1 Chronicles 13-18: The bringing of the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem, a psalm of praise, God's covenant with David to establish his throne forever, David extends the boundaries of the kingdom. If you compare this account with that in 1 Samuel, gone are David's adultery with Bathsheba. Gone is Absolom's rebellion. Spotlighted is David the shepherd king, concerned about his people.
Was the Chronicler simply a "paid hack," attempting to "spin" the news to put his boss in the best possible light? (Sounds like something that might happen today.) Or was he simply trying to paint with a whitewash historical brush?
The Chronicler had a different purpose. If our author is right is saying that the Chronicler wrote much later in the history of Israel, that this book was written to encourage those returning to Israel from exile in Babylon, then he is claiming David's kingdom is the ideal and the gold standard for rulers so that Israel could again be great. If Israel would learn lessons from its past, the future could be bright. There are key historical details left out, yes, but this is more than face-saving "spin."
I can't help but think of those returning from "exile" back to New Orleans. What would encourage them? An honest accounting of the failures of their government leaders to prepare? An accurate assesment of how many died? A brutally honest calculation of how much rain the levees in their present condition can hold back? Probably not. What the returnees need is encouragement. Jazz music. Neighbors to greet. The lights to stay on. And maybe just a little bit of nostalgia about the old days of New Orleans' greatness. Then, if New Orleans would learn lessons from its past, the future could be bright.
No comments:
Post a Comment