TrnJ NS(1986) 17-22

THE CHRONICLER'S JEHOSHAPHAT

RAYDILLARD
WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
One feature of the Chronicler's historiography that has become increas-
ingly clear in the last decade of research has been his penchant for
patterning portions of his account after earlier events. The building of the
temple recapitulates themes from the construction of the tabernacle; the
relationship of Solomon and Huram-abi is made to parallel that of Bezalel
and Oholiab.
1
R. Braun has shown that the Chronicler's portrayal of
Solomon was in part shaped by his treatment of David;
2
H. G. M.
Williamson has argued convincingly that the succession of David and
Solomon was modeled on the earlier succession account covering the
transition of power from Moses to Joshua.
3
The author's handling of
Hezekiah is similary influenced by his prior portraits of David and
Solomon.
4
H. G. M. Williamson has also convincingly demonstrated that
die Chronicler shaped his account of the reign of Ahaz (2 Chr 28) in such a
way as to show that the depths of apostasy that had characterized the North
during the reign of Jeroboam at the time of the schism had also
characterized the South under Ahaz.
5
In each of these cases an earlier
incident or narrative is chosen almost as a "type scene"
6
for some
subsequent account. One thesis of this article is that the Chronicler has used
the Asa narratives as a model for his account of Jehoshaphat.
have pointed out the ways in which the author has paralleled Solomon and Huram-abi
with Bezalel and Oholiab in an earlier article 'The Chronicler's Solomon," WTJ 43 (1980)
289-300. See also S. Abramsky, "The Chronicler's View of King Solomon;* Erlsr 16 (1982)
3-14. The parallels drawn between the builders of the two sanctuaries are only one part of the
Chronicler's effort to portray the construction of the temple as a second tabernacle. For
example the Chronicler emphasizes the divine origin of the plans (1 Chr 28:19// Exod 31:18;
25:9,40), the generosity of the people (1 Chr 29:1-9// Exod 36:3-7), and use of plunder in the
construction (1 Chr 18:7-11; 26:26-28 // Exod 3:21-22; 11:2-3; 12:35-36; 25:3; cf. Isa
60:4-7,10-14).
2
R. Braun, "Solomonic Apologetic in Chronicles," JBL 92 (1973) 503-16.
>H. G. M. Williamson, "The Accession of Solomon in the Books of Chronicles," VT 26
(1976)351-61.
4
F. Moriarty, TheChroniclers Account of Hezekiah* s Reform," CBQ21 (1965) 399406; M.
Throntveit, "The Significance of the Royal Speeches and Prayers for the Structure and
Theology of the Chronicler" (unpublished PhD. dissertation, Union Theological Seminary in
Virginia, 1982) 155-60.
>H. G. M. Williamson, Israel m the Books of Chronicles (Cambridge: University Press, 1977)
114-18; land 2 Chronicles (NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982) 343-49.
6
I am borrowing and perhaps slightly skewing the terminology of Robert Alter ("How
Convention Helps us Read: the Case of the Bible's Annunciation Type-Scenes," Proof texis 3
[1983] 115-30; "Biblical Type-Scenes and the Uses of Convention," Critical Inquiry [1978]
355-68). The frequency with which these modeled recapitulations are found in Chronicles
18
TRINITY JOURNAL
When one compares the handling of Jehoshaphat in Kings and
Chronicles, the disparity of length in the two accounts is immediately
apparent. Though the deuteronomic historian notes his accession in 1 Kgs
15:24, the larger context in Kings is more concerned with the northern
kingdom (1 Kgs 15:25-16:34), and particularly with the reign of Ahab as the
backdrop for the ministry of Elijah (1 Kgs 17-21). The deuteronomic
historian gives only the briefest account of Jehoshaphat's reign, most of
which is the largely formulaic language of the introduction and conclusion
(1 Kgs 22:41-50). Though the battle for Ramoth-gilead is found in both
accounts (1 Kgs 22:1-40; 2 Chr 18:1-19:3), in Kings the context makes the
primary function of that narrative to account for the death of Ahab, but in
Chronicles the same account is put to quite different use. The Chronicler's
use of the Micaiah narrative will be the second focus of this paper.
