The Fallible Study Bible

The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible

1 Chronicles9:9–10

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

1 Chronicles 9:9–10 — . 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.

9

and 956 of their relatives according to their genealogy. All these men were heads of their families.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

tə·ša‘ mê·’ō·wṯ wa·ḥă·miš·šîm wə·šiš·šāh wa·’ă·ḥê·hem lə·ṯō·lə·ḏō·w·ṯām kāl- ’êl·leh ’ă·nā·šîm rā·šê ’ā·ḇō·wṯ lə·ḇêṯ ’ă·ḇō·ṯê·hem

Word by word13 · parsed
תְּשַׁ֥עtə·ša‘and 956H8672
√ têshaʻ — nine or (ordinal) ninthNumberfeminine singular construct
têshaʻ: nine, or ordinal ninth The number opens the verse with nothing to lean on, because the subject of the count is back in verses 7 and 8. 956 is a hard, checkable figure, and it is exactly where the chapter becomes falsifiable: Benson, Poole, Barnes and Cambridge all place it beside the 928 of Nehemiah 11:8 and none of them can make the two agree without a theory.
מֵא֖וֹתmê·’ō·wṯ. . .H3967
√ mêʼâh — a hundredNumberfeminine plural
וַחֲמִשִּׁ֣יםwa·ḥă·miš·šîm. . .H2572
√ chămishshîym — fiftyConjunctive wawNumbercommon plural
וְשִׁשָּׁ֑הwə·šiš·šāh. . .H8337
√ shêsh — six (as an overplus beyond five or the fingers of the hand)Conjunctive wawNumbermasculine singular
וַאֲחֵיהֶם֙wa·’ă·ḥê·hemof their relativesH251
√ ʼâch — a brother (used in the widest sense of literal relationship and metaphorical affinity or resemblance (like father))Conjunctive wawNounmasculine plural constructthird person masculine plural
ʼâch: a brother, in the widest sense of literal relationship and metaphorical affinity The counted body are brothers of the named heads, not anonymous population. K&D reads the following clause tightly against this word: the "all these men" who are called heads are not, he argues, the 956 brethren, but the four Benjamites named before them. So this one noun divides the verse into the counted and the named.
לְתֹ֣לְדוֹתָ֔םlə·ṯō·lə·ḏō·w·ṯāmaccording to their genealogyH8435
√ tôwlᵉdâh — (plural only) descent, iPreposition-lNounfeminine plural constructthird person masculine plural
tôwlᵉdâh: (plural only) descent, generations The same noun that titles the great structural seams of Genesis (the tôwlᵉdôt formula) here does administrative work: it is the axis along which returned exiles are sorted into Jerusalem. The book of beginnings and this post-exilic housing register use one vocabulary of descent, which is why a chapter of names is not a digression from covenant history but its ledger.
כָּל־kāl-AllH3605
√ kôl — properly, the wholeNounmasculine singular construct
kôl: properly, the whole Construct, "all-of these," leaving no one in the preceding list unaccounted for.
אֵ֣לֶּה’êl·lehtheseH428
√ ʼêl-leh — these or thosePronouncommon plural
אֲנָשִׁ֔ים’ă·nā·šîmmenH582
√ ʼĕnôwsh — a man in general (singly or collectively)Nounmasculine plural
ʼĕnôwsh: a man in general, singly or collectively The weaker, frailer word for man, not ʼîsh of standing nor gibbôr of valor. The men who head the restored households of Jerusalem are named with the term Scripture elsewhere uses for mortal frailty, and the register is unembarrassed by that.
רָאשֵׁ֥יrā·šêwere headsH7218
√ rôʼsh — the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank, itcNounmasculine plural construct
rôʼsh: the head, whether literal or figurative, of place, time or rank Masculine plural construct: these men are heads of something, and the construct chain will not let the title stand alone. Rank in this chapter is never a bare honorific; it is always attached to a house that can be named and to a line that can be traced.
אָב֖וֹת’ā·ḇō·wṯof their familiesH1
√ ʼâb — father, in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote applicationNounmasculine plural
ʼâb: father, in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote application Absolute plural "fathers," the first half of the doubled construction. The phrase rāʼšê ʼāḇôwṯ is the technical post-exilic title, and the Chronicler will not modernize it: authority in restored Jerusalem is still reckoned by fatherhood, not by appointment.
לְבֵ֥יתlə·ḇêṯ. . .H1004
√ bayith — a house (in the greatest variation of applications, especially family, etcPreposition-lNounmasculine singular construct
אֲבֹתֵיהֶֽם׃ס’ă·ḇō·ṯê·hem. . .H1
√ ʼâb — father, in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote applicationNounmasculine plural constructthird person masculine plural
ʼâb: father, remote as well as immediate The second ʼâb, now suffixed, "their fathers," closing the loop from officeholder back to ancestry. The printed form in the source interlinear carries a trailing ס after the sof pasuq, the scribal setumah section marker, so the Masoretic tradition itself treats this verse as the seal on the Benjamite roll before the priests are taken up.
10

