2 Chronicles 17-25: Dialectical Tensions in Judah II

Last week's post covered 2 Chronicles' account of first three kings of Judah. Today we extend our analysis up to the reign of Hezekiah. As with the last post, this entry will take a look at the dialectical tensions within the Chronicler's narrative and how the Chronicler uses those tensions to emphasize the importance of proper obedience to God.

Jehoshaphat
Asa's son Jehoshaphat succeeds him to the throne and begins a series of building and fortification initiatives, as well as the removal of the non-Israelite sacred poles and high places, both signs of a good king. Indeed, the Chronicler writes:

The Lord was with Jehoshaphat, because he walked in the earlier ways of his father; he did not seek the Baals, but sought the God of his father and walked in his commandments, and not according to the ways of Israel. Therefore the Lord established the kingdom in his hand.
(2 Chronicles 17.3-5)

A few important things to take away from this:

1. The Lord "is with" and rewards those that follow in God's ways and reject outside deities.
2. Kings are compared to their fathers, who might be good or wicked.
3. Kings are compared to Israel, a people that consistently stands contrary to God's will by not following the line of David.
4. Kings have a habit of following the Lord for a time, but ultimately losing their way, as Jehoshaphat's father did. 

Jehoshaphat is so reverent as to send officials, Levites, and priests throughout Judah to teach from the "book of the law." He is loved by those he rules over, and feared by those around his territory, having a great army and great cities. But his success does not last.

In a story lifted nearly verbatim from 1 Kings 22, Jehoshaphat makes a marriage alliance with King Ahab of Israel, who tries to convince Jehoshaphat to attack Ramoth-gilead. All the prophets of King Ahab that are present say it's a good idea, but Jehoshaphat presses to see if there are any others. Ahab sends for Micaiah, who prophecies doom, saying the Lord has contracted a spirit to cause all the other prophets to lie. For this Micaiah is imprisoned.

Micaiah's dissenting voice turns out to be accurate, and Ahab is killed in battle while Jehoshaphat is saved by God. But the Chronicler has Jehoshaphat punished for his support of Ahab: Jehu son of Hanani prophecies that the wrath of the Lord is upon Jehoshaphat. Nevertheless, the king did some good in his life, which is not forgotten. This portion does not appear in the Kings narrative, and seems to show that the Chronicler is very particular about following in the ways of the Lord. He has to acknowledge the king's wrongdoing, even if the king is not punished for it.

Indeed, Jehoshaphat goes on to appoint righteous judges in the land. He defeats the Moabites and Ammonites after praying to the Lord and trusting in God to intercede on behalf of Judah. The Lord as divine warrior is feared by all the kingdoms.

The last we are told of Jehoshaphat's life is that he joins the wicked King Ahaziah of Israel in shipbuilding for vessels bound for Tarshish. Jehoshaphat is not directly punished for this, though the ships are all wrecked.

Overall, Jehoshaphat has a very righteous reign. The Chronicler does include a line from Kings (2 Chronicles 20.33; 1 Kings 22.43) that the ruler did not in fact destroy all the high places, but this contradicts with what the Chronicler previously wrote (2 Chronicles 17.6)  and seems to represent a textual error.

Jehoram
Jehoram is the first King of Judah that the Chronicler explicitly renders entirely unfavorable.

This character undoes the work of his father (biologically) by killing his brothers as well as some officials, and (physically) by installing new high places, which lead the people of Judah into unfaithfulness. He also marries the daughter of the wicked King Ahab of Israel. Jehoram is labeled as walking in the ways of the kings of Israel, a negative reference to his apostasy. "Out with the old and in with the new" is a common theme throughout the succession of kings, which either brings Judah into apostasy or saves it from apostasy.

And yet, we are told, the Lord is still champion of Judah, even though the king and his people are not walking in the ways of the Lord:

Yet the Lord would not destroy the house of David because of the covenant that he had made with David, and since he had promised to give a lamp to him and to his descendants forever.
(2 Chronicles 21.7)

But God's patience with Jehoram eventually reaches a turning point. Jehoram is directly punished with invasions by the Philistines and Arabs, direct repercussions for the king's evil ways. All the possessions of the house and all of Jehoram's wives and sons are taken, with the exception of Jehoahaz, the king's youngest son. After this Jehoram falls ill with an incurable disease of the bowels. He dies in great agony and "departed with no one's regret." (2 Chronicles 21.20) His death is not commemorated, and he is buried in Jerusalem, though in the ultimate sleight it is not in the tombs of the kings.

