THE BIBLE INFORMS US that one night in ancient Persia a sleepless King Xerxes (KJV Ahasuerus) ordered the reading of “the book of the chronicles,” presumably as an antidote for his insomnia (Est. 6:1). It is important to note that the document read to Xerxes was not the same book of the chronicles serving as the focus of our study. Yet, the Persian chronicles were no doubt similar to the Hebrew chronicles in structure and contents since both belonged to the royal annal tradition of ancient Near Eastern literature. Precisely because of this correspondence, I fear the books of Chronicles are often relegated to the same category of medicinal remedy ascribed to those Persian chronicles—that of “literary tranquilizer.”
But we have not heard the end of the story. Before drawing hasty conclusions or relying on first impressions as we begin our study of Chronicles, we must return to ancient Persia and see if King Xerxes indeed journeyed to “the land of Nod.” Happily, I am pleased to report that Xerxes’ sedative failed. Rather than drift off into sleep at the reading of the Persian chronicles, his interest was piqued, and he was drawn into an intriguing recital—a story of profound personal relevance. I trust the same will be true of our review of the Hebrew Chronicles.1
The church’s neglect of Chronicles is understandable, though not excusable, for a number of reasons. I will briefly mention but two of the several factors that have conspired to rob the church of its once-hyphenated legacy. Naturally, I refer to what was known for centuries as the Judeo-Christian religion. According to the apostle Paul, the Gentile church may be compared to a wild olive shoot grafted into the nourishing sap of the tap-root of believing Israel (Rom. 11:17–24). During the past two centuries the impact of Westernization and the influence of dispensational theology have combined to sever the “wild branch” of the (North American) church from the “cultivated olive tree” of Jewish religion.2
What does this mean for the study of the books of Chronicles? Proponents of dispensational theology would have us believe that the Old Testament is Israel’s history, not the church’s. By dispensationalism, I mean the theological stance that assumes the old covenant belonged exclusively to the nation of Israel. According to this approach, the implementation of the new covenant in Christ has rendered the old covenant obsolete and its stipulations are no longer binding on the Christian church.3 Chronicles, however, invites the reader to view God’s progressive revelation within the movements of Israel’s history through the lens of continuity—not contrast. The word of God to King David through the prophet Nathan indicated his royal dynasty would be established “forever” (2 Sam. 7:16). The writer of the Chronicles considered this promise still operative in the national life of Israel some six centuries later (1 Chron. 17:14). Curiously, one of the key New Testament titles for the church’s Messiah is the Old Testament epithet for Israel’s messiah, “Son of David” (cf. Matt. 9:27; Acts 13:32–34; Rom. 1:3; Rev. 5:5; 22:16). This is only one simple illustration of the overlap between the old and new covenants assumed by the New Testament writers.
If the Christian reader somehow manages to overcome the siren song of those espousing the partition of the old and new covenants, there remains the shoals of “occidentalism.” Industrialization and urbanization have had a profound effect on Western thought and culture. The citizenry of many Western nations, including the United States, enjoy unparalleled personal freedom and unprecedented economic prosperity. Individualism and materialism carry a price tag, however, and the cost has been staggering. The culture of narcissism that characterizes Western society has been described as an abyss of affluent individualism resulting in alienation and loneliness, boredom in pursuit of sensation, obsession with personal convenience, and insatiable consumerism.4 In fact, the postmodern condition of North America has been diagnosed as that of a society “cast adrift” in a time of “cultural winter.”5
Like it or not, we find ourselves living in a society that craves a future without a past. Increasingly, North American culture is characterized by a “centripetal individualism” that scorns any communal record framed in the “preterit tense” because of it preoccupation with self-gratification in the “present tense.” Yet 1–2 Chronicles encourage us both to restore our sense of historicity and to reclaim the essence of our social identity. They reinforce the former by emphasizing the epithet “the God of our fathers” (some twenty-five times, e.g., 1 Chron. 12:17), a reminder that God remains the God of our ancestors in the faith. Chronicles bolsters the latter by linking individual identity with group solidarity through the genealogical records and cross-generational accounts of temple worship and related service responsibilities (e.g., 2 Chron. 31:16–18).
There is a sense in which even the form of the literature in Chronicles is a problem for many modern readers. The books of Chronicles are one type of story, a sequential narrative tracing the history of kingship in Israel. According to Leland Ryken, a story may be driven by a documentary impulse (i.e., telling what happened) or a literary impulse (telling in detail how it happened). In either case, the writer seeks to draw the reader into a shared experience with the characters of the story.6
By contrast, contemporary society has abandoned the shared experience of the connected narrative for a functional database consisting of “factoids.” The factoid is a piece of decontextualized information capable of being stockpiled in a massive arsenal of personal or corporate knowledge, given our multiple technologies for storing, retrieving, and publishing data. And yet, the strategies of contemporary epistemology promote triviality and incoherence, removing knowledge from the sphere of education and learning and placing it in the arena of entertainment or power politics.7 The information explosion made possible by ever more sophisticated electronic technologies has so fragmented and tribalized knowledge that our contemporaries now cry for some “metanarrative” that will bring universal meaning and coherence to the human experience.8
Ironically, the metanarrative our postmodern culture needs is nothing more than a universal “story” in which to root truth and reality. Alas, postmodernism has found no story large enough to include all the islands of human knowledge and experience. In step with the contemporary mania for data, 1–2 Chronicles give us “facts” about Israelite history: names, dates, places, events, and so on. But this two-volume book is also a connected narrative, a story if you will. Chronicles is a story about a God who chooses one nation to bless all nations. Chronicles is also about a people banished from God’s “promised land” because of sin and rebellion but restored to that privileged position by his gracious response to their repentance and renewed faith. According to C. S. Lewis, a good story “leaves things where it did not find them.”9 Chronicles is a “good story” because it “finds” the Hebrews in exile in Babylonia but “leaves” the Hebrews regathered in Jerusalem and Judah (according to the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah the prophet and orchestrated by the God of heaven, 2 Chron. 36:22–23).
In one sense Chronicles repeats the story of Genesis and the story of the entire Bible and offers a “metanarrative” for all of human history: the story of “paradise lost” and the journey toward “paradise regained.” My task as a “literary escort” through the “story” of Chronicles is to help the reader navigate the historical and cultural distance between the then (postexilic Israel) and the now (twenty-first-century world).
Successful navigation of any kind is dependent on accurate directional instruments. The “true north” compass point for this study is the assumption that the relevance of Chronicles for the modern reader must be based on some theological principle or principles demonstrating the continuity between the Old and New Testaments. Several examples of those theological axioms bridging the covenants are noted below, including:
• similarity in doctrinal emphases, especially human sinfulness (e.g., Ps. 14:1–3; Prov. 14:12; cf. Rom. 3:23; 6:23)
• correspondence in essential message, that of “good tidings” or “good news” of God’s freedom, release, and favor, and forgiveness (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 41:27; 52:7; 61:1; cf. Matt. 4:23; 9:35)
• consistent application of typology as a basic hermeneutic for understanding the relationship of the two covenants. Typology is literary foreshadowing and a method of biblical interpretation that establishes formal correspondence between Old Testament events, persons, objects, or ideas and similar New Testament events, persons, objects, or ideas by way of prototype. The Old Testament correspondent is identified as the “type”; the term “antitype” is used for the New Testament correspondent expressing the Old Testament truth more completely (e.g., the priesthood of Melchizedek [Gen. 14:17–24; Ps. 110:4] is the prototype of the superior priesthood of Jesus Christ [Heb. 7:1–22]; the sacrificial worship of Israel [Lev. 1–7] is a shadow of the reality of Christ’s “once for all sacrifice” [Heb. 10:1–18]).