/. Asa as a Model for Jehoshaphat
In contrast to Kings, the Chronicler devotes considerable attention to
Jehoshaphat (2 Chr 17-20), devoting nearly as much attention to his reign as
to that of Hezekiah (2 Chr 29-32) and giving him an unqualified
endorsement (22:9; contrast 20:33). The Chronicler had also considerably
expanded his account of the preceding reign of Asa, and his Asa narrative
appears to have served as a paradigm for his account of Jehosphaphat. The
following parallels should be noted:
(1) Both accounts concern pious kings whose reigns could be outlined
as follows: (a) reform, building programs, and large armies (14:2-8; 17:1-
19); (b) battle report (14:9-15; 18:1-19:3); (c) reform (15:1-19; 19:4-11);
(d) battle report (16:1-9:20:1-30); (e) transgression and death (16:10-14;
20:31-21:1).
In addition to the similarity of outline for the two accounts, Asa's second
battle and Jehoshaphat's first both involve the northern kingdom, once as
an enemy (16:1-9) and once as an ally (18:1-19:3); in both of these cases the
kings of Judah are condemned for their wrongdoing. Similarly Asa's second
reform and Jehoshaphat's first both include references to teaching priests
and to travel between cities (15:3,5; 17:8-9). The reform accounts in both
reigns are thought by many scholars to be duplicates of the same event:
Asa's suppression of heterodox worship (14:2-6) may have been one aspect
of the reforms endorsed by Azariah the prophet (15:1-19); Jehoshaphat's
teaching mission (17:7-9) may have been the reflex of a larger judicial
reform (19:4-11).
(2) Both kings are said to have suppressed the high places (14:2-5);
17:6) and not to have done so (15:17; 20:33).
7
argues that such patterned historiography is a part of that distina and intricate code adopted by
the Chronicler from the recognized conventions of narrative literatrue operating in his own
culture, i.e., they are one part of that repertoire of devices that constitute his narrative
grammar. The parallels drawn by the Chronicler are shrewdly developed, artfully staged, subtly
arranged artifices (Alter, "Annunciation Type-Scenes," 116) that draw a significant analogy
between aspects of two different narratives: these "perceptible artful devices" (Alter, 117)
deploy episodes or narratives so that the author's themes are clearly enunciated or heightened.
7
Such flagrant "contradictions" occurring twice in sequential accounts deserve a better
explanation than an ad hoc appeal to careless or forgetful later redactors. The fact that the
DILLARD: THE CHRONICLER'S JEHOSHAPHAT 19
(3) Both enjoy the rewards of their piety in building programs (14:7;
17:2,12), peace (14:1; 17:10), large armies (14:8; 17:12-19). God was with
both (15:9; 17:3), and the fear of Yahweh was on the nations (14:14; 17:10;
20:29) during their reigns.
(4) Prophets indict both for their entangling foreign alliances (16:7-9;
19:1-3; cf. 20:35-37).*
(5) The Chronicler may be indicating his intention to parallel the
accounts of Asa and Jehoshaphat by his twice comparing Jehoshaphat to his
father (17:3;
9
20:32 / / 1 Kgs 22:43);
10
Asa and Jehoshaphat are explicitly
paired together as a standard of comparison against Jehoram in 21:12.
One must not underestimate, however, the differences between the
Chronicler's narrative of Asa and Jehoshaphat. Williamson
11
finds a marked
contrast with the Chronicler's account of Asa in the lack of a rigid
chronological framework for the reign of Jehoshaphat. Though there are
two battle reports for each king, the sequence is reversed: Asa begins with a
victory during a period of fidelity, but ends with an alliance that provoked
prophetic rebuke.
12
The reverse is true for Jehoshaphat: he is compromised
by his alliance with Ahab (19:1 -3), but his next battle (2 Chr 20) is more like
Asa's first.
Chronicler repeats the statements made of Asa regarding the high places is eloquent testimony
that both seemingly contradictory statements were original with Chronicles and were included
in the account of Jehoshaphat to perfect the parallel between the two kings. The two
statements must then have cohered in the mind of the original author, and it is not hard to
provide scenarios by which the statements can be harmonized. The statements that both kings
did and did not remove the high places would most naturally apply to quite different periods in
their reigns and could best be understood as indicative of the resilience of the indigenous pagan
cults that plagued Judah's history rather than as some editorial lapse.
8
For the Chronicler foreign alliances contradicted exclusive reliance on God; this theme had
great relevance for his post-exilic audience. See R. Dillard, "Reward and Punishment in
Chronicles: the Theology of Immediate Retribution," WTJ46 (1984) 164-72.