Ahaziah
The opening of Ahaziah's description informs us that a symmetrical sort of divine justice is exacted upon Jehoram before his death. The Arab invaders killed all of Jehoram's sons except for Ahaziah. This seems to be divine retribution for Jehoram's murder of his brothers. That is, Jehoram's murder of his father's sons ensures that his progeny will be killed as well - all except for one, representing symmetrical outcomes.

Ahaziah is as wicked as his father (and Ahab) and counseled by his mother. "But," the Chronicler reveals, "it was ordained by God that the downfall of Ahaziah should come about through his going to visit Joram. (2 Chronicles 22.7) This verse does not appear in Kings; the Chronicler instead inserts it to articulate his idea of divine retribution.

The righteous Jehu, who has been busy cleansing the house of Ahab, turns his attention to Azariah, killing his officials and nephews, as well as Ahaziah himself. This leaves a power vacuum, which is filled by none other than Ahaziah's mother.

Athaliah
In a rage over her dead son, Athaliah sets out to destroy the entire royal family (evil is clearly a familial trait; her mother was Jezebel). Only one son of Ahaziah survives: Joash is saved by his sister Jehoshabeath. For seven years he hides out in the house of God, until the priest Jehoiada (who is Jehoshabeath's husband) pushes to make Joash king under the protection of priests and Levites.

Joash
Joash is proclaimed king, and at the behest of Jehoiada the captains of Judah kill Athaliah. Thus begins a new cycle of benevolence. But as we will see, Joash is only faithful to God when Johoiada is alive.

Joash is a "popular" king that makes a covenant between himself and the people that they should be the Lord's people. Thus influenced, the people destroy the altar of Baal and the priest there. Jehoiada, for his part, reorganizes the staff of the house of the Lord. In appreciation of his efforts, all the people of Israel, including military and political leaders, march him into the king's house and set him on the throne. Indeed, people actually rejoice at being taxed in order to fix the house of the Lord. And the house is finally restored to its proper condition.

But we know that Joash is only faithful to the Lord because he is so influennced by Jehoiada. In a departure from the normal introductory regnal formula, it is written:

Joash did what was right in the sight of the Lord all the days of the priest Jehoiada.
(2 Chronicles 24.2)

Other kings do what is right or wrong on their own account, but Joash is dependent on the priest that brought him into power. Once Jehoiada dies, the king of Judah abandons the Lord, along with the rest of Israel. God sends prophets to turn the people, but they do not listen. Zechariah son of Jehoiada is even stoned for speaking the truth against Joash.

For his apostasy, Joash is defeated by the Army of Aram. When the army withdraws, Joash's servants remember the blood of Zechariah, and murder Joash on his bed. Joash is buried in Jerusalem, though separate from the other kings. Though King Joash was apparently faithful during Jehoiada's lifetime, it seems that it was truly the priest who was responsible for Judah's peace and prosperity.

Amaziah
Amaziah takes a semi-pious approach to "cleansing" after becoming king. He kills the servants who murdered his (ultimately not pious) father, though does not punish their children, in deference to Mosaic Law. (Deuteronomy 24.16) For this it is said:

He did what was right in the sight of the Lord, yet not with a true heart.
(2 Chronicles 25.2)

Amaziah's righteousness is apparent in his attack on the Edomites. He initially plans to attack with his men, alongside 100,000 Israelite warrior hired for 100 talents of silver. But a man of God advises the king to leave the Israelites out of battle, for the Lord is not with Israel. Amaziah obeys, but after the slaughter of the Amonites resorts to worship of the gods of Seir. For this he is punished through defeat at the hands of the Israelites, an act the Chronicler tells us is divinely ordained.

So the Chronicler continues to bring to light dialectical tensions, and we continue to discover them.


Good night. Stay tuned for an account of the final kings of Judah next week - their pride, their sins, and their good works alike!

2 Chronicles 10-16: Dialectical Tensions in Judah I

After the tales of David and Solomon, the Chronicler begins his account of the succession of Kings of Judah. As discussed in the post on Chronicles' account of King David and last week's post on King Solomon's reign, the Chronicler has a very particular worldview in his rewriting of the tale of the rulers of Israel and Judah described in the Book of Kings. In fact, the Chronicler leaves out the kings of Israel entirely, emphasizing that only Judah remained faithful to God during this era. In the eyes of the Chronicler, the Davidic line was the only legitimate one, so only the Southern Kingdom, centered in worship around Jerusalem, needed to be recorded.