• overlap in ultimate purpose, namely, making sinful humanity wise unto salvation through faith in God (e.g., Gen. 15:6; Hab. 2:4; cf. Rom. 1:17; 5:1; Eph. 2:8; 2 Tim. 3:15)
• identical understanding of the appropriate human response to God’s revelation, one of loving God and obedience to his Word (e.g., Deut. 5:10; 6:5; 1 Sam. 15:22; Ps. 119:9; cf. Matt. 28:20; John 14:23; 1 Cor. 7:19; 1 John 5:2–3)
Finally, this study takes seriously the principles of biblical theology articulated in several of the New Testament letters concerning the value of the Old Testament for the church. Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, indicated to Timothy that “all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16). By “all Scripture,” Paul understood what we now call the Old Testament (cf. “the holy Scriptures” in 3:15), since that collection of Jewish literature was the church’s only complete canon at the time he penned his letters. More specifically, Paul recognized that those things written in the past (i.e., the Old Testament) were meant to teach and warn us so that we might have hope and stand firm in the Christian faith (cf. Rom. 15:4; 1 Cor. 10:11).
Granted, there are two Testaments in our Bible. But we have one Bible, and the God of the Old Testament is the very same God of the New Testament (cf. Ps. 33:11; James 1:17).10
The English poet and Nobel laureate Rudyard Kipling once quipped:
I keep six honest serving men
(They taught me all I knew);
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who.11
I have enlisted the help of Kipling’s worthy companions here as guides for our orientation to the books of Chronicles. Our journey ushers us into Israel’s past, but a detached analysis of ancient history is not our final destination. Rather, our ultimate goal is active participation in the record of Israel’s pilgrimage of faith in God, recognizing their story is really our own. Much like Xerxes, who rewarded Mordecai’s loyalty upon hearing the chronicles of his own reign (Est. 6:1–3), we seek that kind of personalized investment in the records of the Hebrew monarchies that instills the desire to respond accordingly to the God who rules over all kingdoms and nations—all history (2 Chron. 20:6).
Lest we become victims of the same self-absorption that plagued the Chronicler’s generation, it is imperative we remember that the universal theological truths derived from our study have both individual and corporate application. Even further, our appropriation of timeless biblical principles for the life and practice of contemporary Christianity must consider seriously the next generation of faithful—since by definition “today” is the threshold of “tomorrow.”
What Are the Chronicles?
Literary Character
AS LITERARY HISTORY, the books of Chronicles supplement the records of Samuel and Kings. The books of 1–2 Samuel and 1–2 Kings are considered part of the “Primary History of the Old Testament” (i.e., Genesis through Kings), a connected narrative tracing the rise and fall of the nation of Israel. Chronicles, however, belongs to the “Secondary History of the Old Testament” (i.e., Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther). These books retell the same story from the vantage point of the postexilic period. In addition, they update the story by reporting the plight of those Hebrews who returned to Judah after the Exile and those who remained in Babylonia.
The Chronicler rehearses the history of Israel from the patriarchs (by way of genealogy) through the fall of the southern kingdom of Judah to Babylonia. As theological history, the Chronicles provide commentary on the faithfulness of God in fulfilling his covenant promises (esp. the Abrahamic covenant [Gen. 12:1–3] and the Davidic covenant [2 Sam. 7:4–17]). In addition, the Chronicles emphasize the centrality of the temple and legitimize the authoritative roles of the priestly and Levitical orders within the community. Finally, the books give considerable attention to the contributions of the Hebrew united and Judahite monarchies to the religious life of Israel.
As a literary work, the Chronicles may be broadly classified as history. According to Burke Long, “history” is an extensive and continuous written composition, based on source materials and devoted to a particular subject or time period.12 Above all, history is concerned with chronology and cause-effect relationships. More specifically, the books are truly “chronicles” in terms of literary style. The “chronicle” as a literary form is a prose composition consisting of a series of reports or selected events in third-person style, arranged and dated in chronological order.13 The Chronicles are not “annals” in the strict sense of the literary form, since they are not a concise year-by-year reporting of events pertaining to a particular institution (e.g., monarchy or temple).
The Chronicles represent a rich collection of literary types, including:
• genealogy (1 Chron. 3:1–9)
• list or catalog (1 Chron. 9:3–23; 2 Chron. 4:19–22)
• report (2 Chron. 9:1–12)
• letter (2 Chron. 30:6–9)
• prayer (1 Chron. 17:16–27)
• speech and sermon (1 Chron. 22:5–16; 2 Chron. 32:9–15)
• prophetic revelation (1 Chron. 17:4–14)
• song (1 Chron. 16:7–36)
This combination of literary forms and the well-developed plot structure of the two books confirm Chronicles as a work of considerable artistic merit.14
The vocabulary of Chronicles shows a tendency to use stock phrases and standardized expressions when addressing the need for a balance between the heart and form of worship (e.g., “rejoicing” and “serving God” with a pure heart, 1 Chron. 28:9; 29:9, 19; “generous giving” and “faithfulness,” e.g., 1 Chron. 29:9, 14, 17; and “thankfulness” and “joyful celebration” in worship, e.g., 1 Chron. 16:4, 7; 23:30). Finally, in keeping with the conventions of ancient historiography, the language in sections of Chronicles is highly formulaic. Several of the more prominent formulas are listed below:
• adoption formula (“I will be his father, and he will be my son,” e.g., 1 Chron. 17:13; 28:6)
• authorization formula (statement identifying the proper authority behind a given procedure, usually with “person X said/wrote/commanded …,” e.g., 1 Chron. 9:22)
• covenant formula (usually includes the word “covenant,” e.g., 2 Chron. 15:12–13; 23:16)
• date formula (reference to a specific year of a king’s reign for the purpose of locating an event chronologically, e.g., 2 Chron. 23:1; 34:3)
• intimidation formula (usually includes the word “fear,” e.g., 1 Chron. 14:17; 2 Chron. 14:14)
• reassurance formula (“do not be afraid or discouraged,” e.g., 1 Chron. 22:13; 28:20)
• regnal résumé (an introductory and/or concluding summary of the reign of a king of Israel or Judah, including such elements as: accession age formula, length and place of reign formula, identification of queen mother formula, theological review formula, citation formula, death and burial formula, succession formula)15
Historical Focus
THE GENEALOGIES OF 1 Chronicles trace the heritage of covenant faith from Adam to David, with particular attention given to the Hebrew patriarchs and the twelve sons of Jacob. The actual history addressed in Chronicles spans the Hebrew monarchy from the close of Saul’s reign to the Babylonian captivity of Judah (ca. 1020–586 B.C.). The accounts of David’s and Solomon’s kingships are focused on events and figures associated with the ark of the covenant as well as the preparations for and the construction and dedication of Yahweh’s temple.
