TRV
Translation
King James Version
And when he went in to his wife, she conceived, and bare a son, and he called his name Beriah, because it went evil with his house.
Complete Jewish Bible
Then he had sexual relations with his wife, and she conceived and bore a son whom he called B'ri'ah [in calamity], because his household had suffered a calamity.
Berean Standard Bible
And again he slept with his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to a son. So he named him Beriah, because tragedy had come upon his house.
American Standard Version
And he went in to his wife, and she conceived, and bare a son, and he called his name Beriah, because it went evil with his house.
World English Bible Messianic
He went in to his wife, and she conceived, and bore a son, and he named him Beriah, because it went evil with his house.
Geneva Bible (1599)
And when he went in to his wife, she conceiued, and bare him a sonne, and he called his name Beriah, because affliction was in his house.
Young's Literal Translation
and he goeth in unto his wife, and she conceiveth and beareth a son, and he calleth his name Beriah, because in evil had been his house, --
Study This Verse
Commentary on 1 Chronicles 7 verses 20–40
20 ¶ And the sons of Ephraim; Shuthelah, and Bered his son, and Tahath his son, and Eladah his son, and Tahath his son,
21 And Zabad his son, and Shuthelah his son, and Ezer, and Elead, whom the men of Gath that were born in that land slew, because they came down to take away their cattle.
22 And Ephraim their father mourned many days, and his brethren came to comfort him.
23 And when he went in to his wife, she conceived, and bare a son, and he called his name Beriah, because it went evil with his house.
24 (And his daughter was Sherah, who built Bethhoron the nether, and the upper, and Uzzensherah.)
25 And Rephah was his son, also Resheph, and Telah his son, and Tahan his son,
26 Laadan his son, Ammihud his son, Elishama his son,
27 Non his son, Jehoshua his son.
28 And their possessions and habitations were, Bethel and the towns thereof, and eastward Naaran, and westward Gezer, with the towns thereof; Shechem also and the towns thereof, unto Gaza and the towns thereof:
29 And by the borders of the children of Manasseh, Bethshean and her towns, Taanach and her towns, Megiddo and her towns, Dor and her towns. In these dwelt the children of Joseph the son of Israel.
30 The sons of Asher; Imnah, and Isuah, and Ishuai, and Beriah, and Serah their sister.
31 And the sons of Beriah; Heber, and Malchiel, who is the father of Birzavith.
32 And Heber begat Japhlet, and Shomer, and Hotham, and Shua their sister.
33 And the sons of Japhlet; Pasach, and Bimhal, and Ashvath. These are the children of Japhlet.
34 And the sons of Shamer; Ahi, and Rohgah, Jehubbah, and Aram.
35 And the sons of his brother Helem; Zophah, and Imna, and Shelesh, and Amal.
36 The sons of Zophah; Suah, and Harnepher, and Shual, and Beri, and Imrah,
37 Bezer, and Hod, and Shamma, and Shilshah, and Ithran, and Beera.
38 And the sons of Jether; Jephunneh, and Pispah, and Ara.
39 And the sons of Ulla; Arah, and Haniel, and Rezia.
40 All these were the children of Asher, heads of their father's house, choice and mighty men of valour, chief of the princes. And the number throughout the genealogy of them that were apt to the war and to battle was twenty and six thousand men.