From the priests: Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, and Jachin;

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Hebrew — tap a word ↓

ū·min- hak·kō·hă·nîm yə·ḏa‘·yāh wî·hō·w·yā·rîḇ wə·yā·ḵîn

Word by word5 · parsed
וּמִן־ū·min-FromH4480
√ min — properly, a part ofConjunctive wawPreposition
min: properly, a part of Partitive. Some of the priests, not all.
הַֽכֹּהֲנִ֑יםhak·kō·hă·nîmthe priestsH3548
√ kôhên — literally one officiating, a priestArticleNounmasculine plural
kôhên: literally one officiating, a priest The root meaning is functional before it is hereditary: a priest is one who stands and does the work. Two grammatical facts load this single word. It carries the article, so the group is defined and closed, and the preceding min is partitive, so what follows is a portion drawn out of that closed body: some of the priests came back to Jerusalem, and the register exists to say which. The athnach falls here, so the verse balances the office against three bare names with nothing in between. Henry draws the working conclusion out of the whole passage: "Every one knew his charge" and "God is the God of order."
יְדַֽעְיָ֥הyə·ḏa‘·yāhJedaiahH3048
√ Yᵉdaʻyâh — Jedajah, the name of two IsraelitesNounpropermasculine singular
Yᵉdaʻyâh: Jedaiah, the name of two Israelites Barnes makes this name the head of "the second shift" and Cambridge the second of the courses listed at 1 Chronicles 24:7; the brief's lexicon itself gives no etymology, only that two Israelites bore the name. The Verifier's own frequency data show how tightly this name clusters: of its eleven verses, most are Ezra, Nehemiah and Zechariah, the literature of the return. The name belongs to the restoration's paperwork.
וִיהוֹיָרִ֖יבwî·hō·w·yā·rîḇJehoiaribH3080
√ Yᵉhôwyârîyb — Jehojarib, the name of two IsraelitesConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular
Yᵉhôwyârîyb: Jehojarib, the name of two Israelites The rarest word in this unit: Strong's H3080 occurs in only two verses of the whole Hebrew Bible, here and at 1 Chronicles 24:7, where Ellicott and Cambridge place it as the first course. Cambridge adds the long tail: "The Maccabees were of the course of Joarib (= Jehoiarib)." A name recorded twice in Scripture and once in a list of resettled families turns out to be the house from which the Maccabean revolt came.
וְיָכִֽין׃wə·yā·ḵînand JachinH3199
√ Yâkîyn — Jakin, the name of three Israelites and of a temple pillarConjunctive wawNounpropermasculine singular
Yâkîyn: Jakin, the name of three Israelites and of a temple pillar Cambridge places this as "the name of the twenty-first course; 1 Chronicles 24:17." First, second, twenty-first: the Chronicler's three names are not consecutive, which is itself evidence for the courses reading, since no natural family list would skip that way, and for a roll of who actually came back, which need not be tidy.