The Chronicler is notable for his emphasizing another point: divine retribution is dealt to kings for their evil actions in their own lifetimes. Kings that are faithful to the Lord are blessed with either peace or victory in war. The reigns of the greatest kings of Judah are associated with building projects. The resulting effect is that the people of Judah are destroyed when their king is wicked, but they build great things when their leader is good.

Chronicles therefore serves as an excellent example of dialectical tensions, the tensions between God's will that humankind obey him and humankind's penchant for not obeying the law of God. These forces give shape to biblical narrative, and move the story forward through cycles of devotion and apostasy.

Dialectical tensions are perhaps best expressed in Azariah's words to King Asa of Judah:

Hear me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin: The Lord is with you, while you are with him. If you seek him, he will be found by you, but if you abandon him, he will abandon you. For a long time Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law; but when in their distress they turned to the Lord, the God of Israel, and sought him, he was found by them.
(2 Chronicles 15.2-4)

Today's post explains the notable characteristics that the Chronicler emphasizes about the first three kings of Judah.

Rehoboam
Solomon's son gets off to a rocky start by ostracizing all of Israel except for Judah. He does it in a rather tactless style - promising to add to the workload of a tired people, and to enact stronger discipline among his followers. The story seems to suggest that had he listened to the elders instead of his entourage, Israel and Judah would have remained united.

Rehoboam makes a mistake that will trip up a few kings after him. While he is politically weak, he obeys the Lord. But when he becomes established and politically strong, he abandons the law of the Lord, and the people follow suit. Therefore, "because they had been unfaithful to the Lord," Judah is overrun by King Shishak if Egypt. (2 Chronicles 12.2) The prophet Shemaiah puts it nicely: "Thus says the Lord: You abandoned me, so I have abandoned you to Shishak." (2 Chronicles 12.5). The people acknowledge this, humble themselves, and the Lord relents somewhat. The people will not be destroyed, but they will serve Shishak as punishment. In the words of the Lord: "Nevertheless they shall be his servants, so that they may know the difference between serving me and serving the kingdoms of other lands." (2 Chronicles 8) This is an interesting way to put it; when Israel desired a monarch, the Lord emphasized that they would be sacrificing the best qualities of a divine ruler for an earthly one. Now Judah must serve a foreign earthly ruler in addition to the one that was chosen - it must pay tribute to the Egyptian King.

But because Rehoboam humbles himself, he only loses earthly treasures, and Judah is not completely destroyed.

Abijah
Abijah has the task of facing off against Jeroboam, the King of Israel. Luckily, he is faithful to the Lord and so Israel emerges triumphant: "Thus the Israelites were subdued at that time, and the people of Judah prevailed, because they relied on the Lord, the God of their ancestors." (2 Chronicles 13.18)

Asa
This king's reign goes well for most of his life. Judah enjoys ten years of peace during his reign, as he does what is right in the sight of the Lord. He destroys the vestiges of idol worship and spruces up Judah:

Asa did what was good and right in the sight of the Lord his God. He took away the foreign altars and the high places, broke down the pillars, hewed down the sacred poles, and commanded Judah to seek the Lord, the God of their ancestors, and to keep the law and the commandment. He also removed from all the cities of Judah the high places and the incense altars. And the kingdom had rest under him. He built fortified cities in Judah while the land had rest. He had no war in those years, for the Lord gave him peace. He said to Judah, “Let us build these cities, and surround them with walls and towers, gates and bars; the land is still ours because we have sought the Lord our God; we have sought him, and he has given us peace on every side.” So they built and prospered. Asa had an army of three hundred thousand from Judah, armed with large shields and spears, and two hundred eighty thousand troops from Benjamin who carried shields and drew bows; all these were mighty warriors.
(2 Chronicles 14.2-8)

 Note that Asa has peace because the Lord bestows it upon him. Righteous actions by Kings are rewarded. Unrighteous actions are punished.

It might seem strange to have such a great army during a time of peace, but the narrative includes it because it demonstrates very effectively the power that Judah has. Asa and his army defeat an Ethiopian army comprised of a million men and three hundred chariots.

