![]()
1, 2 KINGS
RICHARD D. PATTERSON AND HERMANN J. AUSTEL
![]()
Introduction
1. Historical Background
2. Unity, Authorship, and Date
3. Origin, Occasion, and Purpose
4. Literary Form
5. Theological Values
6. Canonicity
7. Text
8. Chronology
9. Bibliography
10. Outline
1. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The events of Israel’s history from the latter days of King David till the capture of Jerusalem are selectively recounted in the two books of Kings, to which two short footnotes are appended, one concerning an incident in the early days of the exile (2Ki 25:22–26), the other concerning the release of the captured Judean king Jehoiachin after the death of Nebuchadnezzar (25:27–30). The historical details span 971–562 BC.
The involved period moves from the politically powerful and luxurious days at the close of the united kingdom under Solomon to the division of the kingdom under Rehoboam and then traces the fortunes of the northern and southern kingdoms to their demise in 722 BC and 586 BC, respectively. Numerous references to the external political powers and peoples of the times—e.g., the Egyptians, Philistines, Phoenicians, Arameans, Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, Assyrians, and Chaldeans—are integrated into the inspired record. In particular the Israelites were to experience the Aramean threats and Assyrian pressures of the ninth century BC, the great Assyrian invasions of the eighth century BC, together with the resultant pax Assyriaca in the seventh century BC, and the fall of the Neo-Assyrian Empire at the hands of the rising power of the Chaldeans under their brilliant king Nebuchadnezzar II.
Numerous archaeological discoveries have confirmed, illuminated, or supplemented the biblical record, and many of them will be noted in the Commentary and Notes. Particularly important to the understanding of the Bible is the recovered inscriptional material from Assyria and Babylonia. The careful collation of these writings (supplemented by other epigraphic finds) with the biblical narrative has brought greater clarity to the understanding of the Near East during the early and middle segments of the first millennium BC.
Yet Kings is not primarily an account of the political and social history of this period; the work’s focus is on Israel’s spiritual response to God, who had taken Israel into covenantal relationship with himself (2Ki 17:7–23) and who had bestowed great privileges to the nation through the promise made to David (1Ki 2:2–4). Accordingly, within the pages of Kings is found a detailed summary of the spiritual experiences of a people—particularly its kings, prophets, and priests, whose activities largely point to the need for the advent of the One who would combine the intended ideal of these three offices in himself.
2. UNITY, AUTHORSHIP, AND DATE
The inclusion of the material on but one scroll shows that the Hebrews considered the books of Kings to be one book (see Canonicity). Thematically the continuity of the Elijah narrative (1Ki 17-2Ki 2), itself part of the prophetic section dominating 1 Kings 16:29-2 Kings 9:37, and the recurring phrase “to this day” (1Ki 9:13; 10:12 [“since that day” NIV]; 2Ki 2:22; 10:27; 14:7; 16:6; 17:23, 34, 41; 21:15) clearly indicate that the two books of Kings form a single literary unit.
The problem of the history of the compilation of the book is more pressing. Its author mentions using several source documents, three specifically: (1) “the book of the annals of Solomon” (1Ki 11:41), drawn from biographical, annalistic, and archival material contemporary with the details of 1 Kings 1–11; (2) “the book of the annals of the kings of Israel,” mentioned some eighteen times in 1 Kings 14:19-2 Kings 15:31 and drawn largely from the official records of the northern kingdom that were kept by the court recorder (cf. 2Sa 8:16; 20:24; 1Ki 4:3; 2Ki 18:18, 37; 2Ch 34:8); and (3) “the book of the annals of the kings of Judah,” mentioned fifteen times (1Ki 14:29-2Ki 24:5), being a record of the events of the reigns of the kings of the southern kingdom from Rehoboam to Jehoiakim.
Other unnamed sources may likewise have been drawn on for the book’s final composition, such as the court memoirs of David (1Ki 1:1–2:11), a cycle involving the house of Ahab and the prophets Elijah and Elisha (1Ki 16:29-2Ki 9:37), the records of the prophet Isaiah (Isa 36–39), and two concluding historical abstracts (2Ki 25:22–26, 27–30).
The use of source material and the great time span involved have occasioned numerous suggestions as to the unity, authorship, and date of Kings. Whereas older liberal critical theory tended to find three redactors of Kings, current scholarship focuses on the relation of Kings to the book of Deuteronomy. Kings is seen to be part of a larger work, the Deuteronomistic History, which stretches from Joshua through Kings. Support for this thesis is found in themes and language in Kings that reflect a prevailing Deuteronomistic point of view. Particularly important are the themes of centralization of worship (cf. Dt 12:5), prophetic fulfillment of the Word of God (cf. Dt 18:15–22), and divine retribution for Israel’s failure to maintain its cultic orthodoxy (cf. Dt 27; 28:15–68).
Various schemata have been formulated to account for this approach. Some have argued for a single edition of the Deuteronomistic History. Composed in the time of Josiah, it championed the idea that the king’s reforms were the means to rectifying the sins of Jeroboam I (cf. 1Ki 13:2; 2Ki 23:15–20).1 Particularly heinous was Jeroboam’s violation of the Deuteronomic law concerning centralized worship. Others have decided for a double redaction, the first in the Josianic era and the second during the exile. This second edition was designed to account for the fall of Jerusalem and the conditions of exile.2
A great deal of discussion has centered on whether one or more authors were involved in composing the Deuteronomistic History. Martin Noth proposed the idea of a single historian, the “Deuteronomist,” who wrote after the capture of Jerusalem in 586 BC in an effort to explain the reasons for the fall of both Israel and Judah.3 Central to Noth’s thesis was the writer’s emphasis on such themes as the violation of God’s covenant, the importance of centralized worship (in Jerusalem), and the evils of idolatry. Noth believed that Deuteronomy 1:1–4:43 was also the work of the Deuteronomist. Although Noth’s theory has gained wide acceptance, many have modified his thesis by finding additional themes that appear to have been important to the Deuteronomic historian.4
Others have decided for a multiplicity of authors. Usually this approach proposes a “Deuteronomic School” of writers/editors wh...