The Chronicler’s history of the divided kingdoms virtually ignores the northern entity, the rival kingdom of Israel. The narrative summarizing the exploits of the kings of the southern monarchy extols their role as religious reformers and worship leaders in the temple festivals. The books of Chronicles conclude with this same emphasis on Yahweh’s temple, expressed in the edict of Cyrus, king of Persia. His decree permitted the return of the Hebrew exiles to Palestine and the eventual rebuilding of their sanctuary (ca. 538 B.C., cf. 2 Chron. 36:22–23).
Reliability
EVEN A CASUAL reading of the Chronicles reveals that the writer exercised considerable freedom in selecting, arranging, and modifying the extensive source material from which he composed his history. This condition has led many biblical scholars to disparage the integrity and historical reliability of the Chronicler’s record. In fact, the accuracy of the book of Chronicles has been called into question more than any other book of the Old Testament except Genesis. Specific accusations leveled against the validity of the Chronicler’s history include:
• the bias shown in omitting material from Kings related to the northern kingdom
• the neglect of the sins of David and the apostasy of Solomon
• the overemphasis on the favorable character traits of the Hebrew kings
• the tendency to modify material from Samuel and Kings in moralizing and theologizing terms (e.g., 2 Sam. 24:1 compared with 1 Chron. 21:1)
• the addition (or fabrication?) of historical material not found in Samuel–Kings (e.g., 2 Chron. 33:18–20)
• the inclination to enlarge (or exaggerate?) the numbers reported in the parallel accounts of Samuel–Kings (e.g., 2 Sam. 10:18 compared with 1 Chron. 19:18)
Scholars who are committed to the trustworthiness of the books of Chronicles as a historical document have responded to these charges with a variety of arguments. For example, the Chronicler’s omission of materials from Samuel–Kings should not be understood as intentional deception. Rather, the writer assumes the reader’s working knowledge of the earlier Hebrew histories. This allows the compiler carefully and deliberately to select only those excerpts that have direct bearing on the religious life of the Israelite community or promote the theology of hope the Chronicles are intended to convey.
Likewise, the skeptical stance toward the historical accuracy of the Chronicler’s “additions” to the history of the Hebrew kings is unwarranted. The insertion of new materials was simply the result of his wide appeal to sources outside the Samuel–Kings narrative. Many of these sources are identified by name and may actually represent older traditions than those underlying the Samuel–Kings narratives. More important, archaeological data and extra-biblical historical materials have corroborated the Chronicler’s record in those instances where the different sources converge or overlap.16
Several explanations have been offered for the Chronicler’s “embellishment” of the numbers and statistics taken from the parallel Samuel–Kings narrative (see fig. 1). Clearly, some of the numerical discrepancies can be attributed to scribal error (e.g., 2 Kings 24:8; 2 Chron. 36:9, see NIV note). Others reflect a literary approach that prefers rounding off of totals rather than exact readings. It is even suggested that the Chronicler may have introduced the ancient equivalent of allowing for inflation in his numerology (since he was writing some five hundred years after the time of David). Finally, it is possible that portions of the books of Chronicles may have been based on older (and perhaps more reliable?) Hebrew texts and manuscripts than the Samuel–Kings accounts.
The Chronicler’s modification of the historical narratives of Samuel–Kings proves more difficult to assess. Here the concept of Yahweh’s continuing and progressive revelation in Hebrew history and the consequent development of Hebrew theology aids our understanding of the Chronicler’s use of the ancient sources. For instance, 2 Samuel 24:1 states that the Lord incited David to take a census, whereas the parallel account in 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the instigation to Satan. This seems an unmistakable example of later development of Hebrew theology regarding the “agency of Satan” in Yahweh’s sovereign design to test motive and punish sin among humanity (cf. the role of Satan in Job 1–2; Daniel’s expansion of Hebrew understanding of resurrection from the dead in Dan. 12:2 based on Isa. 26:19).
Another category of conflicting reports in Samuel–Kings and Chronicles parallels finds its solution by analogy to the New Testament quotation of Old Testament passages. The New Testament writers both quoted and interpreted Old Testament texts for specific theological purposes. It appears that the Old Testament writers under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit also made appeal to earlier documents at their disposal in a similar fashion. This kind of interpretive quotation has sometimes been labeled “inspired exposition.”17 Apparently, God is free to interpret his own record!
A Sermon?
THE BOOKS OF Chronicles are widely acknowledged as “sermonic” literature by biblical commentators. In fact, Williamson describes the Chronicler’s work as a “levitical sermon” that both warns and encourages his audience.18 By “sermon” we mean preaching, whether an oral or written public address.
Lower |
Content Specifics |
Parallel Passage |
Evaluation of Chronicles |
|
(a) |
1 Chron. 11:11 |
300 slain by Jashobeam, not 800 |
2 Sam. 23:8 |
Scribal error |
(b) 18:4 |
Hadadezer’s 1000 chariots and 7000 horsemen, not 1000 chariots and 700 horsemen |
8:4 |
Correct |
|
(c) 19:18a |
7000 Syrian charioteers slain, not 700 |
10:18a |
Correct |
|
(d) |
19:18b |
and 40,000 foot soldiers, not horsemen |
10:18b |
Correct |
(e) 21:5a |
Israel’s 1,100,000 troops, not 800,000 |
24:9a |
Different objects |
|
(f) |
21:5b |
Judah’s 470,000 troops, not 500,000 |
24:9b |
More precise |
(g) |
21:12 |
Three years of famine, not seven |
24:13 |
Correct |
(h) 21:25 |
Ornan paid 600 gold shekels, not 50 silver |
24:24 |
Different objects |
|
(i, j) 2 Chron 2:2, 18 |
3,600 to supervise temple construction, not 3,300 |
1 Kings 5:16 |
Different method of reckoning |
|
(k) 2:10 |
20,000 baths of oil to Hiram’s woodmen, not 20 kors (= 200 baths) |
5:11 |
Different objects |
|
(l) 3:15 |
Temple pillars 35 cubits, not 18 |
7:15 |
Scribal error |
|
(m) 4:5 |
Sea holding 3000 baths, not 2000 |
7:26 |
Scribal error |
|
(n) |
8:10 |
250 chief officers for building temple not 550 |
9:23 |
Different method of reckoning |
(o) 8:18 |
450 gold talents from Ophir, not 420 |
9:28 |
Correct or scribal error |
|
(p) |
9:16 (Chron. is same) |
300 gold bekas per shield, not 3 minas |
10:17 |
Different method of reckoning |
(q) |
9:25 |
4000 stalls for horses, not 40,000 |
4:26 |
Correct |
(r) 22:2 |
Ahaziah king at age 42 years not 22 |
2 Kings 8:26 |
Scribal error |
|
(s) |
36:9 |
Jehoiachin king at age 8, not 18 |
2 Kings 24:8 |
Scribal error |
Compared with its parallels, Chronicles is the same once, higher 10 times, and lower 7 times. Total disagreements: 19 (j repeats i) out of 213 parallel numbers. |
||||
| Fig. 1. Numbers in Chronicles That Disagree with Old Testament Parallels | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Rex Mason has identified the essential characteristics of a preached sermon as follows. A sermon:
• must appeal to some recognized source of authority
• proclaims some theological teaching about the nature, character, promises, works, or power of God
• calls for some kind of response on the part of the audience (e.g., penitence or obedience to some specific instruction)
• often employs rhetorical devices designed to arouse the interest of the audience and draw them into the message (e.g., wordplay, hypothetical question, illustration, literary device like simile or metaphor, anecdote, humor).19
Admittedly some scholars are more cautious in their analysis of Chronicles as a “sermon.” They prefer to restrict the literary form known as Levitical or priestly sermon to isolated speech units in the books and in certain cases reject the description “sermon” for something more generic like “address” or “oracle.”20 Quite apart from these technicalities related to the definition and extent of the sermonic literary form of Chronicles, the term sermon seems most appropriate for characterizing the books because:
• the Chronicler makes repeated references to authoritative literary sources, especially other histories of Israel and prophetic writings (see “The Chronicler’s Sources,” below)
• according to Selman, the Chronicler’s message hinges on two words from God that emphasize divine promise and fulfillment: the Davidic covenant (1 Chron. 17:3–14) and God’s response to Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple (2 Chron. 7:11–22; see also “Chronicles As a Biography of God,” below)
• the books are filled with literary devices and rhetorical features (see “Literary Character,” above, and “The Composition of the Chronicles,” below)21
The issue of audience response proves more difficult to assess. Michael Wilcock claims that the Chronicles are a sermon encouraging right relationship between God and his people.22 Yet in one way, the Chronicles are a sermon without an application, since the Chronicler makes no direct reference to his own time period. The response of the audience, however, is implicitly assumed everywhere in the Chronicler’s sermon. The audience’s intuited understanding of the preacher’s application is a key ingredient of the art of biblical narrative. It also a subtle but most powerful technique for penetrating the heart and mind of hearer (or reader) with the truth claims of the preacher’s message.
