Ezra: Shame and a Remote God

Today's post takes another look at the book of Ezra, focusing on the shame that Ezra feels for the Israelites as they try to shed the past in order to establish a new future.

Read last week's post on Ezra: Looking in: Outside Sources in Ezra.

Ezra's Shame
Ezra is a particularly devout priest and scribe who is charged by King Artaxerxes with reestablishing the Israelites in Jerusalem. As a devout man, he is very conscious of the sins of Israel. He lives in a time when Israel stands able to reestablish itself as a legitimate nation as well as the legitimate people of God. However, there is a lot of work to do in order to reestablish both temple worship and a proper two-way dialog with God.

Ezra leaves Babylonia with a group of Israelites and plenty of provisions to reestablish the temple, and stops along the river Ahava, sending back for Levites to accompany the party to Jerusalem. There Ezra commands a fast in order to ask for God's protection:

Then I proclaimed a fast there, at the river Ahava, that we might deny ourselves before our God, to seek from him a safe journey for ourselves, our children, and all our possessions. For I was ashamed to ask the king for a band of soldiers and cavalry to protect us against the enemy on our way, since we had told the king  that the hand of our God is gracious to all who seek him, but his power and his wrath are against all who forsake him. So we fasted and petitioned our God for this, and he listened to our entreaty.
(Ezra 8.21-23)

The relationship between God and humanity has been put under immense strain, and Ezra's wording makes apparent and incomplete faith in the Lord on the part of the Israelites. Generally, God offers protection in matters without people having to ask for it. Instances of theophany (i.e. divine revelation) have God grant protection to a character. In the days after the exile, however, God's relationship with his people is strained. Ezra must actively ask for protection.

Ezra also reveals the historical mindset, which seems to be emerging from less-than-complete devotion to the Lord. Before the Babylonian exile, a leader would not be "ashamed" of asking a band of foreign soldiers for protection because such soldiers would be considered superfluous, even insulting to God. Before the Babylonian exile, this group would be rejected outright in favor of God's protection. Ezra, however, at least considers the two options, indicating an incomplete trust in God. His decision is a matter of pride, as though Ezra has to prove that his God is capable of destroying the enemy. For someone who has lived in captivity without centralized worship, this view is not surprising. The community and leadership that instilled faith in God has disappeared. Now faith must be found again.

There is a bit of housekeeping to do in order to resubmit to God. During their time in Babylon, and probably even before this, a number of men took foreign wives. This is a forbidden practice known as exogamy (meaning marriage outside of a clan or group). The bible maintains that exogamy is proven path to the greatest sin: apostasy (meaning the abandonment of God). Maintaining strict worship of God only is the first commandment listed in the Decalogue (Ten Commandments; see Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5). The texbook case of exogamy leading to apostasy occurs in the story of Solomon's apostasy, in which Solomon's lust for foreign women leads to the worship of foreign gods, which breaks the covenant between God and David and leads to the divided monarchy, which eventually devolves into the whole mess the descendants of Israel find themselves in from the reign of King Nebuchadnezzar until Ezra's time.

Shame is the acutest emotion Ezra feels in the book that bears his name, with two explicit descriptions of the emotion and events that lead to it. The first is described above. The second comes upon learning of the people of Israel's exogamy. Ezra reacts to the information with traditional displays of mourning: tearing his garment and pulling out his hair. Then he prays to the Lord with words that convey his deep sense of shame:

"Oh my God, I am too ashamed and embarrassed to lift my face to you, my God, for our iniquities have risen higher than our heads, and our guilt has mounted up to the heavens."
(Ezra 9.6)

Ezra continues to express his shame on behalf of the people, recounting their iniquities. At least some of this shame is a result of God's kindness. Ezra notes that Israel could be worse off, were God less devoted to his people. Perhaps he is fearful that further sin will push God "over the edge" as it were:

"After all that has come upon us for our evil deeds and for our great guilt, seeing that you, our God, have punished us less than our iniquities deserved and have given us such a remnant as this, shall we break your commandments again and intermarry with the peoples who practice these abominations? Would you not be angry with us until you destroy us without remnant or survivor? O Lord, God of Israel, you are just, but we have escaped as a remnant, as is now the case. Here we are before you in our guilt, though no one can face you because of this."
(Ezra 9.13-15)

The group takes action. The men who return to Jerusalem with foreign wives are ultimately swayed to send them away (and with them, possibly, the children). But it is important to note that the author of Ezra does not have God act directly. Throughout all of the shame and alienation, Ezra is not a man who receives the word of God. His conversation seems to be one-way.

