As I drive, I often listen to podcasts. Included on my favourites list are some current affairs programs. I find it helpful to listen to the different perspectives offered by various reporters as they analyse the events of the day. Listening in this way, to what I think of as trusted news sources, helps to develop a deeper understanding of current events. I also note on these programs that they speak of other news outlets and the audiences they broadcast or write for. The bottom line? One event can be viewed from a number of angles.
This is also true in the Scriptures. While it is our understanding that all Scripture is inspired by God1, we also understand that the Bible is the work of various authors, inspired by God in their work. The result of this is that there are places in the Bible where we hear slightly differing accounts of events as the Biblical authors compose their texts for differing audiences.
Should this trouble us? No, not at all. As Richard S. Dietrich wrote,
Why did not the various editors remove the contradictions? We tend to think in terms of orderliness and logic. This is not a characteristic of the Hebrew mind. It is not that the ancient Hebrews were not intelligent enough to notice these things. Rather, they were able to be comfortable with them, able to see the value of looking at the same thing form different points of view…. The editors often did not think it was right to set themselves up as judges, getting rid of a form of the story or forcing some pattern upon the different traditions to make then say the same thing. They simply included the different forms, and thereby saved for us accounts which give us a richer picture and deeper meaning that we would otherwise have had.2
As we read in our opening reflection today, this enables us to “hone our capacity to hear different stories that are expressed in different ways… [that we might] discern deeper truths.”
These two volumes books of Kings and Chronicles are examples of histories that overlap, but do not sit entirely ‘tidily’ next to each other.
Both sets of books cover essentially the same historical era, and have much common material. But they are products of different times in the history of Israel (exilic v post-exilic), and as such they seek to communicate different through complementary truths.
1 and 2 Kings are essentially a theological reflection on what the author’s first audience already knew of Israel’s history. They give an account of the faithfulness – or not – of the Kings of Israel and Judah to God. They formula in these books, after King Solomon’s death, is generally, “King X reigned for Y years. He did what was evil in the sight of the Lord….” The point the author is making is that many of the Kings in this period were not faithful to God. This lens is used to assess the worth or not of their reign. Only Kings Asa, Hezekiah, and Cyrus are commended in these books, because of their faithfulness.
So, the books of Kings are the story of God and His people, of unfaithful leaders and their failed Kingdoms, which ultimately leads to exile. It is the kings who are front and centre in these books.
1 and 2 Chronicles are written much later and with a different purpose. These are post exilic books and so are generally more positive in tone, reflecting the more positive times of the people. They are also much more concerned with the worship of the people.
Lawrence Boadt writes,
Because of the changed world of Israel after the exile, the priestly leaders felt the need for an updated version of Israel’s history. They took up and rewrote the…history found in the Books of Samuel and Kings from their own perspective. No doubt one important reason was to explain the proper role of the kings over Israel in the past now that they were gone for good. Another was to emphasise the temple for religious worship.”3
The table below lists some key distinctions of Kings and Chronicles4.
It is true that the books of Kings and Chronicles recount overlapping events in Israel’s history, telling the story in different ways as they seek to communicate the story of God and their people. None of this should disturb us, however. Rather this gives us a richer lens with through which to reflect on both the history of our faith as well as our own encounters with God as we engage seriously with our Scriptures.
In the service for the Ordination of Deacons we read:
Do you wholeheartedly accept the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, as given by the Spirit to convey in many and varied ways the revelation of God which is fulfilled in our Lord Jesus Christ?5
This is our central truth.
11Tim 3.16.
2Richard S. Dietrich, EFM Volume 1, 1984.
3Lawrence Boadt, Reading the Old Testament, 1984.
4Comparison of 1-2 Chronicles with 2 Samuel and 1-2 Kings, ESV.org
5The Ordinal, Ordination of Deacons, APBA