Two characteristics of biblical narrative are especially pertinent to the Chronicler’s subliminal approach to eliciting the desired response from his audience. (1) The first is connected with the idea of plot development in storytelling. The plot of a story is a coherent sequence of related events moving toward closure. The essence of a story plot is conflict moving toward resolution.23 By his careful selection and arrangement of the narrative events associated with the Israelite monarchies the Chronicler has encouraged his audience to consider the history as a type of commentary on the rise and fall of Davidic kingship in Israel. For the Chronicler, the resolution of this conflict (i.e., the seeming failure of the divine promise concerning the Davidic covenant) is found in the continuity of Hebrew worship of the God of Abraham and in the restoration of the Hebrews to the land of Israel under Cyrus king of Persia.24
(2) The other characteristic is linked to the role the Chronicler plays as the “narrator” of the events in his retelling of Israel’s history. The narrator of a story speaks in the third person, leaving personal judgment and moral commentary to the subtle influences of literary structure and the dialogue of the main characters in the story. As narrator, the Chronicler persuades the audience to understand the history of Israel from his viewpoint, a viewpoint different from those of the participants in the story. Point of view is crucial for the interpretation of the narrative because it is the ideological lens through which the audience comprehends the events of the story line. The Chronicler’s viewpoint reflects the perspective of God and the ideology of the Hebrew Bible, making Chronicles a theological commentary on Israelite history. In fact, Raymond Dillard has described Chronicles as a “tract,” a religious pamphlet designed to renew Israel’s hope in God and restore right worship of him.25
The intrusion of the prophetic voice in the Chronicler’s history is another way in which the books may be classified as sermonic literature. More than a dozen prophetic speeches are scattered throughout Chronicles, addressed to both the Hebrew kings and people alike (see fig. 2). The Chronicler’s purpose for inserting the prophetic speeches matches that of Jehoshaphat’s speech to Judah, an exhortation to his audience to believe in God and the word of his prophets so they might be “successful” as his covenant people (2 Chron. 20:20).
Name |
Reference |
Title |
Audience |
Amasai |
1 Chron. 12:18 |
chief |
King David |
Nathan |
1 Chron. 17:1–15 |
prophet |
King David |
Shemaiah |
2 Chron. 12:5–8 |
prophet |
King Rehoboam, officials |
Azariah |
2 Chron. 15:1–7 |
none |
King Asa |
Hanani |
2 Chron. 16:7–9 |
seer |
King Asa |
Zedekiah |
2 Chron. 18:9–10 |
prophet |
King Jehoshaphat, Ahab |
Micaiah |
2 Chron. 18:12–22 |
prophet |
Kings Jehoshaphat, Ahab |
Jehu |
2 Chron. 19:1–3 |
seer |
King Jehoshaphat |
Jahaziel |
2 Chron. 20:14–17 |
Levite |
King Jehoshaphat, all Judah |
Eliezer |
2 Chron. 20:37 |
none |
King Jehoshaphat |
Elijah |
2 Chron. 21:12 |
prophet |
King Jehoram |
Zechariah |
2 Chron. 24:20–22 |
priest |
the people |
Anonymous |
2 Chron. 25:7–8 |
man of God |
King Amaziah |
Anonymous |
2 Chron. 25:15–16 |
prophet |
King Amaziah |
Obed |
2 Chron. 28:9–11 |
prophet |
Israelite army |
Huldah |
2 Chron. 34:22–28 |
prophetess |
King Josiah |
Neco |
2 Chron. 35:20–21 |
pharaoh of Egypt |
King Josiah |
| Fig. 2. Prophetic Speeches in Chronicles26 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
In fact, Schniedewind has suggested that these prophetic speeches in Chronicles represent a new kind of “prophecy” in later biblical literature—“the inspired interpretation” of earlier prophetic texts.27 The basic functions of these prophetic speakers in Chronicles included interpretation of historical events (e.g., Shemaiah’s speech in 2 Chron. 12:5–8), warning (e.g., Jahaziel’s speech in 20:14), and exhortation (e.g., Zechariah’s speech in 24:20–21). The Chronicler was also careful to emphasize the key themes of the earlier Hebrew prophetic tradition, namely:
• the divine retribution associated with the blessings and curses conditioning Yahweh’s covenant relationship with Israel (e.g., 1 Chron. 28:9; 2 Chron. 7:13–14)
• the call to return to Yahweh in genuine repentance (e.g., 2 Chron. 12:6–12; 15:4)
Concerning the former, Williamson has noted that the Chronicler only cites prophetic literary sources when referring to a “good” king of Judah.28 He further suggests that this may be the Chronicler’s way of shifting the thrust of the prophetic message from divine judgment to divine blessing. As to the latter, it seems the Chronicler recites the illustrations of past repentance on the part of the Israelites as concrete examples to assure postexilic Judah of God’s continued response of merciful forgiveness to those who return to him.
A Morality Play?
MICHAEL WILCOCK HAS suggested Chronicles might be understood as a drama of sorts, a “morality play” in the guise of historical narrative.29 By “morality play,” we mean a dramatization of a conflict between good and evil or right and wrong from which an ethical lesson may be drawn. Granted, one might identify a cast of characters in the narrative of Chronicles, complete with heroes like David and Solomon and villains like Ahaz and Manasseh. What better setting for the staging of a drama than Jerusalem, King David’s Zion and the city of God? Or could one imagine a more elaborate prop than the temple of Yahweh or more distinctive costuming than the priestly wardrobe of its ministers? But Chronicles may be considered drama for other reasons, especially for its sermonic style, the frequent intrusion of the prophetic voice, and the theme of divine retribution.