We have here an account,
I. Of the tribe of Ephraim. Great things we read of that tribe when it came to maturity. Here we have an account of the disasters of its infancy, while it was in Egypt as it should seem; for Ephraim himself was alive when those things were done, which yet is hard to imagine if it were, as is here computed, seven generations off. Therefore I am apt to think that either it was another Ephraim or that those who were slain were the immediate sons of that Ephraim that was the son of Joseph. In this passage, which is related here only, we have, 1. The great breach that was made upon the family of Ephraim. The men of Gath, Philistines, giants, slew many of the sons of that family, because they came down to take away their cattle, Ch1 7:21. It is uncertain who were the aggressors here. Some make the men of Gath the aggressors, men born in the land of Egypt, but now resident in Gath, supposing that they came down into the land of Goshen, to drive away the Ephraimites' cattle, and slew the owners, because they stood up in the defence of them. Many a man's life has been exposed and betrayed by his wealth; so far is it from being a strong city. Others think that the Ephraimites made a descent upon the men of Gath to plunder them, presuming that the time had come when they should be put in possession of Canaan; but they paid dearly for their rashness and precipitation. Those that will not wait God's time cannot expect God's blessing. I rather think that the men of Gath came down upon the Ephraimites, because the Israelites in Egypt were shepherds, not soldiers, abounded in cattle of their own, and therefore were not likely to venture their lives for their neighbours' cattle: and the words may be read, The men of Gath slew them, for they came down to take away their cattle. Zabad the son of Ephraim, and Shuthelah, and Ezer, and Elead (his grandchildren), were, as Dr. Lightfoot thinks, the men that were slain. Jacob had foretold that the seed of Ephraim should become a multitude of nations (Gen 48:19), and yet that plant is thus nipped in the bud. God's providences often seem to contradict his promises; but, when they do so, they really magnify the promise, and make the performance of it, notwithstanding, so much more illustrious. The Ephraimites were the posterity of Joseph, and yet his power could not protect them, though some think he was yet living. The sword devours one as well as another. 2. The great grief which oppressed the father of the family hereupon: Ephraim mourned many days. Nothing brings the aged to the grave with more sorrow than their following the young that descend from them to the grave first, especially if in blood. It is often the burden of those that live to be old that they see those go before them of whom they said, These same shall comfort us. It was a brotherly friendly office which his brethren did, when they came to comfort him under this great affliction, to express their sympathy with him and concern for him, and to suggest that to him which would support and quiet him under this sad providence. Probably they reminded him of the promise of increase which Jacob had blessed him when he laid his right hand upon his head. Although his house was not so with God as he hoped, but a house of mourning, a shattered family, yet that promise was sure, Sa2 23:5. 3. The repair of this breach, in some measure, by addition of another son to his family in his old age (Ch1 7:23), like Seth, another seed instead of that of Abel whom Cain slew, Gen 4:25. When God thus restores comfort to his mourners, makes glad according to the days wherein he afflicted, setting the mercies over against the crosses, we ought therein to take notice of the kindness and tenderness of divine Providence; it is as if it repented God concerning his servants, Psa 90:13, Psa 90:15. Yet joy that a man was born into his family could not make him forget his grief; for he gives a melancholy name to his son, Beriah - in trouble, for he was born when the family was in mourning, when it went evil with his house. It is good to have in remembrance the affliction and the misery, the wormwood and the gall, that our souls may be humbled within us, Lam 3:19, Lam 3:20. What name more proper for man that is born of a woman than Beriah, because born into a troublesome world? It is added, as a further honour to the house of Ephraim, (1.) That a daughter of that tribe, Sherah by name, at the time of Israel's setting in Canaan, built some cities, either at her own charge or by her own care; one of them bore her name, Uzzen-sherah, Ch1 7:24. A virtuous woman may be as great an honour and blessing to a family as a mighty man. (2.) That a son of that tribe was employed in the conquest of Canaan, Joshua the son of Nun, Ch1 7:27. In this also the breach made on Ephraim's family was further repaired; and perhaps the resentment of this injury formerly done by the Canaanites to the Ephraimites might make him more vigorous in the war.
II. Of the tribe of Asher. Some men of note of that tribe are here named. Their militia was not numerous in comparison with some other tribes, only 26,000 men in all; but their princes were choice and mighty men of valour, chief of the princes (Ch1 7:40), and perhaps it was their wisdom that they coveted not to make their trained bands numerous, but rather to have a few, and those apt to the war and serviceable men.
Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 20–40. Public domain.
