Month: May 2020

Week 19 II Chronicles

I looked at a bible map. It was a nice, tidy map showing the northern kingdom coloured baby-blue and the south imperial-red. The two colours seemed about equal in size, which is deceptive because there wasn’t a 50:50 division by tribes. Israel-North had: Dan, Ephraim, Manasseh, Issachar, Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, Gad, Reuben, and some of Simeon. The south had Judah and Benjamin. A 10:2 split.
The armies weren’t equal either. The numbers show a 2:1 advantage for the north.
So the north was no weakling.
But the bible isn’t that concerned about material advantage. And after chapter ten its interest is: what’s happening to the life-of-faith-and-belief now?
It’s a timely question because Jeroboam decided to set up a new religion in the north. New religious centres, shiny new idols, new practices, a new religious calendar. Some of Moses’ ideas were thrown in to flavour the stew, but there were enough novelties that northerners had a decision to make: do-I-stay-or-go?
Quite a few northern Levites decided to emigrate, and the chronicler says that when priests started leaving: those from all the tribes of Israel who set their hearts on seeking the Lord God of Israel, followed them to Jerusalem. Which means that when members of the ten renegade tribes filtered south they were actually re-constituting Jerusalem as a kind of unofficially reunited-kingdom, but based on faith. So… still red, but tinged with ten shades of blue.

Notes: quote from II Chronicles 11:16; see also 15:9 (NASB version). See military census in 13:3.

Week 19 II Chronicles

Solomon was a smart, dynamic, ambitious and determined autocrat. So he had enemies.
As soon as he died a delegation of non-Judah-tribes wanted to renegotiate the oppressive labour policy. 
King Rehoboam had two advisory groups to help him decide. One advised that he lighten the load. The other said: work ’em harder. Crazily, Rehoboam chose suggestion #2.
What was he thinking? As the head of state he could have just publicly agreed with popular opinion, and then disregarded it.
Anyway, the interesting twist and explanation the chronicler adds is that Rehoboam’s decision: was a turn of events from the Lord.
A bible reader’s advantage is getting reminded that there’s not just one input. Rehoboam is making his own independent decision about state policy. And the Lord is directing the affairs of Israel. The Lord’s action is not unilateral because both he and the king are making decisions and taking action. It’s a bilateral process.
If Rehoboam had been conciliatory and chosen suggestion #1 it would have changed things quite a bit because then his decision is a different decision with different effects. I’m guessing that he’d still end up with only half a kingdom, and Jeroboam would win his rebellion and get the lion’s share. But all that comes at the end of a different set of events.
It’d be easier to understand outcomes if the Lord simply acted dictatorially. It complicates things that he doesn’t.

Note: quote from II Chronicles 10:15 (NASB version)

Week 19 II Chronicles

A couple of days ago I said I wanted to see how Solomon’s story ended.
The reason was because The David Story in I Chronicles had some pretty obvious, I would say glaringly obvious omissions that made the story a sunny one.
Today I see the chronicler doing the same thing with Solomon. The dark and gloomy I Kings ending of The Solomon Story is collapsed into three informational verses: Solomon was king for forty years; he died; and – if you want more info – go and read Nathan, Ahijah, or Iddo. Nothing about the Solomon who turned his back on the Lord.
There’s two things I plan to do this week:
First, I’m going to see how the chronicler deals with the other kings of Judah. Will he highlight them, too?
My second goal is to answer a question (it’s a bit complicated so I doubt I’ll figure it out): why did the chronicler omit this material? What was he doing? Why the exclusions?
Afterthought: As I finish reading I realize I’m more bothered by what the writer didn’t say than what he did so I ask myself: what do chapters one-to-nine actually say about Solomon? One thing I see: at least 135 verses out of 201 are about the temple – prepping, building, dedicating. So, 67% of the chronicler’s Life of Solomon is about the temple. That’s surprising enough to keep in mind.

Note: see the contrasting accounts of Solomon’s end-of-life in II Chronicles 9:29-31 and I Kings 11.

Week 18 II Chronicles

Earlier this week I didn’t need to have ears like a bat to detect an echo when I started reading the stories of David in I Chronicles because I remembered most of them from II Samuel.
Of course, there’s also a bunch of stuff missing. The chronicler says nothing about Goliath, Jonathan, Abigail, David’s escape from Saul, Bathsheba, Uriah, the Absalom rebellion. But he’s interested in David the King, and he ends up painting a pretty complimentary picture of a pretty ideal king.
I’m a modern-day Albertan so my first thought is cover-up – the chronicler’s tying-off loose ends. But even though that’s a kind of appealing default I have doubts about it right away. For a couple of reasons. First, my guess is that those downside stories were pretty well-known events – I’d be surprised if people in the ancient near east didn’t have an ear for scandal. The other thing I noticed is that the chronicler actually tells readers to check other accounts of the events: now the acts of King David, from first to last, are written in the chronicles of Samuel the seer, in the chronicles of Nathan the seer, and in the chronicles of Gad the seer.
Anyway, the reason I’m mentioning this now is that I’m seeing the same pattern in Solomon’s story in II Chronicles – repetition and, so far, the sound of lots of clapping. So I’ll wait & see how Solomon’s story ends.

Note: quote is from I Chronicles 29:29 (NASB version).