The sermonic style of the Chronicler’s narrative contributes to its classification as a type of “morality play.” Mason has identified several characteristics of preaching embedded in the literature of Chronicles (see above the Chronicles as “A Sermon?”).30
According to Henry Sloane Coffin, preaching is the presentation of “truth through personality to constrain conscience at once.”31 Chronicles is both sermon and morality play, in that the Levitical preacher articulates God’s truth as witnessed in Israel’s history for the sake of mobilizing the conscience of his audience. The conscience is that human faculty or innate principle of right and wrong that prompts self-awareness of moral goodness (or its lack) in one’s intentions and conduct. The portraits of good and evil in the Chronicler’s character studies of the Israelite kings call attention to the human “heart” (the word occurs more than thirty-five times in the two books). The Chronicler understood that a person’s will is inclined toward good or evil as it is informed by the character of the conscience, whether deadened by sin or enlivened by faith in God. This explains the emphasis in his “preaching” on God’s work of probing the human heart to test motive and encourage loyalty among the faithful (e.g., 1 Chron. 28:9; 29:17–18).
The recital of Judah’s history (the southern kingdom) underscores another key message for postexilic Jerusalem. This message is the principle of divine retribution associated with the blessings and curses conditioning Yahweh’s covenant with Israel. Beyond its sermonic style and prophetic interjection, Chronicles is a morality play because it showcases “a God of inflexible justice.”32 The Chronicler’s story of the Judahite monarchy substantiates his work as a “morality play” for two reasons. (1) It validates the thesis of divine retribution as an undergirding principle shaping Israelite history: The wicked have “perished” and the righteous have “prospered” over the centuries (cf. Ps. 1:3, 6). (2) The example of Davidic kingship stands as a warning to postexilic Judah that the retribution principle is not dormant but still operative in the life of the covenant community.
Lest the community suffer “spiritual paralysis” over the threat of divine retribution, the Chronicler also offers select case studies illustrating the divine alternative to covenant curses. One such case study is the account of King Manasseh’s reign (2 Chron. 33:1–9). Even as God’s justice cannot fail, neither can God’s grace, as attested in the repentance of Manasseh (cf. 2 Chron. 33:10–13). The Chronicler recognizes that his audience must have an understanding of the retribution principle or they are doomed to repeat past failures. Hence, respect for divinely appointed authority figures and obedience to the covenant stipulations are essential for the success of the postexilic community. A replay of the Babylonian exile is unthinkable!
Why Were the Chronicles Compiled?
THE DISPOSITION OF the Chronicler’s audience is much like that of the psalmist who lamented, “How long, O LORD? Will you forget me forever?” (Ps. 13:1). A cloud of despair and a shroud of doubt hung over postexilic Judah because of the apparent failure of Zerubbabel and others to inaugurate the new covenant promised by Jeremiah (Jer. 31:31–34). This new covenant also pledged that a David-like king would rise to power in Israel (Jer. 33:15; Ezek. 37:24) and that God’s people would be infused with a new heart and a new spirit (Ezek. 36:26–27). Later the prophets Haggai and Zechariah predicted that God would shake the nations and overthrow kingdoms and Jerusalem would once again enjoy renown as a wealthy commercial hub and an international worship center (Hag. 2:7, 22; Zech. 14:16).
This hope for Israelite restoration projected by the prophets has been deferred for two hundred years by the time of the Chronicler. The Hebrews are convinced that God has reneged on his covenant promises. Victimized by a martyr complex and paralyzed by self-pity, the contemporaries of the Chronicler would have found comfort in the words of the seventeenth-century English satirist Alexander Pope:
Hope springs eternal in the human breast:
Man never Is, but always To be blest.33
Indeed, the exiles under Assyria and Babylonia are over for the minority of Hebrews who have returned, but Judah remains a struggling and insignificant political and cultural “backwater” under Persian domination. National and political life are overshadowed by the pagan “superpowers” of Persia and Greece. The religion of the Jews is challenged by the rival temple cult of the Samaritans on Mount Gerizim, the great cult of Ahura Mazda among the Persians, and the Greek mystery religions. It is against this backdrop that the Chronicler offers a “theology of hope” to postexilic Judah, couched in the annals of earlier Israelite history. He seeks to assure the Jewish community of faith that the present distress will soon pass and give way to God’s restoration of Israel, according to the theocratic ideal expressed in Chronicles.
Chronicles As a Biography of God
THE PURPOSE OF Chronicles is only secondarily to rekindle hope through the retelling of the history of Israel, especially the story of Hebrew kingship. Its primary purpose is to tell the story of the God of history, more specifically, the biography of the God of Israel’s history. The Chronicler’s biography of God includes “chapters” addressing the themes of his:
• sovereign rule as Creator (cf. 2 Chron. 20:6)
• providential intervention as Sustainer (cf. 2 Chron. 20:12)
• election of Israel (1 Chron. 16:13, 17)
• faithfulness to his covenant promises (1 Chron. 17:18–24)
• responsiveness to prayer (2 Chron. 6:40; 7:12)
• justice (2 Chron. 19:7)
• goodness (2 Chron. 30:18–20)
• mercy (2 Chron. 30:9)
The “biography” as a literary form in the ancient world was a stylized account of the public and professional life of a significant individual in a given society. The “life story” of certain key political or religious figures was important as a model or example of the distinctive norms and values shared by that group or society. The primary purpose of the biography was to reshape or change the life of the reader through a literary encounter with a significant character portrayed as an ideal representative of the community. The Chronicler’s biography or “life of God” has a similar purpose. The “public life” of God, so to speak, is “chronicled” as one of absolute faithfulness to his promises made to Israel as his chosen people, especially David and his heirs (2 Chron. 6:14–15). The Chronicler reminds his audience that the God of Israel seeks a similar response as his eyes range throughout the earth looking for “those whose hearts are fully committed to him” (16:9).