A Remote God
The author of Ezra's tone fits in perfectly with the historical reality of the time. Ezra is always supplicating God, never knowing if God appreciates the actions. Ezra does credit God with causing king Artaxerxes to let God's people return to Jerusalem. However, in the rest of the book action towards God is never reciprocated. God is praised but does not take direct action. God is remote. There is a wall between God and Israel - of Israel's own construction - that must be breached. Israel must work hard in order to reestablish a relationship with God, so that God will once again be an active player in Israelite life.

Looking in: Outside Sources In Ezra

The biblical author of any given section of the bible integrates a number of sources, some of which are specifically written for the bible, some of which evolved as theological or non-theological folk tales, and some of which are archival material. This archival material might include lists, psalms, genealogies, epistles, or other items.

The book of Ezra is a perfect candidate for examining the sourcing of the bible (1) because it is short, and (2) because the sourcing is rather apparent. The author of Ezra uses a variety of sources (or, at least, sources that were never meant to be included in the text), including lists, decrees, and correspondences. Some of the items may have even been invented by the author. These are all woven together into a cohesive story line that tells the tale of God's people after their return from exile in Babylon.

How do we know that there are multiple sources for this document? To answer that we must examine the text of the bible briefly.

One of our strongest clues to multiple sources is that Ezra 4.7-6.18 is written entirely in Aramaic, in a very bureaucratic style. This indicates that it likely came from a separate Aramaic source, probably a government document. Most of the rest of Ezra is written in Hebrew. You can even tell that the original author of Ezra 4.7-6.18 was not an Israelite by a simple analysis of their diction. In fact, Ezra 4.12 marks the first place in the bible that the word Jew is used. The Israelites referred to themselves as, well, "Israelites" or "God's people" or something like that. It is only outsiders that refer to the Israelites as Jews during this time period. In fact, the term "Jew" appears in the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther, and then does not appear again all the way until the book of Daniel! A whole nine books exist in that space, none with a reference to "Jews." This is because they come from different sources than Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther - sources that do not include Persian governmental correspondence.

Another term unique to this section is "Beyond the River." The Israelites live "Beyond the River" from the point of view of Persia. However, the Israelites would not refer to themselves as the people "Beyond the River" because they are the people meant to be on that very side of the river!

One final indication is that the bible switches from third-person narration to first-person narration in Ezra 7.27. The story therefore shifts from a tale about the Israelites to a tale about Ezra told through Ezra's point of view. As we will see, the shift in narrator will be common in prophetic literature, in which third-person introductions are written about prophets before their warnings are given in the first-person.

What you will find below is a listing of the chronicled/archival/governmental sources in Ezra. These sources are wonderful because they help to tell the story, in the same way that "found" items in modern literature, such as the text of letters or songs within the body of a novel, give meaning and understanding to the story as a whole. Without the governmental letters, we would not understand as well exactly how the Israelites were being treated. Perhaps the accounts are exaggerated or otherwise modified by the biblical author, but the epistolary works allow us something of an up-close look at how life was lived.

The Sources:

1.2-4
A decree from King Cyrus of Persia allowing the people of Judah to return to Jerusalem, reestablish worship, and rebuild their temple.

1.9-11
An inventory of the vessels of the house of the Lord that King Cyrus restores for the rebuilding of the house.

2.1-70 (All of chapter 2)
A list of the returned exiles, totaling 42,360, along with 7,337 servants, 200 singers, 736 horses, 245 mules, 435 camels, and 6,712 donkeys. A list of their dedications to the house of God is also given.

3.11
A quote from a song to the Lord.

4.11-16
The text of a letter, written in Aramaic, from political leaders to King Artaxerxes of Persia. The letter urges the king to search the annals of his ancestors for evidence that the inhabitants of Jerusalem are rebellious people.

4.17-22
A response to the political leaders from King Artaxerxes recounting the king's command to search through the annals and the result. Upon discovering the history of God's people, Artaxerxes commands the political leaders to make the Israelites cease building their city.

5.7-17
A letter from Tattenai, the governor of the province Beyond the River, to Darius, king of Persia. The letter informs the king that the building of the house of God has resumed. The governor describes questioning the elders of Jerusalem, and their reply that details the history of the people - how God gave their ancestors into the hands of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylin, and how King Cyrus commanded the rebuilding of the house of God. The letter ends with a request from Tattenai that the king search the royal archives in Babylon for proof of King Cyrus' decree.

6.2-5
The text of King Cyrus' decree. The document is not found in Babylon, but rather in Ecbatana, the capital of the province of Media. The text of King Cyrus' command is here recorded.

