioth in other books, since Strong's records six Israelites named Uzzi and two named Meraioth, so the Verifier's lexeme matches at 1 Chronicles 7:2-7 and Nehemiah 11:22 are homonyms from other tribes and carry no genealogical weight here. The third christ reading is marked novel by the tool's own judgment and is not attributed to any commentator.

✦ = 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)