Asa goes on to be a great reformer, going so far as to remove his mother Maacah from her post as queen mother because she makes an idol of Asherah. But this great king ends up making a big mistake. When King Baasha of Israel threatens to attack Judah, Asa pays off King Ben-hadad of Aram to break his covenant with Israel and attack them, so that Asa might have peace. For relying on a human instead of God, he is punished with disease in his feet. Again he seeks human aid above the Lord, relying on physicians instead of God. For this he dies. Yet his funeral is well attended - for the evil he caused at the end of his life, he was a good king for most of it.

Our discussion continues next week with further exploration of dialectical tensions and the implications for the author and reader.

2 Chronicles 2-9: A Political Detail

The Chronicler continues in his familiar style or "rewriting history," as it were, in his account of Solomon. His story restates and to a degree reinterprets the reigns of the Kings of Israel. For more on this author's methods, check out last week's post.

Solomon's narrative in Chronicles runs roughly parallel to the one given in 1 Kings, though the Chronicler is careful to remove Solomon's character flaws, just as he did for David. In contrast to 1 Kings, we do not read of king Solomon's love of foreign women, the way they turned his heart away from the Lord, and the Lord's ensuing promise to wrench the united monarchy from Solomon's son (for that, see 1 Kings 11). Nor do we hear that he "sacrificed and offered incense at the high places." (1 Kings 3.3) The Chronicler's Solomon is much more faithful to the Lord. When the kingdom is wrenched from his son... Well, it happens for a different reason, not because Solomon failed to walk in the ways of the Lord. Likewise, his ascension to the throne happens quite simply, without any intrigue, in stark contrast to the account in 1 Kings 1.

1 Chronicles prepared us well for the construction of the House of the Lord, the temple. The building is exectured in 2 Chronicles, as one of Solomon's first acts as king. The account runs largely parallel to Kings, yet as we shall see, it includes a detail that would have a profound effect on future theology, to say nothing of the incendiary politics of a small Middle Eastern nation, (re-)founded only in the last century. That country goes by the name of one of the great patriarchs of the bible, the progenitor of the 12 tribes: Israel.

This essential piece of information is the location on which the temple will be built. 1 Chronicles 21.28-22.1 details David's declaration that the house of the Lord will be built at the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite. 2 Chronicles gives the place a new name: Mount Moriah.

Solomon began to build the house of the Lord in Jerusalem on Mount Moriah, where the Lord had appeared to his father David, at the place that David had designated, on the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.
(2 Chronicles 3.1)

Whither this detail? The mention of Mount Moriah transports us all the way back to Genesis 22: Abraham's near-sacrifice of his son Isaac. God commands Abraham:

Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.
(Genesis 22.2)

So Abraham called that place "The Lord will provide"; as it is said to this day, "On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided."
(Genesis 22.14)

Mount Moriah is the locale of the sacrifice! Though the location is not designated as such in 1 Kings, the Chronicler names the place. Mount Moriah becomes the geographical location that connects the past and present - without the mention in either Genesis or Chronicles, it would be a place with much less history. The connection is made, however, by the biblical redactor of the Kings tale, not the original author of Kings.

Why is this important?* It gives a very real location to two very important events in the history of Israel. The location of the Abrahamic story could not be proved at the time of the bible's composition. However, the location of the temple could be. The reference also aids in authorizing the separateness of the place: this is the place where the Lord first and foremost appeared to Abraham, and afterwards the place that David experienced the divine presence of an angel and deemed the place holy. The characters God and David serve to authorize the site as divinely separate. The implicit reference to Abraham by way of "Mount Moriah" further attests to the site's status.

This one phrase contains such mythological power ("myth" meaning "story," rather than "fake") as to create the connection we understand in popular culture today, millennia later. Without the Chronicler's temporally linking term, "Mount Moriah," we would have a much different understanding of the place today.

Over the years the place has been the cause of great dispute as it housed the two temples of Jerusalem and eventually a mosque. Today the location is known as the Temple Mount/Al-Haram al-Sharif. It is one of the most disputed places in the world for its importance in the three Abrahamic traditions [Judaism, Christianity, and Islam]. The dispute territorial dispute is mostly between Jews and Muslims. Jews regard the place as one of the most holy, as it is the location of the two temples and the binding of Isaac. In the Talmud it is even considered to be the place from which God gathered the dust to form the first man. It is also the location of the mythical [again, a "story"] third temple, which some Jewish thought asserts will usher in a new period of peace and prosperity for Jews. Today, the al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock are located on the site, considered to be the third most-holy place in Sunni Islam. In Muslim theology, this is the location of Muhammad's Night Journey, in which he was transported to Jerusalem and then up to heaven. Some Christians view the Temple Mount/Al-Haram al-Sharif as an essential component of Christian eschatology. From this point of view, the end times mentioned in the Book of Revelation will not come until the rebuilding of the third temple by the Jews.