^he textual difficulty with 2 Chr 17:3 is important in this regard. The MT compares Asa
with his father David. However, a few Hebrew mss. and LXX omit the word "David" from this
verse. The Chronicler does not divide the reign of David into periods of good vs. evil as is done
in the dueteronomic history; to the contrary he idealizes David in such a way that his rule is
virtually sinless, so that it would contradict the author's own portrayal of David to contrast his
"earlier ways" (D'JIttfX}) with a later period of his life. Omitting the word "David," the
immediate antecedent would be Asa, for whom the Chronicler does present a chronological
schema dividing the earlier good years from the later evil ones. Furthermore Jehoshaphat is
specifically compared to Asa in the parallel history and later in the Chronicler's own narrative
(1 Kgs 22:43 / / 2 Chr 20:32). Since David is so often a standard of comparison, it is easy to see
why a scribe might gloss the text with his name at this point; none of the typical types of scribal
errors would readily account for its omission in the LXX.
10
The Chronicler nowhere else explicity compares a king with his father twice. He does
compare Rehoboam to David and Solomon (11:17), Uzziah to Amaziah (26:4), andjotham to
Uzziah (27:2), and he explicitly contrasts Manasseh to Hezekiah (33:3). Though the
deuteronomic historian had compared Amaziah to his father Joash (2 Kgs 14:3), the Chronicler
omits this from his account (2 Chr 25).
11
1 and 2 Chronicles 21%.
"The omission of such chronological notes could reflect deliberate "dischronologization" of
Jehoshaphat's reign by the Chronicler to facilitate his drawing parallels with Asa. This solution
would require taking the chronological notes in connection with Asa all the more carefully; see
R. Dillard. "The Reign of Asa (2 Chronicles 14-16): an Example of the Chronicler's
TheologicalMethod,'7ETS23 (1980)207-18; W.Rudolph, "Der Aufbau der Asa-Geschichte,"
VT2 (1952) 367-71.
20
TRINITY JOURNAL
Though the Chronicler has devoted much more space to this king than
did the deuteronomic historian, one should not overstate the contrast
between the two histories. Most of the account in Kings is cited nearly
verbatim by the Chronicler (1 Kgs 22:1-35 / / 2 Chr 18:2-34; 1 Kgs
22:41-46,49 / / 2 Chr 20:31-36). Of those portions unique to Chronicles,
many were probably stimulated as elaborations on themes alluded to in the
deuteronomic account, suggesting a greater influence for the author's Kings
Vorkge than might be apparent simply from noting verbatim parallels.
The following issues mentioned in Kings may have precipitated the
Chronicler's elaboration: the issue of the high places (1 Kgs 22:43; cf. 2 Chr
17:3-6), the comparison with Asa (1 Kgs 22:43; 2 Chr 17:3; 20:32), peace
with Israel (1 Kgs 22:44; cf. 2 Chr 17:1; 18:1), his military exploits (1 Kgs
22:45), particularly with reference to Edom (1 Kgs 22:47; 2 Chr 20).
The basic compositional influence for the Chronicler's record of
Jehoshaphat is the same as for his accounts of other reignshis theology of
immediate retribution.
13
Fidelity and obedience are rewarded with building
programs, wealth and honor, peace and victory, but infidelity is greeted with
swift rebuke (19:1-3) and punishment (20:37).
//. The Micaiah Narrative in Chronicles (2 Chr 18:1-19:3)
The appearance of Micaiah before Ahab and Jehoshaphat is the only
extended prophetic narrative in Chronicles; its inclusion in these books is all
the more surprising in light of the author's comparative disinterest in the
affairs of the northern kingdom. Commentators have commonly attributed
its inclusion to the Chronicler's desire to portray a true prophet or to
continue a positive portrayal of Jehoshaphat's fidelity to the Lord (18:4);
neither of these reasons is compelling in light of the numerous other
prophetic narratives the Chronicler omitted from his Vorlage and in light of
the author's verdict on the entire incident (19:1-3).
In so far as we attempt to read the author's mind, his modifications at the
beginning and end of the story (18:1; 19:1 -3 ) probably provide the key to his
inclusion of this narrative. If it is correct that the Chronicler has consciously
sought to model Jehoshaphat in the image of his father Asa, as argued in the
first part of this paper, since Asa had received a prophet's condemnation for
his involvement in a foreign alliance ( 16:1 -9), the inclusion of this incident
perfects the parallel between the two kings. The Chronicler makes it clear
that this is his interest by inserting into his Vorlage at the outset the note
that Jehoshaphat had "allied himself by marriage with Ahab" (18:1). This
small modification sets the stage for what is much more explicit in the
concluding paragraph of the narrative (19:1-3). The notices with which
both historians conclude their accounts give the moral of their narratives:
the deuteronomic historian ends his account by emphasizing the fulfillment
of the prophetic word in the death of Ahab (1 Kgs 22:36-39), an emphasis
important throughout the deuteronomic history (Deut 18:14-22).
u
13
See Dillard, "Reward and Punishment."
