... not occur in 1 Sam. 5. A text-critical way to harmonize the two texts is to say that the first occurrence of Eliphelet and the following word, Nogah, were erroneously duplicated in the Chronicler’s list, resulting in nine sons instead of seven. That the version with nine sons is also preserved in 1 Chron. 14:5–7 is an indication that the writer made the changes in 3:6–8 deliberately. One explanation for this deliberate change flows from the observation that, of the total of nineteen sons of David (six ...
... the Chronicler projected to a time during the reign of David. 7:6–12 Benjamin receives separate treatment in the next genealogical section (8:1–40), but this subsection also deals with his descendants. (Interestingly enough, the two versions of Benjamin’s genealogy differ significantly.) Commentators normally credit the inclusion of Benjamin at this position to the sources of which the Chronicler probably made use. Specifically, Genesis 46 and Numbers 26 discuss Benjamin at this position. Benjamin ...
... the Chronicler projected to a time during the reign of David. 7:6–12 Benjamin receives separate treatment in the next genealogical section (8:1–40), but this subsection also deals with his descendants. (Interestingly enough, the two versions of Benjamin’s genealogy differ significantly.) Commentators normally credit the inclusion of Benjamin at this position to the sources of which the Chronicler probably made use. Specifically, Genesis 46 and Numbers 26 discuss Benjamin at this position. Benjamin ...
... the Chronicler projected to a time during the reign of David. 7:6–12 Benjamin receives separate treatment in the next genealogical section (8:1–40), but this subsection also deals with his descendants. (Interestingly enough, the two versions of Benjamin’s genealogy differ significantly.) Commentators normally credit the inclusion of Benjamin at this position to the sources of which the Chronicler probably made use. Specifically, Genesis 46 and Numbers 26 discuss Benjamin at this position. Benjamin ...
... the Chronicler projected to a time during the reign of David. 7:6–12 Benjamin receives separate treatment in the next genealogical section (8:1–40), but this subsection also deals with his descendants. (Interestingly enough, the two versions of Benjamin’s genealogy differ significantly.) Commentators normally credit the inclusion of Benjamin at this position to the sources of which the Chronicler probably made use. Specifically, Genesis 46 and Numbers 26 discuss Benjamin at this position. Benjamin ...
... the Chronicler projected to a time during the reign of David. 7:6–12 Benjamin receives separate treatment in the next genealogical section (8:1–40), but this subsection also deals with his descendants. (Interestingly enough, the two versions of Benjamin’s genealogy differ significantly.) Commentators normally credit the inclusion of Benjamin at this position to the sources of which the Chronicler probably made use. Specifically, Genesis 46 and Numbers 26 discuss Benjamin at this position. Benjamin ...
... the battle, the Chronicler’s text indicates that David gave orders to burn them. Klein (1 Chronicles, pp. 338, 342) cautions that one should not attempt too bold an interpretation of the Chronicler’s motive here, since it can be seen from some other versions of 2 Sam. 5:21 that there might have been a variant of this text available other than the Masoretic Text of Samuel, on which the Chronicler probably based his text. However, the variant text would have fitted the Chronicler’s cause quite well ...
... , the Chronicler’s text immediately mentions that David and the elders of Israel and the commanders of units of a thousand (compared to just “David” in the source text) went to fetch the ark. The inclusive portrayal of the event is again clear in the Chronicler’s version. Whereas the ark is called “the ark of God” in 2 Samuel 6:12b, the Chronicler refers to it as the ark of the covenant of the LORD. This is the first place in Chronicles that the ark is called this. Klein remarks in this regard ...
... a similar change was made when “bring an offering and come into his courts” (Ps. 96:8) was changed into bring an offering and come before him. The reference to “courts” in Psalm 96:8 again presupposes the completed temple, while the changed version in Chronicles is merely referring to the presence of Yahweh. Doan and Giles remark about these changes: “The alteration of references to the sanctuary and those courts was a necessary condition if the Chronicler’s audience was to feel part of the song ...
... 6:26–31. Very important are the opening words of the divine response: I have heard your prayer and have chosen this place for myself as a temple for sacrifices. The rest of the report of the divine response (7:16–22) adheres closely to the Deuteronomistic version (1 Kgs. 9:3–9). The Lord’s words confirm the acceptance of the temple: my Name may be there forever (2 Chron. 7:16). Yet this confirmation is conditional: but if you turn away and forsake the decrees and commands I have given you and go ...
... 6:26–31. Very important are the opening words of the divine response: I have heard your prayer and have chosen this place for myself as a temple for sacrifices. The rest of the report of the divine response (7:16–22) adheres closely to the Deuteronomistic version (1 Kgs. 9:3–9). The Lord’s words confirm the acceptance of the temple: my Name may be there forever (2 Chron. 7:16). Yet this confirmation is conditional: but if you turn away and forsake the decrees and commands I have given you and go ...
... /establish”) and darash (“to seek” the Lord) occur here again. The citing of prophetic sources for further reference about the king’s reign is also typical of the Chronicler’s style. The Chronicler’s evaluation of Rehoboam concurs with that of the Deuteronomistic version, but this is done in the Chronicler’s own programmatic language. Additional Notes 12:2 The Hebrew term “be unfaithful” (ma'al) occurs eleven times in Chronicles (1 Chron. 2:7; 5:25; 10:13; 2 Chron. 12:2; 26:16, 18; 28:19 ...