6.6-12
What follows King Cyrus' decree, without transition, is a letter from King Darius to Tattenai. Not only does Darius allow the building of the house of God, but he funds it as well from the royal revenue, "so that they may offer pleasing sacrifices to the God of heaven, and pray for the life of the king and his children" (Ezra 6.10). A rather harsh sentence is established for any that alters the command.

6.17
A list of the animals sacrificed at the dedication of the house of God.

7.1-5
The genealogy of a priest/scribe named Ezra is given, tracing all the way back to the priest Aaron . This passage establishes Ezra's credentials in the story.

7.12-26
A copy of a letter from King Artaxerxes to Ezra, who is a renowned scholar of the "text of the commandments of the Lord and his statutes for Israel." (Ezra 7.11) The letter provides for a great number of things, including permission for any of the Israelites (priests and Levites included) to go to Jerusalem; this, "according to the law of your God." Ezra and the other Israelites are to carry silver and gold offered by the king, to be used for the purchase of animals for sacrifice, as well as grain and drink offerings. They are also to transport vessels and anything else the temple requires, out of the king's treasury.

Artaxerxes commands the treasurers Beyond the River to provide everything Ezra requires, up to a certain amount (except for salt, which is to be given freely). According to the words of Artaxerxes, this is all done out of the fear of God: "Whatever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be done with zeal for the house of the God of heaven, or wrath will come upon the realm of the king and his heirs." (Ezra 7.21-23) Furthermore, the Israelites will not be taxed based on what they withdraw.

Ezra is also commanded to appoint magistrates and judges for the Israelites in the province Beyond the River. The Israelites are still under the jurisdiction of the King, but they are at least able to govern themselves.

8.1-14
A list of families that returned with Ezra, numbered.

8.18-20
A list of the Levites that are sent for to accompany the traveling band to Jerusalem.


8.24-27
An account of the counting and weighing of the silver, gold, ad vessels brought on the journey. [Though this is not an outside source, it serves as an example of the creation of a source, a record of the amount and weight of objects brought from Babylon to Jerusalem.


8.35
An account of the offerings of those who came from captivity into Jerusalem.

10.18-44
A list of men who were found to have foreign wives, and who pledged to send away these wives and present guilt offerings to the Lord. Possibly the children are sent away as well, but this cannot be determined by the source text.

Hold your head high, everybody. The topic of next week's post: Shame.

2 Chronicles 26-36: Kings, Bubbles, Apostasy!

The final Chronicles post! After this it's onto Ezra and Nehemiah! If you haven't been following the Chronicles blogs, you might be interested in checking out previous posts, linked below.

1 Chronicles 1-9 [Infographic]
Comparative Literature: 1 Chronicles 10-26 as a Retelling of 2 Samuel
2 Chronicles 2-9: A Political Detail
2 Chronicles 10-16: Dialectical Tensions in Judah I
2 Chronicles 17-25: Dialectical Tensions in Judah II

As today's post is rather long and deals with a diverse range of topics, I have divided it into sections:

Truth in Chronicles
Bubble Kings
Kings Uzziah and Jotham
Ahaz the Wicked King
Hezekiah the Faithful King
Intermediary Kings
The Mostly Faithful King Josiah
The Final Kings of Chronicles
The Fall of Jerusalem and Aftermath

Truth in Chronicles
Truth in the Bible can be a tricky thing to define. It can be said that there are different levels or types of truth in biblical literature. Truth does not always necessarily mean fact. In the bible, it takes on a more literary form than what we know today, something like a "universal truth." Below are a few terms that are useful in describing Biblical "truth."

Historicized Fiction Functions like the genre of storytelling we know today as historical fiction. Fictional events occur and fictional characters interact against the backdrop of a historical time period. The tale of Abraham serves as one example. Besides the biblical text (and noncanonical biblical texts), there is no evidence that Abraham was a historical person; he is very likely a fictional person - an archetype of a righteous man, the patriarch of a people. The intention of the biblical author is to tell a certain story. If we run with this idea, Abraham must be a fictional character set in historical times.

Fictionalized History presents historically verifiable figures whose actions, circumstances, possessions, etc. may have been fictionalized in order to make a point. In fact, a fair amount of the information found in the Chronicler's description of the kings of Judah is attested to by nonbiblical works. It is fairly certain, however, that some of these historical events have been exaggerated or otherwise fictionalized, often in an attempt to prove God's greatness.