Copy as
Theodoret of CyrusAD 458
QUESTIONS ON FIRST CHRONICLES, PROLOGUE
The Chronicles also speak about the tabernacle because a temple of the Lord had not yet been built by either Samuel or David. The text also adds that that the holy services were held in the tabernacle. Worship was observed at that time according to the number of the days of the week. For it also says, “and their kindred who were in their villages were obliged to come in every seven days, in turn, to be with them.” With regard to the holy utensils it says, “Some of them had charge of the utensils of service, for they were required to count them when they were brought in and taken out. Others of them were appointed over the furniture, and over all the holy utensils, also over the choice flour, the wine, the oil, the incense and the spices.” And about the priests it says, “Others, of the sons of the priests, prepared the mixing of the spices.” With regard to the tomb of Saul the Chronicles gives us much information, and in the Book of Kings itself we read that his bones were gathered and buried in the land of Jabesh.
Theodoret of CyrusAD 458
QUESTIONS ON 1 CHRONICLES, PROLOGUE
There is abundant information in the books of Chronicles which were written to continue the books of the Kings and to preserve the memory of such important events. The first book begins with a genealogy that sets out to demonstrate how the human race came from a single man. Since it focuses only on the single kingdom of Judah, it can tell us about its cities and the villages, and from where they took their names. Here we come to know Nathan, from whom the blessed Luke constructed the beginning of his genealogy of our Lord and Savior, Son of David and Solomon’s brother4 on his mother’s side: “The following children were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimeah, Shobab, Nathan and Solomon, that is, the four children he fathered with Bersabea, daughter of Ammiel.” And Rechab6 herself, who is mentioned in many books of Scripture, is said to have come from the tribe of Judah.It also clearly explains why Reuben lost his birthright and Joseph gained it and also, finally, the reason why the tribe of Judah obtained the highest honor: “The sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel. He was the firstborn, but because he defiled his father’s bed his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel, so that he is not enrolled in the genealogy according to the birthright; though Judah became prominent among his brothers and a ruler came from him, yet the birthright belonged to Joseph.” It also explains the reason why such a great honor was conceded to Joseph. By the will of God Judah had the dignity of receiving the Lord who was born from him according to the flesh. This is the sense tacitly expressed with the words “a leader from him.” Indeed the passage seems to assert that not only the kings of the earth derived from Judah, but also the eternal king himself who had no beginning and will never end.
It also describes the situation of the tribes beyond the Jordan, those of Reuben and Gad, and even the tribes of Manasseh which later were received into those of the Hagarites and the Itureans, and talks about the tribes of the Naphiseans, and all those peoples who entered into conflict with them. In addition the text relates how they fought and won, and made the Hagarites flee. And it also reports the reason for the victory: “When they received help against them, the Hagarites and all who were with them were given into their hands, for they cried to God in the battle, and he granted their entreaty because they trusted in him.” It also describes the amount of the spoils of war: “They captured their livestock: 50, of their camels, 250, sheep, 2, donkeys and 100, captives. Many were slain because the war was from God. And they lived in their territory until the exile.”