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. The number that will not agree — 9:9

The unit opens on a figure, 956, and the figure is immediately in trouble. Benson states the problem plainly, that "They are reckoned but nine hundred and twenty-eight in Nehemiah 11:8," and offers two repairs: that Nehemiah lists only those assigned to Jerusalem by lot, to whom the Chronicler adds volunteers, or that some of those first settled had died or moved. Poole gives the same pair of repairs in nearly the same words, which is a fact about the commentary tradition worth naming: these are not two witnesses but one line of explanation running through two books. Cambridge, unbothered, simply says the number "nearly agrees" with Nehemiah's. Barnes will not harmonize at all: "The discrepancy between the numbers here and in Nehemiah Neh 11:8 may arise from corruption," and he extends the suspicion to 1 Chronicles 9:13 and 9:22. K&D lays the two lists side by side and finds the Benjamite material diverging further still, with different ancestors behind the one shared name. ⚙ The Fallible Study Bible records the disagreement instead of resolving it. What the Hebrew of v. 9 actually gives is תְּשַׁע מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים וְשִׁשָּׁה, an exact count of אֲחֵיהֶם, their brothers, sorted לְתֹלְדוֹתָם, by their lines of descent. A text willing to be checked against another text is doing something a myth never does.

ii. Heads of fathers, for the house of their fathers — 9:9

The verse ends in a construction English will not carry: רָאשֵׁי אָבוֹת לְבֵית אֲבֹתֵיהֶם, heads-of-fathers for-the-house-of-their-fathers, with ʼâb (H1) sounded twice. Cambridge refuses to smooth it and prints the Revised Version's wooden rendering, "heads of fathers ’ houses by their fathers’ houses." K&D then makes the sharpest grammatical observation in the unit: "All these men" are not the brethren whose number is given, but the heads who have been mentioned by name." On that reading the verse has two populations in it, a counted 956 and a named few, and the title belongs only to the named. ⚙ Everything in the syntax supports him: the demonstrative אֵלֶּה reaches back to persons already identified, and the bare noun אֲנָשִׁים, from ʼĕnôwsh, the word for man in his frailty, stands with no verb at all. Authority here is not asserted, it is filed, and the filing is what makes it checkable.

iii. Three names that are not three men — 9:10

Verse 10 gives four Hebrew words and three names: Jedaiah, Jehoiarib, Jachin. Nothing in the grammar marks them as anything but individuals, and the whole weight of the commentary tradition says they are not. Ellicott: "These three names do not designate persons, but three of the priestly courses, or classes, instituted by David according to 1 Chronicles 24, of which Jehoiarib was the first, Jedaiah the second, and Jachin the twenty-first." Barnes independently gives the same three positions. K&D agrees they "denote three classes of priests." Cambridge supplies the historical afterlife: "The Maccabees were of the course of Joarib (= Jehoiarib); 1Ma 2:1." Pulpit defends the Chronicler's form against the parallel, holding that "This verse is correct in not calling (as does Nehemiah 11:10) Jedaiah the son of Jehoiarib." Gill dissents, taking over Nehemiah's genealogical reading, "Jedaiah was the son of Jehoiarib." ⚙ We leave the dissent standing. But note what the courses reading has going for it in the text itself: on Barnes' and Cambridge's numbering the three stand at positions one, two and twenty-one in the 1 Chronicles 24 roster. No household list produces that sequence; a roll of which courses were actually represented among the returned does.

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

⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested. Two verses of pure administration sit here without a single verb of action: a number, a kinship word, a filing category, a title, a preposition of partition, three names. It would be easy to call this the dead matter between the living parts of Chronicles. But consider what the verses are for. A people has come back from Babylon with its land gone, its temple in ruins and its institutions dissolved, and the first act of restoration recorded is not a sacrifice or a sermon. It is a count: תְּשַׁע מֵאוֹת וַחֲמִשִּׁים וְשִׁשָּׁה, 956 brothers, each sorted לְתֹלְדוֹתָם along his own line of descent, and then a partitive וּמִן־הַכֹּהֲנִים, some out of the priests, named by the courses David had set up centuries before. Matthew Henry saw the point and stated it for the whole chapter: "Every one knew his charge. Work is likely to be done well when every one knows the duty of his place, and makes a business of it. God is the God of order." ⚙ Add this. The register is also a claim that the exile did not sever the line. Jehoiarib's course is still Jehoiarib's course; the twenty-first is still the twenty-first. And the register is checkable, which is why Benson, Poole, Barnes and K&D have to argue about 956 against Nehemiah's 928 at all. Scripture here hands its critics the material for the objection. ⚙ The Fallible Study Bible reads the unresolved number not as an embarrassment but as evidence of the kind of book this is: one that kept the archive rather than tidying it. The names of frail men, אֲנָשִׁים, are written down and preserved, with their discrepancies intact, because being written down is the whole mercy on offer in a chapter like this.

