2 Chronicles, Volume 15

Raymond B. Dillard, David Allen Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D. W. Watts, Ralph P. Martin

• Editore: Zondervan Academic
• Anno: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780310588498
• Argomento: Teología y religión
• Categoria: Comentario bíblico

The Word Biblical Commentary delivers the best in biblical scholarship, from the leading scholars of our day who share a commitment to Scripture as divine revelation. This series emphasizes a thorough analysis of textual, linguistic, structural, and theological evidence. The result is judicious and balanced insight into the meanings of the text in the framework of biblical theology. These widely acclaimed commentaries serve as exceptional resources for the professional theologian and instructor, the seminary or university student, the working minister, and everyone concerned with building theological understanding from a solid base of biblical scholarship.

Overview of Commentary Organization

• Introduction—covers issues pertaining to the whole book, including context, date, authorship, composition, interpretive issues, purpose, and theology.
• Each section of the commentary includes:
• Pericope Bibliography—a helpful resource containing the most important works that pertain to each particular pericope.
• Translation—the author's own translation of the biblical text, reflecting the end result of exegesis and attending to Hebrew and Greek idiomatic usage of words, phrases, and tenses, yet in reasonably good English.
• Notes—the author's notes to the translation that address any textual variants, grammatical forms, syntactical constructions, basic meanings of words, and problems of translation.
• Form/Structure/Setting—a discussion of redaction, genre, sources, and tradition as they concern the origin of the pericope, its canonical form, and its relation to the biblical and extra-biblical contexts in order to illuminate the structure and character of the pericope. Rhetorical or compositional features important to understanding the passage are also introduced here.
• Comment—verse-by-verse interpretation of the text and dialogue with other interpreters, engaging with current opinion and scholarly research.
• Explanation—brings together all the results of the discussion in previous sections to expose the meaning and intention of the text at several levels: (1) within the context of the book itself; (2) its meaning in the OT or NT; (3) its place in the entire canon; (4) theological relevance to broader OT or NT issues.
  • General Bibliography—occurring at the end of each volume, this extensive bibliographycontains all sources used anywhere in the commentary.

The Chronicler’s Solomon (2 Chr 1-9)

Bibliography

Any effort to elucidate the purpose and theology of the Chronicler must take account of the author’s distinctive handling of David and Solomon; an extensive literature has surveyed the subject. The bibliography here is a selective list, but will lead to the wider literature.

Abramsky, S. “The Chronicler’s View of King Solomon.” EI 16 (1982) 3–14. Ackroyd, P. “History and Theology in the Writings of the Chronicler.” CTM 38 (1967) 501–15. Braun, R. “The Message of Chronicles: Rally ’Round the Temple.” CTM 42 (1971) 502–14. ———. “Solomon, the Chosen Temple Builder: The Significance of 1 Chronicles 22, 28, and 29 for the Theology of Chronicles.” JBL 95 (1976) 581–90. ———. “Solomonic Apologetic in Chronicles.” JBL 92 (1973) 503–16. Brunet, A. “La théologie du Chroniste: Théocratie et messianisme.” Sacra Pagina 1 (1959) 384–97. Caquot, A. “Peut-on parler de messianisme dans l’oeuvre du Chroniste?” RTP 16 (1966) 110–20. Dillard, R. “The Chronicler’s Solomon.” WTJ 43 (1980) 289–300. ———. “The Literary Structure of the Chronicler’s Solomon Narrative.” JSOT 30 (1984) 85–93. Freedman, D. “The Chronicler’s Purpose.” CBQ 23 (1961) 436–42. Mosis, R. Untersuchungen. 130–38. Porten, B. “The Structure and Theme of the Solomon Narrative (1 Kgs 3–11).” HUCA 38 (1967) 93–128. Romerowski, S. “Les règnes de David et Salomon dan les Chroniques.” Ḥokhma 31 (1986) 1–23. Stinespring, W. “Eschatology in Chronicles.” JBL 80 (1961) 209–19. Williamson, H. “The Accession of Solomon in the Books of Chronicles.” VT 26 (1976) 351–61. ———. “Eschatology in Chronicles.” TynBul 28 (1977) 115–54.