Theodoret of CyrusAD 458
QUESTIONS ON 1 CHRONICLES, PROLOGUE
The genealogy of the priests and the Levites comes after this. It relates that Zadok, who was high priest at the time of David, had been the eleventh from Aaron; that Azariah, nephew of Zadok, had been the first to receive the priestly anointing in the temple built by Solomon. Among them there was also Jehozadak, who was brought to Babylon as a war prisoner. Jesus9 was his son, a high priest as well, who delivered the people from bondage together with Zerubbabel, and built a temple for the Lord. Here we also learn that Korah, who revolted against the great Moses, was a nephew of Isaar, son of Caath and brother of Amram, Aaron’s and Moses’ father. According to this lineage he was related to the first legislator. But he himself paid in the desert for his errors, although his children did not share the punishment of their father. From here Samuel13 came and then Aeman, who intoned Psalms and was a nephew of the prophet Samuel. In fact he was the son of Joel, son of Samuel. On the other hand, Asaph, one of the singers, came from the lineage of Gerson, son of Levi and brother of Caath. Aetham, who also belonged to the group of the singers, had Merari, the third son of Levi, as great-grandfather.The text also explains the difference between the priests and the Levites. It relates that the Levites were initiated into all the ministries of the holy altar of God: “But Aaron and his sons made offerings on the altar of burnt offering and on the altar of incense, doing all the work of the most holy place, to make atonement for Israel, according to all that Moses the servant of God had commanded.” It seems to me, in fact, that this book was written after the return from Babylon. For this reason it also talks about the bondage and explains its cause: “So all Israel was enrolled by genealogies; and these are written in the book of the Kings of Israel. And Judah was taken into exile in Babylon because of their unfaithfulness. Now the first to live again in their possessions in their towns were Israelites, priests, Levites, and temple servants.” These accounts show that the book was begun after the captivity. Indeed no historian ever relates facts that happened afterwards, but what happened before or during his times. And actually only the prophets have the power to foretell the future. In addition it says that also those who had inhabited that land before them had been enslaved. And actually many of them still live with them: the Canaanites, Chettites, Jebusites, who had been their companions in such a misfortune. Also the priests and the Levites were brought into captivity with the Israelites. I believe that those who were called “the saints’ servants” were then called Nathinim. Many of them, in fact, consecrated themselves to the ministries of the priests and the Levites. There were among them also those who were entrusted with the carrying of the water, the gathering of wood and other necessary duties. Indeed, if it was imposed to the Gabaonites, who were foreigners, to follow Joshua in the praises and to perform some works as porters or carpenters, this task was even more the duty of the Israelites. As a proof of this I have found in the interpretation of Hebrew names that this name means “house of Iaō,” that is, “of the God who is.” The text, in fact, mentions the children of Israel and among them Judah and Benjamin, and Ephraim18 and Manasseh. It also mentions the priests and the Levites, who inhabited those cities. About the Korēnites it says that they derived from Korah. It also says that among them there had been the guardians of the temple of God as well, and it seems that this custom had been introduced by Samuel and David. “All these, who were chosen as gatekeepers at the thresholds, were two hundred twelve. They were enrolled by genealogies in their villages. David and the prophet Samuel established them in their office of trust. So they and their descendants were in charge of the gates of the house of the Lord, that is, the house of the tent, as guards. The gatekeepers were on the four sides, east, west, north, and south.”
Richard ChallonerAD 1781
Beria: This name signifies in evil, or in affliction.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as
Continue studying 1 Chronicles 7:23 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
1 Chronicles 7:23 records a poignant moment within the extensive genealogy of Ephraim, detailing the birth of a son named Beriah. This name, meaning "in evil" or "with evil," was deliberately chosen to commemorate a profound family tragedy—the violent death of Ephraim's sons, Ezer and Elead, at the hands of the men of Gath. The verse powerfully illustrates the ancient Israelite practice of naming children to reflect significant life events, particularly those marked by sorrow and misfortune, thereby embedding personal and communal history, grief, and resilience directly into the family's identity and enduring memory.
CONTEXT
Literary Context: This verse is intricately woven into a lengthy genealogical section spanning 1 Chronicles 1-9, which meticulously traces the lineage of Israel from Adam through the various tribes. Specifically, 1 Chronicles 7 focuses on the tribes of Issachar, Benjamin, Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim, and Asher. Verses 1 Chronicles 7:20-22 immediately precede our verse, recounting the tragic death of Ephraim's sons, Ezer and Elead, who were slain by the men of Gath while attempting to raid their cattle. The naming of Beriah in verse 23 serves as the direct, emotional consequence and memorial of this calamity, demonstrating how personal suffering was woven into the fabric of the genealogical record, even amidst the Chronicler's broader aim of establishing tribal identity and continuity. This narrative interlude provides a humanizing element within the otherwise stark lists, showing the real-life experiences of the ancestors.