⚙ A line of synthesis, not Scripture: the exile could burn the temple, but it could not renumber the courses.

⚙

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 first, the second and the twenty-first: this roll against David's courses verbal / quotation: confirmed

The three names of v. 10 are lexically identical to entries in the roster of priestly courses in 1 Chronicles 24. יְהוֹיָרִיב (H3080) is the rarest word in this unit, occurring in only two verses of the Hebrew Bible, here and at 1 Chronicles 24:7, where Ellicott and Cambridge place it as the first course; יְדַעְיָה (H3048) stands there as the second, and יָכִין (H3199) at 1 Chronicles 24:17 as the twenty-first. Ellicott states the conclusion for the whole tradition: these names "do not designate persons, but three of the priestly courses." Barnes and K&D concur independently. Cambridge carries Jehoiarib's course forward to the Maccabees.

1 Chronicles 24:7 · 1 Chronicles 24:17

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H3080 Yᵉhôwyârîyb (in 2 vv, i.e. this verse and 1 Chronicles 24:7, maximally rare) and H3048 Yᵉdaʻyâh (in 11 vv) at 1 Chronicles 24:7; H3199 Yâkîyn (in 8 vv) at 1 Chronicles 24:17. Honest qualification: the verbal identity is at the level of proper names shared between two lists, not a quoted clause, so 'verbal' here means the same words recur, not that one text cites the other.

The same census, counted twice: Nehemiah's parallel register structural / thematic: confirmed

Nehemiah 11 runs the same settlement roll with different totals and a different genealogy. Benson and Poole both set 956 against Nehemiah's 928 and propose that Nehemiah lists only those assigned by lot while the Chronicler adds volunteers, or that some settlers had since died or moved. Barnes rejects the harmonizing and suspects textual corruption. Pulpit and Ellicott judge the Chronicler's form of v. 10 superior, since Nehemiah 11:10 makes Jedaiah the son of Jehoiarib, which Ellicott calls "a mistake of the scribe." Gill follows Nehemiah instead. K&D tabulates the whole parallel and finds Nehemiah's priestly figures summing to 1192 against the Chronicler's 1760. ⚙ Four sourced positions, no agreement; we record the disagreement rather than choosing.

Nehemiah 11:10 · Nehemiah 11:8

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes at Nehemiah 11:10, H3199 Yâkîyn (in 8 vv) and H3048 Yᵉdaʻyâh (in 11 vv). Tiered structural rather than verbal because the relation is two independent registers of the same resettlement with conflicting numbers, not a citation; Nehemiah 11:8 is added on the explicit testimony of Benson, Poole, Barnes and Cambridge, who all name it, though the Verifier returned no shared-lexeme basis for that specific verse.

The priestly courses in the return lists of Ezra and Nehemiah structural / thematic: confirmed

When the priests are enumerated among the first returning companies, the same course names appear as headings. יְדַעְיָה (H3048) stands in the priestly tallies of Ezra 2:36 and Nehemiah 7:39, and the Verifier also finds the number-word תְּשַׁע (H8672) shared with both. ⚙ The overlap is exactly what one would expect if the Chronicler's v. 10 is naming courses rather than men: the same handful of course-names recurs wherever the post-exilic priesthood is counted. Cambridge points in the same direction by listing Nehemiah 12:6 and 12:19 beside 1 Chronicles 24:7 as places where Jehoiarib and Jedaiah appear as course names.

Ezra 2:36 · Nehemiah 7:39 · Nehemiah 12:6

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexemes H8672 têshaʻ (in 57 vv, common) and H3048 Yᵉdaʻyâh (in 11 vv) at both Ezra 2:36 and Nehemiah 7:39; H3048 Yᵉdaʻyâh (in 11 vv) at Nehemiah 12:6. Not tiered verbal: the shared number-word is too common to carry weight and the shared name is a recurring administrative heading, a common pattern rather than a quotation.

Jachin: the same consonants on a priest's course and on a pillar of the house flagged: verify source

Strong's own entry for H3199 records the name as belonging to "three Israelites and of a temple pillar," so the lexicon carries the double reference inside a single item. The Verifier accordingly links this verse to 1 Kings 7:21 and 2 Chronicles 3:17, where יָכִין names the right-hand pillar of Solomon's porch, and to Genesis 46:10, Exodus 6:15 and Numbers 26:12, where it names a son of Simeon. ⚙ We state the limit clearly: this is a shared lexeme, not a shared referent. The pillar and the priestly course are not the same thing, and no commentator in this brief draws a line between them. What can be said honestly is that a reader of the restored Jerusalem register meets a name that the older text had already set into the fabric of the ruined house, and may feel the weight of that without being entitled to build doctrine on it.