Chronicles As a Theology of Hope
THE HOPE OFFERED by the Chronicler, however, is not simply “religious escapism” accomplished through a fixation on certain theological abstractions about God. Rather, the essence of hope is concretized for the Chronicler in the response of authentic worship of this God of history. The Chronicler is enough of a psychologist to recognize that hope is largely the by-product of a proper relationship of the self with the Transcendent,34 thus enabling the individual to engage in the necessary tussle with the fundamental polarities of life, infinitude and finitude and eternity and temporality.35
The Chronicler is also enough of a theologian to realize that an authentic worship response to the God of Israel’s history is crucial to gaining any integrated perspective on time and circumstance (cf. Ps. 73:15–17, 23–26). Time is the domain of God; past, present, and future belong to ʾelʿolam (“the Eternal God,” cf. Gen. 21:33; Isa. 40:28; 57:15). Likewise, circumstance is also God’s province in that he knows all things (Job 28:23–24) and sustains and directs all creation (Job 12:10; 33:4; Ps. 139:16). Essentially, the Chronicler offers hope to postexilic Judah in the form of instruction for worship renewal. Specific aspects of worship emphasized in this “spiritual renewal workshop” include:
• the recognition that worship is an attitude, a condition of heart and mind, more than ritual (cf. 1 Chron. 28:9; 2 Chron. 6:10–11, 31, 33)
• the significance of worship as “word,” seen in the emphasis on oath-taking, prayer, songs of praise and thanksgiving, confession, and liturgical responses (cf. 1 Chron. 15:29; 16:4, 9, 23, 36, 40; 17:16–27; 2 Chron. 15:15)
• the importance of formal corporate worship because of the benefits associated with belonging to a worship community (2 Chron. 7:8–10)
• the necessity of keeping a liturgical calendar as a reminder that time and life belong to God (2 Chron. 30:15–27)
• the contribution of music as the “universal language” of worship (2 Chron. 5:13; 29:28, 30; 30:21)
• the reinforcement of theological truth through sign and symbol (e.g., the ark of the covenant and the presence of God, 2 Chron. 5:7–14)
• the value of modeling in worship through priestly leadership and mediation (1 Chron. 15:11–15; 16:4–6; 28:21)
• the principle of lay participation in corporate worship (1 Chron. 16:36; 29:17–18; 2 Chron. 7:4–5; 31:10; 35:7)
Like the psalmist before him, the Chronicler understands that ultimately hope must be placed in God (Ps. 42:5, 11; 43:3) because hope issues from God alone (Ps. 62:5). Indeed, God our Savior is “the hope of all the ends of the earth” (Ps. 65:5).
The Chronicler’s remedy for overcoming spiritual malaise remains a potent medicine for God’s people today. The essential ingredients of the Chronicler’s antidote are as contemporary as that of modern psychotherapy as it engages the dysfunction spawned in our culture of narcissism—a variety of interrelated cognitive and behavioral strategies targeting self-absorption.36 The Chronicler’s prescription for moving his audience off “self-center” reads like this:
• shift the focus from self to God through the experience of worship renewal (2 Chron. 6:18–21; cf. Ps. 73:13–28)
• contextualize the role of the individual in the larger community of faith (i.e., the notion of many members in one body, whether Israel in the Old Testament or the church in the New Testament, cf. 2 Chron. 7:14)
• develop a cross-generational blueprint for spiritual growth and development (i.e., focused strategies promoting the welfare of the “next generation”; e.g., David’s extensive preparations assuring the success of his son Solomon, 1 Chron. 28–29)
• gain long-range perspective by locating the individual (i.e., the immediate personal concerns of the postexilic Hebrews at the time of the Chronicler) on the continuum of the community’s history (i.e., “God’s story” of redemption for all creation through the nation of Israel; note the numerous occurrences of the phrase “the God of our fathers” in Chronicles, e.g., 1 Chron. 12:17; 29:18)
Chronicles As a Call to Worship
LITURGICALLY, THE CALL to worship is an invitation, a summoning of the assembly of the faithful into God’s presence. The call to worship is a call to celebration, praising God for who he is as the only true God and thanking him for what he has done to restore the pre-Fall creation order and to redeem fallen humanity. Certain portions of the books of Chronicles emphasize temple worship, especially the pilgrimage festivals, and they are presented as a model for worship in postexilic Judah. Some of these texts still have currency for use as a call to worship for our contemporary church settings (e.g., 1 Chron. 29:10–13; 2 Chron. 7:14).
But there is another sense in which the entirety of 1 and 2 Chronicles is a call to worship because in retelling the story of Israel’s history we have a “biography of God” (or even an “autobiography,” since God inspired the writing of the Chronicles by his Holy Spirit, see above). In telling the story of the God of history, and more specifically the God of Israel’s history, this biography reveals who God is and what he has done for Israel and ultimately for all the nations. Once we have entered into God’s presence through the literary portal of “salvation history” as narrated in Chronicles, what can our response be but one of praise and thanksgiving!
Give thanks to the LORD, call on his name;
make known among the nations what he has done.
Sing to him, sing praise to him;
tell of all his wonderful acts.
Glory in his holy name;
let the hearts of those who seek the LORD rejoice. (1 Chron. 16:8–10)37
When Were the Chronicles Compiled?
THE CHRONICLES, ALONG with Ezra-Nehemiah, are probably the latest books of the Old Testament in respect to the date of composition. The time of writing for the Chronicles is usually assigned to the postexilic period of Hebrew history. Dates range anywhere from the reforms of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah (ca. 515 B.C.) to well into the Greek period (sometime between 300 and 160 B.C.).
The last dated event in Chronicles is the record of the decree issued by the Persian King Cyrus permitting the Jews to return to Palestine from exile in Babylonia (ca. 538 B.C.; cf. 2 Chron. 36:22–23). If Zerubbabel’s genealogy is ordered in chronological sequence, however (cf. 1 Chron. 3:17–21), then seven generations are counted from the exile of King Jehoiachin (ca. 597 B.C.) to the Chronicler’s own era. This internal evidence moves the date of (at least the genealogical portion of) Chronicles nearer 450 B.C. (assuming a twenty-year generation). The widely acknowledged associations between Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah (whether or not one identifies Ezra as the Chronicler) also suggest a similar date.38 Given the uncertainties in approximating the length of a biblical generation, it seems reasonable to assign the compilation of Chronicles in its final form to a date between 450 and 400 B.C.
559 B.C. |
Accession of Cyrus in Persia |
539 |
Babylon falls to Cyrus (Dan. 5:30–31)39 |
538 |
Edict of Cyrus (Ezra 1:1–4) |
537? |
Jews return under Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel (Ezra 1:11; 2:2) |
536 |
Second Temple foundation set (Ezra 3:8) |
530 |
Accession of Cambyses |
522 |
Accession of Darius I |
520–518 |
Haggai and Zechariah preach to Judah (Hag. 1:1; Zech. 1:1, 7; 7:1) |
515 |
Second temple completed (Ezra 6:15) |
490 |
Battle of Marathon; Malachi preaches? |
485 |
Accession of Xerxes |
478 |
Esther becomes Xerxes’ queen (Est. 2:16) |
465 |
Accession of Artaxerxes I |
458 |
Ezra arrives in Jerusalem (Ezra 7:8–9) |
445 |
Nehemiah arrives in Jerusalem (Neh. 2:11) |
432 |
Nehemiah’s return to Susa (Neh. 13:6) |
| Fig. 3. Postexilic Israelite Chronology | |
|---|---|
How Were the Chronicles Compiled?
As History
THE CHRONICLER MAY be favorably compared to the New Testament Gospel writer Luke as both a historian and a theologian. As a historian Luke gathered materials (including eyewitness accounts), investigated other historical sources, interviewed eyewitnesses, and set down in writing an “orderly account” of the life of Jesus Christ (Luke 1:1–4; cf. Acts 1:1–2). Luke’s Gospel is a blend of prose and poetry and combines third-person reporting with first-person speech (esp. conversations, prayers, and songs). Finally, Luke was heavily dependent on the early church’s use of the Old Testament as the source book for identifying Jesus as the Messiah.40
Likewise, the Chronicler wrote a chronologically ordered account of Israel’s history (from Adam to his own day) based on a careful analysis of existing historical sources. Further, the Chronicler’s history of Israel is a blend of prose and poetry and combines third-person narrative with first-person speech (esp. in conversations, prayers, psalms, and letters). Lastly, the Chronicler was also dependent on those earlier Scriptures contained in the Hebrew Bible (notably the books of Samuel, Kings, Psalms, Isaiah, and Jeremiah).