Historical & Cultural Context: In ancient Israel, names were far more than mere identifiers; they were often prophetic, descriptive, or commemorative, reflecting the circumstances of birth, parental hopes, or significant events. The practice of naming a child to acknowledge sorrow or a difficult period was common, as seen in Rachel naming her son Ben-Oni ("son of my sorrow") before her death in Genesis 35:18. The "men of Gath" were Philistines, a perennial enemy of Israel, and their presence here underscores the constant dangers faced by early Israelite tribes in establishing and defending their territory. This incident likely occurred during the period of tribal settlement or early judges, a time marked by frequent skirmishes. The term "evil" (Hebrew: ra') in this context refers not to moral wickedness but specifically to calamity, misfortune, or disaster that befell the household, highlighting the profound impact of the loss of Ephraim's sons on the family's well-being and future.
Key Themes: This verse contributes to several key themes within Chronicles and the broader biblical narrative. Firstly, it underscores The Significance of Names, demonstrating their power to encapsulate personal and communal history, grief, and identity. Names like Beriah are not arbitrary but carry deep meaning, serving as living memorials. Secondly, it highlights the Acknowledgement of Sorrow and Loss within the divine plan; even in meticulously preserved genealogies, human suffering is not ignored but integrated into the narrative, serving as a testament to the realities of life in a fallen world. This contrasts with a sanitized view of history, affirming that God's people experience genuine hardship. Thirdly, despite the tragedy, the verse subtly emphasizes God's Preservation of Lineage. The birth of Beriah ensures the continuation of Ephraim's line, which is crucial for the Chronicler's purpose of tracing the continuity of Israel's tribes and their connection to the covenant. This enduring nature of God's promises, even through hardship, is a foundational theme, echoing God's faithfulness to Abraham's descendants throughout the book of Genesis and beyond, ultimately pointing towards the Messianic line.
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The primary literary device at play in 1 Chronicles 7:23 is Etiology, where the verse explains the origin and meaning of the name "Beriah" by directly connecting it to a preceding catastrophic event. The name itself thus becomes a narrative device, serving as a concise summary and perpetual reminder of the family's profound suffering. This etiological naming also functions as a form of Symbolism, where the child's name symbolizes the family's collective experience of "evil" or calamity, making the child a living testament to their history. Furthermore, there's a poignant use of Juxtaposition or Contrast, as the act of new life (birth) immediately follows and is directly influenced by the recent experience of death and loss. This highlights the ongoing cycle of life and death, joy and sorrow, within the human experience, even as genealogies emphasize continuity and the enduring nature of God's covenant promises despite human tragedy.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
The naming of Beriah in 1 Chronicles 7:23 offers profound theological insights into God's relationship with His people amidst suffering. It demonstrates that even within the meticulously ordered genealogies of Israel, the raw reality of human pain and loss is neither ignored nor sanitized. God's narrative includes the bitter alongside the sweet, acknowledging that His people experience genuine calamity and grief. Yet, the continuation of the lineage through Beriah, despite the "evil" that befell the house, subtly points to God's enduring faithfulness and His sovereign plan to preserve His covenant people. Even when human circumstances are dire, God's purposes for His chosen line persist, ensuring that the necessary connections for His redemptive plan remain unbroken. This passage reminds us that God is present in our sorrow, and even out of profound loss, new life and continuity can emerge, testifying to a deeper, unseen divine hand at work that sustains His promises through all generations.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
1 Chronicles 7:23 offers a poignant reminder that life, even within the covenant community, is not immune to profound sorrow and unexpected tragedy. The naming of Beriah is a testament to the raw honesty with which ancient Israelites processed their pain, integrating it into the very fabric of their identity. In a world that often encourages us to suppress or quickly move past grief, this verse validates the experience of deep loss and the necessity of acknowledging it. It teaches us that it is permissible, even vital, to name our sorrows, to articulate the "evil" that befalls our "house," whether it be personal illness, relational brokenness, collective trauma, or societal upheaval. Yet, the narrative doesn't end with despair; the birth of Beriah signifies continuity and hope. Even in the midst of profound grief, life goes on, and God's overarching plan for His people endures. This encourages us to find ways to honor our past pains while embracing the present and future, trusting that God is at work, preserving and sustaining us, even when our circumstances feel overwhelming. Our stories of suffering, like Beriah's, become part of a larger narrative of resilience and divine faithfulness, reminding us that even in our darkest moments, God remains sovereign and faithful to His promises.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Who is the "he" who went in to his wife and named Beriah?