The reigns of David and Solomon as recorded in Chronicles are markedly different when compared with the earlier accounts in Samuel-Kings; though the central events of their lives are found in both records, they are set in different theological frameworks largely motivated by the needs of their respective audiences. The outlines of the Chronicler’s distinctive treatment of Solomon appear in high relief by examining both (1) his deletion of material from the Sam/Kgs account and (2) his use of models around which to shape his version of Solomon.

1. The Chronicler’s omissions. The deuteronomic historian had divided the reign of Solomon into two distinct periods, a time of blessing and obedience (1 Kgs 1–10) followed by apostasy and judgment in the form of the schism (1 Kgs 11–12). The concern with centralization of worship, particularly with frequenting the high places in Judah (1 Kgs 3:2–4; 12:31–33; 13:2, 32–33; 14:22–23; 22:43; 2 Kgs 12:3; 14:4; 15:4, 35; 16:4; 17:11, 29–41; 18:4, 22; 21:3; 23:5–20), became the canon also for condemning the actions of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1–13). The era of blessing ended with attacks from adversaries (11:14–25) and rebellion from within (11:26–40); the schism itself was attributed to judgment for the sins of Solomon (11:1–6, 31–33). Solomon’s corvée labor and his numerous wives made him the negation of the ideal king (Deut 17:17; 1 Sam 8:11–18; 1 Kgs 11:1–6; 4:6–7, 22–28; 5:13–18; 9:15–23; 12:3–19). For the deuteronomic historian the record of the sins of Solomon, as well as those of David, was one more ingredient in the answer for his exilic audience to the “why” for the destruction of Jerusalem; though David and Solomon were Israel’s glorious kings, they too had their part in the failure to live according to God’s covenant with his people, a failure that ultimately issued in judgment.

In contrast the Solomon portrayed in Chronicles differs considerably. Any fault or transgression which might tarnish the image of David and Solomon has been removed (that is, with the exception of the account of David’s census [1 Chr 21] and perhaps somewhat regarding the first attempt to move the ark [1 Chr 13]). Instead the Chronicler portrays glorious, obedient, all-conquering figures who enjoy not only divine blessing but the total support of the people as well; he presents us not only the David and Solomon of history, but also the David and Solomon of his messianic expectation.

Parenthetically, it should be stated that the nature of the Chronicler’s eschatological expectation is highly debated. Scholarly opinion is divided between two extremes and a host of mediating positions: on the one hand, many find the author’s messianic/eschatological expectations central to the book, while others view the Chronicler as espousing the view that the purposes of God were so realized in the restoration community as to leave little if any place for eschatological expectation. For a survey of positions and bibliography, see Braun, “Apologetic,” 506-7; a recent summary of the issue is also found in Williamson, “Eschatology.” See also Brunet, Caquot, and Stinespring.

With reference to Solomon in particular, the account of the accession is striking. Instead of the bedridden, aging David who only saves the kingdom for his son Solomon at the last moment due to the promptings of Bathsheba and Nathan (1 Kgs 1), the Chronicler shows a smooth transition of power without a ripple of dissent: David himself publicly announces Solomon’s appointment and is present for his anointing; Solomon’s designation as successor is greeted with enthusiastic and total support on the part of the people, including the other sons of David, the officers and mighty men in the army (1 Chr 28:1—29:25), the very groups that had participated in Adonijah’s attempted coup (1 Chr 29:24; 1 Kgs 1:7–10). The Chronicler also deletes the record of Solomon’s compliance with David’s request that he take vengeance on David’s enemies after his death (1 Kgs 2). Gone too are the sins for which the deuteronomic historian had condemned Solomon (1 Kgs 11); the blame for the schism is shifted from Solomon to Jeroboam (2 Chr 13:6–7).

While the Chronicler’s ennobling of Solomon is effected by his deletion of any blemish found the Kings account, these are not the only omissions he makes in line with his own central concerns; not just Solomon’s sins are missing, but also some accounts which would have enhanced a favorable portrayal of the king. Since the Chronicler’s account of Solomon’s reign is given almost exclusively to his concern with the temple (2 Chr 2–7), narratives not showing any involvement with the cult are omitted. Even the enduement with wisdom is not wisdom in the abstract (1 Kgs 3:16—4:34) but is specifically wisdom to build the temple (see below, 2.c.).