As Theology
AS A THEOLOGIAN, Luke emphasized the theme of God’s salvation for both Jew and Gentile rooted in the new covenant established by the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Luke’s history is a theology of hope centered in the good news of the kingdom of God, inaugurated by the teaching and work of Jesus as Messiah. Luke was also an apologist of sorts, since he sought to legitimize Jesus of Nazareth as the long-awaited Messiah and the church of Jesus Christ as the rightful heir of the covenant promises given to the Israelites.41
In much the same way, the Chronicler’s recitation of Israel’s history is grounded in the theology of the covenants associated with Abraham, Moses, and David. The Chronicler’s history is also a theology of hope, assuring the restoration of Israel as God’s chosen people on the record of his past faithfulness to the Hebrews in word and deed. Finally, the Chronicler served as an apologist. He sought to establish the continuity between postexilic Judah and preexilic Israel as the covenant community of Yahweh. Moreover, he demonstrated the legitimacy of the Levitical priesthood as the rightful heirs of the divine authority previously invested in the kings and prophets of Israel.
The Chronicler’s Sources
LIKE ANY OTHER historical work, ancient or modern, Chronicles makes use of earlier and contemporary documents. Like his New Testament counterpart Luke, the Chronicler is a model research historian, carefully citing the resources informing his edition of Israelite history. The sources identified by the Chronicler are sorted below according to literary category:
• descendants of Simeon (1 Chron. 4:33)
• descendants of Gad (1 Chron. 5:17)
• descendants of Benjamin (1 Chron. 7:9)
• descendants of Asher (1 Chron. 7:40)
• all Israel (1 Chron. 9:1)
• gatekeepers (1 Chron. 9:22)
• Rehoboam (2 Chron. 12:15)
2. Letters and official documents
• David’s temple plans (1 Chron. 28:11–12)
• Sennacherib’s letter (2 Chron. 32:9–20)
• Hezekiah’s Passover letter (2 Chron. 30:6–12)
• proclamation of Cyrus (2 Chron. 36:22–23)
3. Other histories
• the book of the kings of Israel (1 Chron. 9:1; 2 Chron. 20:34)
• the book of the annals of King David (1 Chron. 27:24)
• the book of the kings of Judah and Israel (2 Chron. 16:11; 25:26; 28:26; 32:32)
• the annotations on the book of the kings (2 Chron. 24:27)
• the book of the kings of Israel and Judah (2 Chron. 27:7; 35:27; 36:8)
• the annals of the kings of Israel (2 Chron. 33:18)
• the directions written by David king of Israel and by his son Solomon (2 Chron. 35:4)
4. Prophetic writing
• the records of Samuel the seer (1 Chron. 29:29)
• the records of Nathan the prophet (1 Chron. 29:29; 2 Chron. 9:29)
• the records of Gad the seer (1 Chron. 29:29)
• the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chron. 9:29)
• the visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chron. 9:29)
• the records of Shemaiah the prophet (2 Chron. 12:15)
• the records of Iddo the seer (2 Chron. 12:15)
• the annotations of the prophet Iddo (2 Chron. 13:22)
• the annals of Jehu son of Hanani (recorded in the book of the kings of Israel) (2 Chron. 20:34)
• (the events of Uzziah’s reign) recorded by the prophet Isaiah son of Amoz (2 Chron. 26:22)
• the vision of the prophet Isaiah son of Amoz (in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel) (2 Chron. 32:32)
• the records of the seers (2 Chron. 33:19)
There is considerable debate in the literature as to the number, nature, and content of these sources since many of the titles suggest considerable overlap. More important is the relationship of the Chronicler’s resources to the anterior texts of the books Samuel and Kings. It is now argued that many of the Chronicler’s bibliographic citations do not represent independent sources but are variant names for the two primary sources of 1–2 Kings’ corpus (“the book of the annals of the kings of Judah” [e.g., 1 Kings 14:29] and “the book of the annals of the kings of Israel” [e.g., 1 Kings 15:31).42
The Chronicler’s modification of Kings’ royal annal formula to include the name “Israel” should not be construed as deception or misrepresentation (e.g., 1 Kings 15:23 refers to “the book of the annals of the kings of Judah”; the parallel citation in 2 Chron. 16:11 cites “the book of the kings of Judah and Israel”).43 Rather, the expansion of the formula is in keeping with the Chronicler’s purpose to unify the Hebrew tribes after the demise of the divided monarchies. Similarly, the Chronicler highlights the important role of the prophets as a positive force in the Judahite monarchy by interpolating references to them as advocates of repentance when the narrative in Kings preserves no prophetic intervention.44
There is no doubt that the Chronicler makes use of historical sources no longer extant (e.g., the references to genealogical records). It is more significant to recognize, however, that the Chronicler relies principally on biblical books already established in the Hebrew canon for his retelling of Israel’s history (especially Samuel, Kings, and Psalms). This fact is important for two reasons: First, it affirms the high regard of the Chronicler for the received Scriptures of the Hebrew Bible; second, it provides insight into the exegetical tradition of the later biblical writers as it relates to the selection, arrangement, and reshaping of excerpts from those earlier canonical documents.45
The Place of Chronicles in the Canon
THE HEBREW TITLE of the book is literally “the words of the days” or “the events” of the monarchies. The Hebrew title is characteristically taken from the first verse, but here the title phrase is actually found in 1 Chronicles 27:24. Like Samuel and Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles were originally one book. Chronicles follows Ezra-Nehemiah in the Hebrew Bible, suggesting it either was accepted into the Old Testament canon at a later date or was viewed as an appendix to the Writings collection since it supplemented the histories found in Samuel and Kings. The text was divided into two books when the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek.
The English version adopts the order of the LXX in placing Chronicles among the historical books after Kings and before Ezra-Nemehiah. The books are called “The Things Omitted” in the Greek Old Testament, a reference to the things passed over by the histories of Samuel and Kings (see Appendix A on the synoptic relationship of Samuel/Kings and Chronicles).46 The English title “Chronicles” is a shortened form of Jerome’s suggestion that the books be called “a chronicle of the whole divine history.”47 The reference to the death of the priest Zechariah by Jesus suggests that these books were considered canon at his time and were located at or near the end of that collection (Matt. 23:35; cf. 2 Chron. 24:20–22).
The Chronicler is a theologian, religious teacher, and historian. His interpretive and apologetic history of Israel is designed to awaken covenant faith and evoke hope in the beleaguered postexilic Jewish community. The larger structure of Chronicles highlights this hopefulness in that the first book opens with the building of the temple (with Gentile help) and the second book closes with the edict of a Gentile king commanding the building of the Second Temple (cf. 2 Chron. 36:22–23). An expanded version of this tagline, the so-called Cyrus colophon in 2 Chronicles, appears in Ezra 1:1–3. The repetition of the decree of Cyrus serves to bridge the records of Ezra and Nehemiah with the history of the Chronicler. The connection of the Ezra-Nehemiah reforms with Israel’s “temple history” reinforces the Chronicler’s theocratic ideal and the expectations of a “new exodus.”