Answer: The immediate literary context of 1 Chronicles 7:20-22 describes the deaths of Ephraim's sons, Ezer and Elead. While the text doesn't explicitly state "Ephraim" as the one who "went in to his wife," the flow of the genealogy strongly implies that this is Ephraim himself, or at least a direct descendant whose birth is directly connected to the immediate aftermath of the tragedy that befell Ephraim's "house." The Chronicler often compresses generations or focuses on the most prominent figure in a lineage. Given the profound sorrow and mourning mentioned, it's most likely Ephraim himself, experiencing this new birth as a solace and a sign of enduring lineage after the devastating loss of his other sons. This act highlights the importance of continuity within the tribal records.
What is the deeper significance of naming a child after a misfortune?
Answer: Naming a child after a misfortune, as seen with Beriah, carried significant cultural and spiritual weight in ancient Israel. It was not merely an "expression of grief but a profound way of embedding the family's history and experience directly into the child's identity. Such a name served as a perpetual memorial, ensuring that the tragedy and its impact would not be forgotten, thereby preserving the family's narrative. It also reflected a deep sense of realism about life's hardships, acknowledging that suffering is an undeniable part of the human condition. Theologically, it can also be seen as an act of lament and honest expression before God, trusting that even in sorrow, God's presence and purposes endure. This practice contrasts with names of joy or hope, emphasizing the full spectrum of human experience within God's covenant and the honest recording of both blessings and burdens in the sacred texts, much like the lament psalms in the book of Psalms.
How does this seemingly minor genealogical detail contribute to the Chronicler's overall purpose?
Answer: While seemingly a minor detail, the naming of Beriah serves several key purposes for the Chronicler. Firstly, it underscores the continuity of the lineage despite severe hardship, a central theme in Chronicles which aims to demonstrate God's faithfulness in preserving His people and their tribal identities, particularly after the exile. This detail assures the post-exilic community of their unbroken connection to their ancestral heritage. Secondly, it adds humanity and pathos to the otherwise dry genealogical lists, reminding the reader that these are real families with real experiences of joy and sorrow, making the history relatable. Thirdly, it highlights the importance of names as carriers of history and meaning, reinforcing a cultural practice that was deeply significant to Israelite identity and memory. Finally, it subtly points to God's sovereignty over adversity, showing that even when "evil" befalls a house, the divine plan for the continuation of the covenant people proceeds. This continuity is vital for tracing the lineage that ultimately leads to the Davidic monarchy and, implicitly, to the Messiah, as explored in the opening genealogy of Matthew 1:1.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The story of Beriah, named "in evil" because of the calamity that befell his house, finds a profound Christ-centered fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. While Beriah's name marked a family's sorrow and a specific historical tragedy, Jesus is the ultimate one who was "in evil" for us, bearing the immeasurable weight of humanity's sin and suffering. The prophet Isaiah foretold of the Suffering Servant, declaring, "Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted" (Isaiah 53:4). Jesus, the Lamb of God, took upon Himself the "evil" of sin, enduring the cross not because of His own transgression but because of ours, as 2 Corinthians 5:21 states, "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." Through His suffering, death, and resurrection, Christ transformed the ultimate "evil" of sin and death into the ultimate good of salvation and eternal life. Just as Beriah's birth ensured the continuation of Ephraim's line despite tragedy, Christ's sacrifice ensures the spiritual lineage of all who believe, bringing forth new life and hope out of the greatest sorrow, fulfilling the promise of a preserved people through the ultimate Son, who was perfected through suffering for our sake (Hebrews 2:10), thereby establishing a new and eternal "house" for God's people (Hebrews 3:6).