The (physical and political) battle for the location is of great importance today, especially as Israel faces a new outlook in the Middle East with the impending power shift in Egypt. Time will only tell what new stories will be added to the narrative of the Temple Mount/Al-Haram al-Sharif.

---

*In addition to emphasizing the consistency of holy sites, the detail also fulfills the symbolic biblical cycle of departure and return. Israel and his family went down into Egypt, to be led out years later by Moses. Now the biblical narrative returns to this historical place - a place already consecrated by theophany [experience of the divine].

Comparative Literature: 1 Chronicles 10-26 as a Retelling of 2 Samuel

I hope having "Comparative Literature" in the title didn't scare you off. Then again, you wouldn't be reading this if it did.

After a litany of genealogies, Chronicles retells the narrative of Samuel and Kings, with a few key differences. The Chronicler is focused on establishing a solid kingship - one not founded in the blood of Uriah the Hittite and the struggle for succession of Solomon. The Chronicler avoids these through clever editing, but still must contend with David's census.

The Chronicler glorifies David. With one apparent instance of wrongdoing during his entire reign, David serves as a model king, a king par excellence. His rise and rule flow smoothly, without the problems of adultery or a disloyal son to disrupt them. This extends even to the rise of Solomon, his son. The Chronicler delivers not a tale of intrigue - like the one in Kings - but rather a straightforward and uncontested transfer of power.

The Power of God
The Chronicler is very much concerned with the proper attribution of God's power and humankind's folly, and makes a point of inserting editorial opinions in a number of places. The first comes in Chronicles 10, following Saul's suicide:

So Saul died for his unfaithfulness; he was unfaithful to the Lord in that he did not keep the command of the Lord; moreover, he had consulted a medium, seeking guidance, and did not seek guidance from the Lord. Therefore the Lord put him to death and turned the kingdom over to David son of Jesse.
(1 Chronicles 10.13-14)

Saul's wrongdoing gives us a clear framework for what a king should do and in fact stands in sharp contrast to what David, his succesor, does do. A king is to be faithful to the Lord, to keep his commands and seek his guidance. A king is to acknowledge, respect, and rely on the Lord's power in battle.

The Importance of David
David does all this. Or, rather, the Chronicler has David do all this by editing the source text that comprises Samuel and Kings to remove incidents that reflect negatively on the David's reign, such as the Bathsheba incident. David's lone sin in Chronicles is to misplace his trust in the Lord by taking a census of the people. This is considered apostasy because a census is tailored to count the men able to fight for Israel. A census would call into question the efficacy of God's holy power over war. It is not the earthly army that win's wars for Israel, but God's divine army. So why worry about the number of men you have to fight when the Lord ensures your victory anyway?

Even the sin of taking a census is mitigated somewhat by the Chronicler, who assigns the blame to a third character: Satan. David is incited by a supernatural force - and who would not be! This tactic also exonerates God of any wrongdoing. In 2 Samuel 24 God explicitly incites David to take the census in what might be a test of faithfulness like the one God gives to Abraham. This brings up the sticky question of why God would do this. The text of Samuel tells us he is angry with the people of Israel, but there is no textual material to back it up. David seems to do a fairly good job of ruling, and the people are not shown to act wickedly. God's actions therefore seem a bit peculiar. By attributing the temptation to Satan, the Chronicler exonerates God, somewhat exonerates David, and creates an entirely different sticky question: Who is this Satan character? That is a post for another day.

Fallout
The aftermath of God's rage against David - enacted, peculiarly, against Israel itself (or perhaps not peculiarly at all, when we consider that the cause of this in Samuel is God's anger against Israel) varies greatly from Samuel to Chronicles. The differences between the two tellings reveal each author's intention.

The Samuel story goes like this:
David realizes his wrongdoing. He confesses his sin to the Lord and asks that his built be removed. The word of the Lord, delivered through the prophet Gad, is thus that David has three options: three years of famine, three months of fleeing before Israel's enemies, and three days of pestilence in the land at the hand of the Lord. David responds, "I am in great distress; let us fall into the hand of the Lord, for his mercy is great; but let me not fall into human hands." The Lord sends pestilence and 70,000 die. The angel of the Lord nearly destroys Jerusalem before the Lord commands it to relent. David sees this angel of God standing by the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite and beseeches the Lord, "I alone have sinned, and I alone have done wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done? Let your hand, I pray, be against me and against my father's house." God instructs David to build an altar Araunah's threshing floor. David buys the man's floor and cattle, erects an altar, and makes sacrifices. These offerings cause the Lord to avert the plague from Israel.