The Composition of Chronicles
IT IS GENERALLY assumed that the historical materials of Chronicles were spliced together in two distinct stages. The original work consisting of 1 Chronicles 10 through 2 Chronicles 34 was probably compiled in conjunction with the prophetic ministries of Haggai and Zechariah about 500 B.C. It is even possible this rewriting of Israel’s “royal history” was commissioned as part of the celebration surrounding the completion of the Second Temple. The second stage of compilation saw the addition of 1 Chronicles 1–9 and 2 Chronicles 35–36, perhaps in association with the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah (ca. 450–400 B.C.).
The genealogies of 1 Chronicles 1–9 preface the review of the monarchies of David and Solomon. The section makes important contributions to the overall plan and purpose of the book in several ways, including:
• calling attention to the unity of “all Israel,” a necessary theme after the fall of the divided monarchies
• confirming God’s election of Israel and demonstrating the divine fulfillment of the covenant promise made to Abraham and Sarah concerning “a great nation” (cf. Gen. 12:1–3)
• legitimizing the royal and priestly leadership of the nation (given the particular focus on the tribes of Judah and Levi).
The section outlining the reigns of kings Saul and David presents a study of contrasts (1 Chron. 10–29). Saul’s disobedience, failure, and neglect of the ark of the covenant serve as a foil for David’s faithfulness, triumphs, and careful attention to the ark of God and Israel’s worship. The reign of King Solomon is summarized in the next major unit of the history (2 Chron. 1–9). The theme of promise and fulfillment related to the Davidic covenant ties the story of Solomon to the preceding narrative, with David cast as a “second Moses” and Solomon a “second Joshua.” The concluding block of material reviews the history of Judah in view of God’s promise to “forgive and heal” when the Israelites “humble themselves and pray and seek” God (2 Chron. 7:14), emphasizing the reigns of Hezekiah and Josiah. Both are idealized as Davidic and Solomonic type figures because of their attention to the cleansing of the temple and the restoration of proper worship in Jerusalem (2 Chron. 10–36).
Where Were the Chronicles Compiled?
THE PROVENANCE OR geographical setting for the writing of the Chronicles is unspecified. Since the Chronicler has written a theology of hope for post-exilic Judah, it seems likely the compiler was a member of the restoration community. Further, the books seek to legitimize the priestly corps attending to the duties associated with temple liturgy and to reestablish Jerusalem as the authentic site of Hebrew worship. This makes it probable that the author of Chronicles was also a resident of postexilic Jerusalem.
Authorship
THE CHRONICLES ARE an anonymous composition. The stylistic and linguistic similarities with Ezra-Nehemiah have led many biblical scholars to conclude a single “Chronicler” was responsible for all four books. Following the Jewish tradition assigning the Chronicles to Ezra the scribe (Babylonian Talmud, Baba Batra 15a), W. F. Albright championed the view that Ezra and the Chronicler were the same person.48 At one time there was an overwhelming consensus that Ezra and Chronicles were the product of a single author, but the identification of the Chronicler with Ezra the scribe has not been universally accepted.
More recent biblical research has questioned the literary ties between Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah.49 The comprehensive analysis of the Chronicler’s language has led most Old Testament scholars today to acknowledge the unity of the two books of Chronicles but reject the idea of common authorship of Ezra-Nehemiah. Now the tendency is to separate Chronicles from Ezra-Nehemiah and recognize the two works as distinct compositions.50 Thematic differences such as the lack of Davidic messianism, “second exodus” overtones, and the “pan-Israelite” emphasis in the latter are also cited as reasons for this detachment. At present it seems best to accept the books of Chronicles as a unified composition written by an unknown “Chronicler.” The writer’s pointed interests in the temple and its priestly and Levitical personnel suggest he himself is a priest or Levite employed in the service of the temple. The exact relationship of the Chronicler’s writings to the books of Ezra-Nehemiah remains an open question.
The Chronicler As Pastor
THE CHRONICLER IS both a historian and a theologian. As a historian the Chronicler selects and arranges historical information following the conventions of historiography, whether ancient or modern. His account of Israel’s history utilizes sources, contains unifying themes, emphasizes the role of key individuals (e.g., kings and prophets) as “history makers,” and takes note of causality in the events of human history. As a theologian the Chronicler assumes God’s sovereignty and his providential activity in created order, emphasizing themes related to the divine-human relationship like covenant and temple worship.
But perhaps more important, the Chronicler is also a pastor and an exegete. As a pastor the Chronicler’s purpose is both instruction and exhortation. His narrative is a sermon, an exposition on the pattern of failure and judgment, grace and restoration in Israel’s history. According to Wilcock, “its object is the fostering of a right relationship between God and his people.”51 Two methods are especially important to the Chronicler as an interpreter of Israel’s history: (1) a form of biblical typology (i.e., formal correspondence between persons, institutions, and/or events of earlier biblical history with the same of later biblical history by way of foreshadowing), and (2) and what is now known as innerbiblical exegesis (i.e., the Bible’s citation of itself as a historical and theological source).52 In each case, the Chronicler’s exegetical method assumes the supremacy of the earlier Hebrew Scriptures and models the principle of permitting Scripture to interpret Scripture.53
Audience
THE RESIDENTS OF postexilic Jerusalem and the surrounding province of Judah are the Chronicler’s audience. Although they are several generations removed from those Jews who repatriated the land after the Babylonian exile, the memory of that catastrophe lingers. The emphasis on “all Israel” (the phrase occurs forty times in the Chronicles) suggests the writer has the entire nation in mind, including the political leadership, the religious leadership, and the general populace. The theme of “all Israel” in the Chronicler’s history also suggests an attempt to heal wounds of schism among the Hebrew tribes as a result of the division caused by the competing monarchies of Israel and Judah. The twin themes of the Davidic covenant and temple worship serve to remind the Israelites that their unity is assured by divine promise and demonstrated in their common worship of Yahweh, the God of the covenant. Thanks to Kipling’s “six trusted servants,” we are now ready to begin our pilgrimage into the history, literature, and theology of Chronicles. I use the word “pilgrimage” because a pilgrimage is a journey made to a sacred place as an act of devotion. The Chronicler invites us into a “sacred place” of sorts, the stage of human history. The stage of human history is sacred in one sense because it is the arena of God’s redemptive activity.
To read and study history is to read and study theology, because the God of the Bible is the Sovereign Lord of history. Furthermore, to read and study Scripture is an “act of devotion.” The psalmist asserts that “great are the works of the LORD, studied by all who delight in them” (Ps. 111:2 NRSV). In fact, the righteous person delights in the law of the Lord and meditates on that law day and night (1:2). So then, our journey into Chronicles is indeed a “pilgrimage.”
So like Xerxes of old at the recital of the Persian chronicles, may the biblical writer’s retelling of Israel’s history pique our interest and draw us into God’s intriguing story of redemption—a story of eternal significance with profound personal relevance.