Throughout the Book of Kings and Chronicles, the authors emphasize God's ability to shape history, based on the actions of the kings and people of Judah. When God's people is faithful, kings literally clean up the Temple and figuratively clean up worship practices. They win their battles with God's assistance. When God's people is unfaithful, and wicked kings defile the Temple with devotion to idols, the king and people alike are punished with invasions from foreign lands.

The above example is in fact a form of fictionalized history. This is not to say that God is ficitonal. Rather, the biblical author ascribes action to a character/force beyond human comprehension, The captivity in Babylon is a historical reality. The biblical author fictionalizes the reality by attributing it to some outside influence that cannot be proven by physical means.

The biblical author would probably not understand or care for the difference between historicized fiction and fictionalized history. For him, the stories would have simply been true. They are true by virtue of the author's meaning of truth, one that differs from our modern definition of scientific, factual truth.

The truth of the bible is true in the same way as the stories in Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried. What matters not is the historical reality, but the universal message behind the story.

Dialectical Tensions overlap with Fictionalized History. The constant differential between God's will and human action: These are the pressures that give shape and structure to the biblical narrative.

Bubble Kings
For anyone that follows the economy, or are really sore about it, it might help to take a look at the cycle of kings presented in the Books of Kings and Chronicles in terms of bubbles (and while you're at it, read anything and everything by Matt Taibbi). Market bubbles, dialectical tension bubbles...Whatever. The point is that there is imbalance until the bubble pops.

Strict regulation [adherence to God's word] means things go pretty well, though there isn't much room to - you know - stretch out and test the limits. As regulations are chiseled away [i.e. kings fall from God's will] by human nature manifested by greed [and apostasy], things go well for a while, or at least people think they do. In reality, a bubble is forming, a pressure differential that arises from what is promised and what in reality exists [In the case of the economic crisis, money. In the case of the bible, adherence to God's word]. Just as in nature, the bubble cannot sustain itself, and it bursts. The bank goes under. Judah is invaded.

Here's where the metaphor gets really sick and twisted. For some reason these bubbles continue. For some reason they are allowed to happen. In the Bible, God allows for a certain degree of human freedom before he himself teaches his own people a lesson. Old generations are replaced, and the cycle generally finds a good king to lead again. In case of the financial crisis, the U.S. government allows for a certain degree of freedom before the whole thing comes crashing down on its own accord. And then it bails out the people who perpetrated the crime.

Allow me to take my metaphor too far: the state of safety is adherence to God. [And you can draw your own conclusions about the parallel metaphor.]

But I progress.

Kings Uzziah and Jotham

Uzziah

As long as he sought the Lord, God made him prosper.
(2 Chronicles 26.5)

So the Chronicler says of King Uzziah. He is supported by God and therefore victorious in war. he build cities, but like Rehoboam before him, he grows proud once he becomes strong, ultimately to his own destruction. He attempts to offer incense to the Lord without the priests, and for this he suffers leprosy. But the kingdom of Uzziah is never directly punished for the king's pride.

Jotham
Jotham likewise is a righteous king - more righteous even than his father. He builds cities and succeeds in war.

Ahaz the Wicked King
Ahaz is so wicked - walking in the ways of the kings of Israel (whom the Chronicler believes to be unified against the Lord), casting idols, having his sons pass through fire - that the apostasy bubble bursts and Judah collapses beneath him under attacks by Aram, then Israel, then the Edomites. These attacks are all divinely sanctioned - and deadly. The attack by Israel results in the death of 120,000 valiant warriors of Judah.

Hezekiah the Faithful King
Hezekiah brings goodness, back to Judah, and so the dialectical tensions pull Judah back to God. Hezekiah delivers Judah from its evil ways and initiates sweeping reforms to clean up Judah literally and figuratively. Such action is only possible by a good leader; wicked leaders are not associated with building and cleaning projects. Under him the Temple is cleansed, pagan shrines are destroyed, worship of God is restored, and the roles of priests and Levites are reestablished.

All this is celebrated with a great passover that lasts seven days and includes the sacrifice of over 2,000 bulls and 17,000 sheep. Writes the Chronicler:

There was great joy in Jerusalem, for since the time of Solomon son of King David of Israel there had been nothing like this in Jerusalem.
(2 Chronicles 30.26)

And, furthermore, we find a statement affirming the reward/punishment cycle of dialectical tensions:

And every work that he undertook in the service of the house of God, and in accordance with the law and the commandments, to seek his God, he did with all his heart; and he prospered.
(2 Chronicles 31.21)

The true test of piety comes when King Sennacherib of Assyria invades Judah. Previously this is where kings (e.g. King Rehoboam) have turned their backs on God and put their faith in human works instead. But Hezekiah remains pious. The Lord in turns protects Judah from the invasion.