... The source text is again 1 Kings 15:23–24. However, significant alterations here relate the king’s disease to the preceding event. He sought (darash) a cure from the physicians rather than the LORD (2 Chron. 16:12). The Chronicler’s significantly different version of the king at the end of his life, representing him as turning from somebody who did “the right and the good” in the Lord’s eyes into somebody who “did not seek” the Lord for help in his illness required alteration and expansion ...
... , interprets this event: because you have made an alliance with Ahaziah, the LORD will destroy what you have made (20:37). To rely on alliances means not to rely on Yahweh. The death-and-burial notices in 2 Chronicles 20:34 and 21:1 follow the Deuteronomistic versions in 1 Kings 22:45 and 22:50, with one exception. The latter refers the reader to “the book of the annals of the kings of Judah” (1 Kgs. 22:45) for further information about the king. The Chronicler instead cites the annals of Jehu son of ...
... (Joash did what was right in the eyes of the LORD) sounds an ominous note already by mentioning that this was the case all the years of Jehoiada the priest. Later we will see that things changed dramatically after Jehoiada died. In his version the Chronicler omits 2 Kings 12:3, which states that “the high places . . . were not removed; the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there.” That statement would not have suited the very positive beginning of Joash’s reign according to the ...
... (Joash did what was right in the eyes of the LORD) sounds an ominous note already by mentioning that this was the case all the years of Jehoiada the priest. Later we will see that things changed dramatically after Jehoiada died. In his version the Chronicler omits 2 Kings 12:3, which states that “the high places . . . were not removed; the people continued to offer sacrifices and burn incense there.” That statement would not have suited the very positive beginning of Joash’s reign according to the ...
... faithfulness to Yahweh. Although the king’s letter is suffused with the Chronicler’s style and language, it is also clear that the Chronicler took a leaf from the Deuteronomist’s book in composing it (without the letter being represented in the Deuteronomistic version). A prominent Deuteronomic term, “to return” (shub), encompasses the letter’s content. The call in 30:6 is: people of Israel, return (shub) to the LORD. And the promise in 30:9 is: if you return (shub) to the LORD, then your ...
... Yahweh. Additional Notes 31:1–21 The elaborate description of the voluntary offerings and priestly duties in 31:2–19 is actually a substitution for the Deuteronomist’s reference to the Nehushtan mentioned in 2 Kgs. 18:4. The phrase in the Deuteronomistic version that probably prompted the substitution is the motivational clause “for up to that time the Israelites had been burning incense [or: making smoke offerings] to it” (2 Kgs. 18:4b). The elaborate expansion in 2 Chron. 31:2–19 creates a few ...
... It is at variance with the limit of thirty years in Num. 4:2–3; 1 Chr. 23:2–3, and was doubtless dictated by the scarcity of Levites. 3:9 The NIV has rightly corrected the MT “Judah” to Hodaviah, following 2:40 and the reading of the Syriac version here. However, we need to go further and adapt the MT banayw (his sons) to a name, “Binnui,” with the NRSV, REB, and NJB (see BHS), as also in 2:40. See the discussion of both cases in Barthélemy, Critique textuelle, vol. 1, p. 527. The reference to ...
... two thus bracket the statement of Moab’s hopes. Chronologically this lament does not follow on the expression of hope, any more than the first lament does. The parallel laments resemble the parallel halves of a line of Hebrew poetry. Like such repetitions, the second version goes beyond the first as well as paralleling it. So verses 6–14 begin by bringing out the reason for the calamity that has come upon the people in the prophet’s vision. As usual it is the nation’s pride in its greatness and ...
... enough natural vegetation to pasture their sheep. It is austere and tough. But each spring the desert blossoms in grass and flower wherever the winter rains bring new growth. The poem starts from that natural annual flowering and imagines a wondrously enhanced version of it whereby the wilderness will blossom and burst into bloom. The same word occurs three times: the desert will burst, burst, burst. In the way that meadows naturally sprout wild flowers such as the crocus, the desert will sprout forests and ...
... is speaking to Babylon’s subjects, for whom their mistress certainly looked invulnerable. Statements such as those in verses 7a, 8b, and 10b express how Ms Babylon looked to the Judeans. It is for their benefit, then, that verses 8–9 offer another version of her womanly transformation. As well as moving from authority to servitude, she will move from the security of wifehood and the joy of motherhood to the insecurity of widowhood and the loneliness of bereavement (v. 8). 47:12–15 The third section ...
... conjunction at the beginning of this verse that provides a transition to a new temporal horizon. Perhaps it is because it is missing in the Greek, but there is no textual note to that effect. In any case, the Masoretic Text begins, “And now therefore” (see NRSV and most other versions). In other words, we move from a previous oracle that describes what is happening in the present (the siege of Jerusalem) to a present oracle that proclaims what will be new in the future (its deliverance).
... . I was doing pretty well despite growing up always believing that I was my mother’s reject. “I reconnected with my mother at a seminar; she had sought me out because by now she had seven children, nowhere to live, no job and no food to give them. The short version is I bought her a piece of land, built a house on it, found her a job and moved my youngest brother in with me so that I could mentor him. Today he is a 3rd year law student. “The statement made about Jesus being the head cornerstone, the ...
... at the college. The ad was sponsored by a tavern frequented by students at the college. The ad read: “Bring Your Parents for Lunch Saturday. We’ll Pretend We Don’t Know You!” The ad was soon challenged by the college chaplain, who posted his version of the same ad on the campus bulletin board. It read: “Bring Your Parents to Chapel Sunday. We’ll Pretend We Do Know You!” Appearances versus authenticity. It’s rampant in our society. By the way, have you checked the labels on your grocery items ...