Two Tales of a City

 The Old Testament has an interesting feature.  It tells Israel’s history twice.  The first version starts at creation in Genesis and ends in 2 Kings with Israel’s southern kingdom in exile.  When you turn the page from 2 Kings’ conclusion to 1 Chronicles, the story starts over with Adam and goes through the end of exile. The question is, “why two versions?”  The Kings’ history tells the “How did we get ourselves into the mess of exile” version, while Chronicles comes at the end of exile and answers the question “How do we live and tell our story now? 

Comparing the two histories helps us to see the different purpose for each narrative.  In this short survey, looking at David and his immediate family in each version will provide one place for comparison.  The second comparison is on the macro level, contrasting how the whole nation of Israel is handled between the two accounts.

 

David is a key figure in Israel’s history.  The nation’s hopes rested on God’s enduring promise to his family line.  The portrait of David in Samuel/Kings is drastically different in Chronicles.  

The first narrative tells about David’s rise to power and victories, but also spends much time on his sordid story.  His failures include his affair with Bathsheba and the subsequent murder of her husband Uriah that he commanded.   It tells his failures as a father which lead to the attempted insurrection by his son Absalom. The brokenness continued to the end of his life as one of his sons, Adonijah, tried to steal the throne which was promised to Solomon.  The history includes his greatness, but it also includes the tale of the destructive power of sin that plagues his family.

 

In comparison, the Chronicles narrative sanitizes David’s story.  The only appearance of Bathsheba is in a genealogy.  There’s no mention of adultery, the murder of Uriah or the death of the child from the affair.  Absalom similarly shows up as no more than a footnote listed in the family line.  There’s no mention of his attempted insurrection, his sleeping with all his father’s wives and concubines and his tragic death.  David is not portrayed as perfect, but with his cleaned-up story, one might feel better about resting on God’s promises to his people that come through his family.

 

In terms of the transfer of power from David to Solomon, Chronicles tells the story of a smooth transition, and how “All the officers and warriors, as well as all of King David’s sons, pledged their submission to King Solomon” (1 Chr 29:24).  The attempted takeover by Solomon’s brother Adonijah and resulting execution has been airbrushed out.  At the end of 1 Chronicles 29, we are told that David dies and that a full record of all the events of his life are recorded, including “the records of Nathan the prophet” (the prophet that confronted David for his affair and murder).  The biblical authors make it clear that they are providing a selection of information when they offer this type of comment which occurs more than twenty times.

 

In this instance, the author is telling you there’s more to David’s life, but the story being told is answering the “How should we live now” question.  What’s implied is that there’s a narrative of sin and death in those records, but he’s offering a counter-narrative.  This alternate telling comes from the vantage point that insists that God’s enduring promise to David is more powerful than any detailed story of disaster.  It’s a promise that can’t be held back, by the mightiest failures of the most notable humans.

 

Moving on from David and his family, we examine the big picture with the treatment of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Israel.  Samuel/Kings tells both the story of the northern tribes with all the “kings of Israel” as well as the Southern Kingdom with the “kings of Judah”.  The northern kingdom fell to Assyria and was deported in 722 BC, never to return.  Chronicles leaves out the history of the kings and Kingdom of Israel in the north.  Since Israel (the ten tribes in the north) never returned from exile, there is no point for the author of Chronicles to re-tell the story of the north.  They were wiped out and none of their kings had an enduring promise of restoration coming through their family line.

 

However, there is still a footnote of hope for the northern Ten Tribes of Israel.  It was during Hezekiah’s reign in Judah (the southern kingdom), that Assyria conquered and deported the northern Kingdom of Israel.  Just before this event, Hezekiah sends letters to the inhabitants of the Northern Tribes of Israel urging them to repent and come to Judah for a Passover celebration (see 2 Chronicles 30).  

 

Many in the north responded to the Passover invitation with ridicule, but it says that some humbled themselves and came.  The chapter describes how most from the north that came for the Passover had not purified themselves and celebrated improperly.  But, Hezekiah prayed that Yahweh would atone for all who had determined to seek after him, even though they were not purified.  This event provides hope for cleansing, inclusion and restoration for those from Northern Israel that were displaced.  The prayer of atonement from Hezekiah, David’s descendant, foreshadows the atonement that would come through an eternal king from the House of David.  

 

The comparisons demonstrate how different the two narratives are.  The Samuel/Kings narrative ends with exile.  By concluding at the low point of destruction, the reader is invited to trace back and consider “How did we end up in this mess?”.  Gerhard von Rad referred to the design of Samuel/Kings as an expression of “Worship at the judgment and justice of God”.  Looking through the lens that von Rad provides, we can see that the Samuel/Kings narrative likes to tell the worst flaws of the ‘best’, and the obvious errors of the worst.  This version makes it clear that Israel earned her exile and God is to be worshipped for his justice.  Yahweh was explicit that if Israel went after the gods of the nations they would end up in exile and that was exactly what happened.

 

In the second narrative, Chronicles extends the story another 70 years - to the conclusion of the exile.   It ends with a proclamation of liberation and restoration on the lips of King Cyrus from Persia.  “Yahweh, the God of heaven…. has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah”.  The question this history invites the reader into is this, “Having been delivered from our bondage how should we live and tell our story now?”

 

Ultimately, the two narratives work together and have been instructive for the generations after that read them.  God’s people needed to recognize how they ended up in a mess.  They needed to recognize the results of sin and idolatry.  At some point however, it became necessary to tell their story in a new way.  The goal is repentance that comes after understanding, not self-debasement.  Eventually the story needs to be told in light of the promised restoration and they needed to tell their story in light of what God is able to do in spite of their mess.

 

I’ve made messes in my own life or lived in brokenness other people have provided me.  In order for me to move forward from those messes, I needed to be able to tell my story in a way that reflects on how I got into my messes.  However, at some point, I needed to move from the “how I got here” to the “how to live now” in light of the promise of restoration through the king from the house of David.

 

When we add God’s restoration, it changes how we tell the whole of our story.  We are no longer stuck in “how did I get here”, but we can move towards the future that God intends.