The author of Samuel shows us a David whose thoughts seem to center on himself, yet whose "self-centeredness" can be expressed in a positive way." In the Samuel account, David clearly realizes that his decision affects all the kingdom: "Let us fall into the hand of the Lord, for his mercy is great." This is the ethically correct choice. However, a seemingly egocentric motive appears to follow: "Let me not fall into human hands. Later David will reverse this self-centered thinking for what would be the benefit of the Israelites: "I alone have sinned, and I alone have done wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done?" David then calls for action to be brought against him and his house, the true cause of the punishment. This reversal demonstrates that even though David has his shortcomings, overall he is still an excellent king.

The Chronicler:
The Chronicler, by contrast, has David thinking of himself the entire time - and rightly so, as he alone is the cause of the punishment. In fact, this has the effect of making David seem more righteous. David from this account acknowledges that he has done wrong and accepts total responsibility. Through careful editing, the Chronicler ensures that David is entirely:

David says to God, "I have sinned greatly in that I have done this thing. But now, I pray you, take away the guilt of your servant; for I have done very foolishly." God then offers, through the word of Gad, three options similar to those found in Samuel: three years of famine, three months of devastation by the foes of Israel, "or three days of the sword of the lord, pestilence on the land, and the angel of the Lord destroying throughout the territory of Israel." David's response? "I am in great distress; let me fall into the hand of the Lord, for his mercy is very great; but do not let me fall into human hands." The Chronicler has David entirely focused on his wrongdoing: he does not acknowledge even that his actions will affect Israel - though perhaps he doesn't want it to[?].

And in any case, it was all Satan's fault, right?

The Importance of Jerusalem
Jerusalem's importance to the Chronicler is evident in the description of David's purchase of Ornan's threshing floor for the construction of the altar (1 Chronicles 21.18-22.1). A parallel account is given in 2 Samuel 24.18-25 with the purchase of Araunah's threshing floor. The Samuel account has Araunah prostrate himself before David in a display of piety. Araunah then offers the threshing floor and oxen for free, so that David might make an offering. David, for his part, insists on paying. His supplication of the altar averts the plague.

The Chronicler tells a different story. Ornan (the parallel character to Araunah) sees the angel at his threshing floor, poised to destroy Jerusalem But the sight of a divine figure does not strike fear into him, as it does his sons, who hide. Ornan continues working until he sees David, and then goes before the king and does obeisance. The same transaction takes place, but Ornan receives six times the amount of gold as his contemporary in Samuel, which might be taken as a display of David's benevolence and/or Ornan's worthiness before the Lord. David makes a sacrifice of wellbeing, and Gods response exonerates David and proves the holiness of the site. God sends down fire to consume the burnt offering. The Lord commands the angel to sheath his sword. The place is then confirmed separate (that is, holy) by the lips of David: "Here shall be the house of the Lord God and here the altar of burnt offering for Israel." (1 Chronicles 22.1)

The tale of David given in Samuel ends here. but the Chronicler has a bit more to add in order to further glorify David.

The Temple
The king, unable to build the Lord's temple himself because of the blood he has caused to be shed, commissions his son Solomon to build the House of the Lord. Solomon will rule at a time when the Land is at rest from warfare - indeed, the Chronicler associates the words "rest" and "peace" very frequently with Solomon. A man whose reign has been characterized by international warfare, David now becomes a diplomat, arranging for the construction of the temple through the laborers of Israel and the materials of foreign lands.

The commissioning of Solomon takes part in two episodes. The first is a private conversation between David and his son. This passage touches on a number of binaries that are important in the biblical narrative: father/son, war/peace, experience/inexperience. The second episode consists of David's public oration to the people of Israel concerning the transfer of power and the temple's imminent construction [These two passages are separated by a litany of lists identifying Levitical genealogies and positions - the book is not referred to as "Chronicles" for nothing!]

Transition
David's reign comes to an end in three distinct parts:

1. Praise of God (which also functions as a farewell speech)
2. Transfer of power to Solomon
3. The formulaic summary of David's reign

This brings us to next week's post: 2 Chronicles and the reign of Solomon.