Definition: And Phinehas the son of Eleazar was the ruler over them in time past, [and] the LORD [was] with him.

Explanation: Okay, let’s break down this verse from 1 Chronicles 9:20. It's a pretty significant and layered statement about leadership and God’s presence. Here’s what it means in simpler terms: The Basic Idea: This verse describes a leader who held power – possibly a military leader – during a time of conflict. Importantly, the verse emphasizes that the LORD was with him. That's the key part! Let’s unpack it piece by piece: “And Phinehas the son of Eleazar…” : This names the person who held this leadership position. "Phinehas" is a name from the Old Testament, and it means “the sword.” So, he was known for wielding a sword. “[and] the LORD [was] with him” : This is the crucial part. It’s saying that God actively worked alongside this leader – He was present and supportive. What does this tell us about leadership? Divine Authority: This verse suggests that leadership wasn't just about having a title or position, but about being under the guidance and protection of God. It implies that the leader’s authority came from a source higher than themselves. Protection & Responsibility: The fact that the LORD was "with him" implies that he had a responsibility to protect his people – perhaps from enemies. It suggests a duty to use his power wisely and justly. Context is Key (Important Note): This verse appears in the Book of 1 Chronicles, which focuses on the history and leadership of the Israelites during their time under Joshua. It’s often used to illustrate a few things: Divine Protection: It reminds us that God protects His people, even when they are facing difficult situations. The Importance of Righteous Leadership: It highlights that leaders should be guided by God's will and use their power responsibly. In short, this verse tells us that a leader held authority but was also blessed with the presence and support of God. --- Do you want me to: Explain another Bible verse? Give you a deeper explanation about the historical context? Or perhaps answer any specific questions you have about this passage?