The king’s pride results in only one instance of wrath. In a strange scene, Hezekiah becomes sick to the point of death, prays to the Lord, and refuses to accept the Lord’s sign. In the bible’s laconic style, little information about the sign or the illness is given. All we know is that Hezekiah refuses the Lord’s sign out of pride. However, he humbles himself, and all of Jerusalem with him, and the wrath of the Lord does not fall upon Judah.

Intermediary Kings
Manasseh is a wicked king of Judah, though he repents in his latter days. After he misleads Judah and pays no heed to the Lord, he is taken away by the King of Assyria in manacles and fetters. But, as per the flexible dialectical tensions, he is restored to his kingship at Jerusalem when he prays and repents:

Then Manasseh knew that the Lord was indeed God.
(2 Chronicles 33.13)

Unfortunately, the people of Judah still sacrifice at the high places to the Lord. Worship is conducted in an improper place...

The Mostly Faithful King Josiah
King Josiah finds the correct outlet for worship of the Lord. His reign begins at the tender age of eight, and despite this he is one of the greatest kings. Josiah demolishes all signifiers of apostasy and centers worship again in Jerusalem.  He even purges the house of the Lord, during which time the book of the law of Moses is discovered.

The message is dire, as delivered by the prophet Huldah. However, Josiah experiences a quasi-Davidic moment as he discovers that he personally will not be punished for the sins of Israel:

Thus says the Lord: I will indeed bring disaster upon this place and upon its inhabitants, all the curses that are written in the book that was read before the king of Judah. Because they have forsaken me and have made offerings to other gods, so that they have provoked me to anger with all the works of their hands, my wrath will be poured out on this place and will not be quenched. But as to the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of the Lord, thus shall you say to him: Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Regarding the words that you have heard, because your heart was penitent and you humbled yourself before God when you heard his words against this place and its inhabitants, and you have humbled yourself before me, and have torn your clothes and wept before me, I also have heard you, says the Lord. I will gather you to your ancestors and you shall be gathered to your grave in peace; your eyes shall not see all the disaster that I will bring on this place and its inhabitants.
(2 Chronicles 34.2-28)

Afterward, adherence to the covenant of the Lord is resumed under King Josiah:

All his days they did not turn away from following the Lord the god of their ancestors
(2 Chronicles 34.33)

Josiah, in fact,  celebrates a passover even greater than that of King Hezekiah:

No passover like it had been kept in Israel since the days of the prophet Samuel; none of the kings of Israel had kept such a passover as was kept by Josiah, by the priests and the Levites, by all Judah and Israel who were present, and by the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
(2 Chronicles 35.18)

But even the righteous Josiah is undone with a test to his devotion to the Lord. King Josiah enters battle with Pharaoh Neco of Egypt, who warns him, through the words of the Lord:

“What have I to do with you, king of Judah? I am not coming against you today, but against the house with which I am at war; and God has commanded me to hurry. Cease opposing God, who is with me, so that he will not destroy you.”
(2 Chronicles 35.21)

Josiah is ultimately killed by the Egyptian army. But even in his prideful death, he is mourned by his followers.

The Final Kings of Chronicles

2 Chronicles ends with a string of kings:

• Jehoahaz - About whom we learn nothing of greatness or evil. He is deposed by the Egyptian king, and his brother Eliakim is made king; his name is changed to Jehoiakim.
• Jehoiakim - Who is evil, and who is carried off to Babylon by King Nebuchadnezzar.
• Jehoiachin - Who is evil. He is deposed by Nebuchadnezzar and taken to Babylon.
• Zedekiah - Who is evil. He, the people, and the priests are all unfaithful, and pollute the house of the Lord. He is the last King of Judah.

The Fall of Jerusalem and Aftermath
Ultimately, God decides to cleanse the land of ungrateful people. The Lord raises the king of the Chaldeans against God's people, and there is no mercy in the slaughter of men and women of Judah and destruction of Jerusalem. Survivors are deported to Babylon. The land gets a rest from God's people for a while:

All the days that it lay desolate it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years.
(2 Chronicles 36.21)

Chronicles ends with a glimmer of hope, however, as King Cyrus of Persia allows the exiles to return to Judah and rebuild the temple. In fact, this is the edict of God, according to Cyrus (according to the Chronicler!):

The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever is among you of all his people, may the Lord his God be with him! Let him go up.
(2 Chronicles 36.23)

So ends Chronicles. And so begins a new chapter in the history of God's chosen people.

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.