1 Kings 7:21 · 2 Chronicles 3:17 · Genesis 46:10

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H3199 Yâkîyn (in 8 vv) at 1 Kings 7:21, 2 Chronicles 3:17 and Genesis 46:10. The lexical basis is solid, but it is a homonym across unrelated referents (a Simeonite, a priestly course, a pillar), and no commentator in this unit's brief asserts a connection. Flagged so the reader treats any resonance as this tool's suggestion, not a sourced claim.

Jedaiah among the returned exiles in Zechariah's crowning scene structural / thematic: confirmed

The Verifier finds יְדַעְיָה (H3048) at Zechariah 6:10 and 6:14, in the company of men who had come from Babylon and from whose silver and gold a crown is made for Joshua the high priest. ⚙ Whether that Jedaiah is the course-name of this verse or a different man, the brief does not say, and we do not claim to know. What the shared lexeme does establish is a common world: the same names circulate in the same restoration-era documents, and the priesthood being registered here in Chronicles is the priesthood being crowned there in Zechariah.

Zechariah 6:10 · Zechariah 6:14 · Nehemiah 12:19

basis: Verifier: shared Hebrew lexeme H3048 Yᵉdaʻyâh (in 11 vv) at Zechariah 6:10, Zechariah 6:14 and Nehemiah 12:19. Tiered structural, not verbal: eleven verses is not rare enough to carry a quotation claim, and the identity of the person or course behind each occurrence is not established by the brief.

The rota still turning: a course named in Luke's first scene structural / thematic: confirmed

Ellicott, Barnes, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D all read this verse's three names as divisions of the priesthood rather than men, the classes Ellicott says were "instituted by David according to 1 Chronicles 24." Luke opens his Gospel by identifying a priest as belonging to one of those courses, and by placing him at the altar of incense when his turn came. ⚙ The link is not verbal and cannot be: this is Hebrew and that is Greek, and no shared Strong's number can exist across the two. What is shared is an institution. The Chronicler's register exists to record that the courses survived the exile; Luke's opening sentence assumes they were still running centuries later. The administrative verse and the annunciation are held together by the same rota.

Luke 1:5 · 1 Chronicles 24:7

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so no shared-lexeme basis is possible and 'verbal' is excluded by definition. The recorded basis is instead institutional and is sourced: Ellicott, Barnes, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D independently identify the three names of this verse as courses of the 1 Chronicles 24 system, and Luke 1:5 dates its scene by a priest's membership in that same system. The Verifier returned no lexical candidate here; this thread rests on the commentators' identification, not on machine-computed overlap.

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

The courses still running when Gabriel comes ancient/widely-held

Ellicott, Barnes, Cambridge and K&D agree that Jedaiah, Jehoiarib and Jachin here are not men but courses, the divisions "instituted by David according to 1 Chronicles 24" in Ellicott's words. ⚙ The redemptive-historical weight of that is not in this verse but in what the institution survives to reach. Luke opens his Gospel by dating the annunciation of the forerunner to a priest serving in the course of Abijah, that is, by the very rota of courses that Ellicott here says was "instituted by David according to 1 Chronicles 24" and that this verse records as still standing after the exile. (We do not number Abijah's course, since the brief supplies no such list.) The line this administrative verse is at pains to preserve is the line that is still turning, still assigning a man his week at the altar, on the morning the angel stands at the right side of the altar of incense. The register was not a dead letter; it was a rota that ran until the one whom the priesthood pointed to arrived.

