9 . This verse presents considerable difficulty: ( a ) The English reader cannot fail to be struck with the awkwardness of the final clause, ‘the sons of Henadad … the Levites’. ( b ) The names here mentioned have been understood by different commentators to represent four, two a...
Show full excerpt
9 . This verse presents considerable difficulty: ( a ) The English reader cannot fail to be struck with the awkwardness of the final clause, ‘the sons of Henadad … the Levites’. ( b ) The names here mentioned have been understood by different commentators to represent four, two and three families. ( a ) The manifest dislocation of the verse has caused some to conjecture that it is a gloss, which has found its way into the text, having been originally introduced to supplement the previous verse by the names of those who had been appointed to the work and by emphasizing the fact that they undertook the duty. This conjecture, which is not without probability, would assign a very early date to the gloss, since the verse appears in the LXX. and, though in a corrupt form, in 1Es 5:58 , ‘Then stood up Jesus, and his sons and brethren, and Cadmiel his brother and the sons of Madiabun, with the sons of Joda the son of Eliadun, with their sons and brethren, all Levites, with one accord, betters forward of the business, labouring to advance the works in the house of God’ (A.V.). If we dismiss this conjecture on the ground of its lack of external evidence, we must be prepared to treat the verse as having come down to us in some way corrupted or mutilated. The key to the verse lies in the last words, ‘the Levites’. The verse describes who the Levites were that received the commission (described in Ezra 3:8 ), and how they discharged it.