2. The Chronicler’s models. It is not sufficient to look at what the Chronicler omits alone; it is also necessary to assess his positive contributions. In the case of his account of Solomon the author appears to have used three distinct models to shape the record.

a. Solomon as a second David. Braun (“Apologetic,” 506–14) has developed these parallels at some length. Solomon, like David, is king by divine choice; in ways not paralleled in Samuel-Kings, the Chronicler has twice recorded Solomon’s name in divine pronouncements regarding David’s successor (1 Chr 22:7–10; 28:6). The only occurrences in the OT of the term

“choose” in reference to the divine choice of any king after David are found in 1 Chr 28:5–6, 10; 29:1 in reference to Solomon (Braun, “Solomon the Chosen,” 588–90). As king by divine election Solomon, like David, enjoys the complete and immediate support of all the people; the Chronicler had elaborated at length on the support of “all Israel” for David at his accession (1 Chr 11–12), and now does so also for Solomon (1 Chr 28–29; cf. 29:22–25). Both kings are shown as having extensive concerns with the cult and the temple and its personnel. In some respects Solomon is even more idealized than David in Chronicles: no blame whatsoever attaches to Solomon as it had to David (1 Chr 21, and perhaps to a lesser extent, 1 Chr 13); Solomon enjoys the privilege of building the temple that had been forbidden to his father. While the earlier history could say that “Solomon did evil . . . and did not follow the Lord completely, as David his father had done” (1 Kgs 11:6), the Chronicler can praise Rehoboam’s early years as a time when the nation walked “in the ways of David and Solomon” (2 Chr 11:17).

b. The succession of Moses and Joshua as a paradigm for that of David and Solomon. Williamson (“Accession,” 351-56) develops the argument that the transition of leadership from Moses to Joshua provided the model used by the Chronicler to portray the transfer of leadership from David to Solomon. He notes the following ingredients in the Chronicler’s account:

(1) The disqualification of Moses and David from achieving their chief goals—the one to enter the land, the other to build the temple—is intimately related to the appointment of their respective successors (Deut 1:37–38; 31:2–8; 1 Chr 22:5–13; 28:2–8) under whom these goals are realized.

(2) The installation of Joshua had been the object of earlier form critical studies; Williamson (“Accession”) and Braun (“Solomon the Chosen,” 586–88) both note the presence of the same elements for this Gattung in the appointment of Solomon. Not only are the various elements of the genre present, but there are also numerous phrases directly parallel in the two accounts (Williamson, “Accession,” 353–54):

“Be strong and take courage” (

): Deut 31:7, 23; Josh 1:6, 7, 9; 1 Chr 22:13; 28:20 (cf. Deut 31:6 and 1 Chr 28:10)

“Do not be frightened or dismayed” (

or equivalents): Deut 31:8; Josh 1:9; 1 Chr 22:13; 28:20 (cf. Deut 31:6)

“The Lord your God is with you” (

or equivalents): Deut 31:6, 8, 23; Josh 1:5, 9; 1 Chr 22:11, 16; 28:20; 2 Chr 1:1

“He will never leave you nor forsake you” (

or equivalents): Deut 31:6, 8, Josh 1:5; 1 Chr 28:20

Stress on prospering through observance of the law: Deut 31:5; Josh 1:7–8; 1 Chr 22:12–13; 28:7–9

(3) Both Moses and David make double announcements regarding the appointment of their successors, once in a private meeting (Deut 1:23; 1 Chr 22:6) and also publicly (Deut 31:2; 1 Chr 28:8).

(4) Both Joshua and Solomon enjoy the immediate and wholehearted support of the people (Deut 34:9; Josh 1:16–20; 1 Chr 29:23–24).

(5) It is twice reported of both Joshua and Solomon that God “magnified” each (Josh 3:7; 4:14; 1 Chr 29:25; 2 Chr 1:1); the piel of

is used in all four instances.

A sixth point could be added to Williamson’s five: b...