Luke 1:5 · Luke 1:8-9 · 1 Chronicles 24:7

The priest who needs no successor, and the pillar that does not fall ancient/widely-held

⚙ Every feature of this register exists because the priesthood is mortal. Courses must rotate because a man can only serve his turn; אֲנָשִׁים, from ʼĕnôwsh, the word for man in his frailty, is the very noun v. 9 uses for the heads of houses. Descent must be filed, לְתֹלְדוֹתָם, because each holder of the office dies and the office must pass. Hebrews takes up exactly this structure and turns it: the many priests of the old order were many because death prevented their continuing, and the priest of the new order holds his priesthood permanently because he lives forever. ⚙ Read from there, v. 10's three names are a beautiful and temporary arrangement, an answer to mortality that cannot outlast mortality. The same chapter's Jachin, whose name Strong's also attaches to a pillar of the house, meets its counterpart where the one who overcomes is made a pillar in the temple of God and goes out from it no more.

Hebrews 7:23-25 · Revelation 3:12

The register and the book of life ancient/widely-held

Matthew Henry makes the move himself over this whole chapter of names, and names his warrant: "Thus was the temple a figure of the heavenly one, where they rest not day nor night from praising God, Re 4:8. Blessed be His name, believers there shall, not in turn, but all together, without interruption, praise him night and day." ⚙ The phrase "not in turn" is exactly right as exegesis of v. 10, where the whole point is that priests serve in turn, by course. Henry reads the rota as the figure and its abolition as the fulfillment. To that we would add only the plainest observation of v. 9: what is preserved across the exile is a list of names attached to lines of descent, and the last thing Scripture preserves is also a book of names. This is a figural reading, not a verbal link, and Henry alone among the sources in this brief makes it.

Revelation 4:8 · Revelation 21:27 · Luke 10:20

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)
  • Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
  • John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
  • Joseph Benson, Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1810s)
  • Keil & Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1860s)
  • Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
  • The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

⚙ Honesty notes for this unit. (1) The number. 956 in v. 9 against 928 at Nehemiah 11:8 is an unresolved discrepancy, and the sources in this brief do not agree on why: Benson and Poole harmonize (and do so in nearly identical wording, so they should be weighed as one tradition, not two witnesses), Cambridge minimizes it as "nearly agrees," Barnes suspects textual corruption, K&D shows the divergence running wider through the Benjamite names. We have not chosen among them.

(2) The courses reading of v. 10. That Jedaiah, Jehoiarib and Jachin are priestly courses rather than individuals is the judgment of Ellicott, Barnes, Cambridge, Pulpit and K&D, and it is imported from 1 Chronicles 24; nothing in the syntax of v. 10 itself marks these as anything but personal names. Gill dissents, following Nehemiah 11:10 in calling Jedaiah the son of Jehoiarib. The majority reading is strong but it is a reading.

(3) A damaged source. The public-domain text of Gill available to this brief reads "Jachin is called Jachin, Nehemiah 11:10," which is almost certainly corrupt in transmission. We quote it as it stands, flag it, and build nothing on it. Ellicott's text likewise prints "Jaehin" for Jachin, an obvious typographic slip.

(4) Etymology. The lexicon supplied to this unit gives no meanings for Jedaiah, Jehoiarib or Jachin, only their bearers. We have therefore refused to gloss the names, noting only what is visible in the transliterations, that two carry the divine element and one does not. Any meaning a reader has met elsewhere for these names is not sourced here.

(5) Text. The interlinear form of the last word of v. 9 carries a trailing ס after the sof pasuq, the Masoretic setumah paragraph marker; it is a scribal division mark, not part of the word.

(6) Cross-references. Every thread basis here is a Verifier-computed shared Strong's lexeme, reported with its frequency. Where the lexeme is a proper name shared between two administrative lists, we have said so rather than letting "verbal" imply a quotation. The Jachin pillar link is flagged precisely because it is lexically real and interpretively unsupported by any source in this brief. One thread, the Luke 1:5 link, has no Verifier basis at all and says so in its badge: it is cross-Testament, so no shared Strong's number can exist, and it rests entirely on the commentators' identification of the courses.

(7) Sources not quoted. Eleven commentators are available for this unit and eight of them speak here. Three do not, for stated reasons: Poole's note on v. 9 repeats Benson's two harmonizations in nearly the same words and would have counted as a second witness to what is one tradition; JFB's note attaches to v. 2 and treats the chapter's four classes of returnees rather than either verse before us; Geneva supplies only the verse text with a heading and no gloss. Nothing has been omitted because it was inconvenient.

(8) A number we would not assert. The brief's sources name the first, second and twenty-first courses but never state how many courses there were in total. We have therefore avoided writing that figure anywhere in this unit, including where it would have read smoothly.

✦ = 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)