14
See the convenient summary in G. von Rad, "The Deuteronomic Theology of History in I
and II Kings," The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (New York: McGraw-Hill,
1966), 208-12.
DILLARD: THE CHRONICLER'S JEHOSHAPHAT 21
Chronicles does not show much interest in the affairs of the northern
kingdom, and the author does not report all the prophecies speaking of
Ahab's death;
15
the moral of the story in Kings (1 Kgs 22:36-40) would then
be somewhat irrelevant when placed in the context of the Chronicler's
history. The Chronicler omits this notice from his Vorlage and replaces it
with a moral equally important to him, that righteous kings must trust
Yahweh and avoid entangling foreign alliances ( 19:1 -3 ; cf. 16:1 -9; 20:35-37 ;
25:6-8; 28:16-23). We have in effect two sermons from the same text, each
of the histories putting the same narrative to different purposes. The
concluding notice of such parallel narratives is also diagnostic of the
author's intent, for example, in the accounts of David's census:
16
the
Chronicler, who is so reluctant to report any wrongdoing on the part of
David, includes the census narrative in order to account for the acquisition
of the temple site ( 1 Chr 21:29-22:1 ; 2 Chr 3:1), information not included in
the deuteronomic account (2 Sam 24).
The discussion of the Micaiah narrative has focused on its literary history
prior to attaining its canonical form in 1 Kgs 22.
17
The major issues have
concerned (1) the identification of its form critical genre (political
narrative, prophetic narrative, battle report), (2) the isolation of sources,
(3) the sequence and nature of the redaction of the earlier materials, (4) the
question of whether Ahab was always the "king of Israel" in the original
narrative, and (5) the contribution of this account to the debate about false
vs. true prophecy.
18
Both Wrthwein and de Vries isolate two separate
sources combined with each other in a complex history of redaction, though
the methodology and results of both are most tenuous and hypercritical.
19
De Vries provides a history of research in the pericope.
20
In a sense, however, all the traditional critical tools are irrelevant at this
point for the Chronicles: the Chronicler himself would have been ignorant
of any literary history for the narrative and would have received it in roughly
15
Of course 2 Chr 18 reports the fulfillment of Micaiah's prophecy, but not of 1 Kgs 20:42 or
21:19-29.1 Kgs 22:26-40 appears to allude to 1 Kgs 21:19; though many of the details change
due to Ahab's repentance (1 Kgs 21:27-29), the dogs still lick up his blood. The image of dogs
licking up the blood or devouring a corpse is common in Kings, particularly as a formulaic
judgment on the end of adynasty (1 Kgs 14:11; 16:4;21:19^3^4;22:38;2 Kgs9:1036); it does
not occur in Chronicles.
l6
R. Dillard, "David's Census: Perspectives on 2 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21," Through
Christ's Word(ed.K. Godfrey andj. Boyd; Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1985)
94-107.
I7
. Wrthwein, "Zur Komposition von 1 Reg 22:1-38," Das ferne und nace Wort (ed. F.
Maass; BZAW 105; Berlin: Toppelmann, 1967); H. Seebass, "Zur 1 Reg 22:35-38," VT 21
(1971) 380-82; S. de Vries, Prophet Against Prophet (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978).
18
J. Crenshaw, Prophetic Conflict ^Berlin: de Gruyter, 1971) 83-5.
"De Vries provides an extensive and quite speculative reconstruction of the redaction
history of the narrative in 1 Kgs 22, but he does not analyse as a redaction critical stage the one
clear case where the sources are evident and not speculative, ne., the Chronicler's own redacting
of the earlier narrative. Supposing for a moment that we had only the version of the Micaiah
narrative found in 2 Chr 18:1 -19:3, would any practitioner of redaction criticism have been able
to reconstruct an earlier stage for this narrative placing it in a context similar to the one it has in
Kings? Such an exercise constitutes a clear warning of the vagaries and subjectivity that can
attach to redaction critical agruments based on hypothetical or reconstructed sources.
^Prophet 4-7.
22 TRINITY JOURNAL
its present form in 1 Kgs 22; speculation about its literary history is more
properly the province of a commentary or study on Kings. The Chronicler,
however, does represent one more step in the redactional process and has
taken a previous unit of tradition into the service of his own interests.
21
21
In addition to his changing the moral of the narrative by modifying the beginning and end
of the account from what was found in his Vorlage, the Chronicler had introduced a few other
more or less minor changes. Jehoshaphat's status is enhanced while Ahab's is attenuated (18:2
vs. 1 Kgs 22:3). The Chronicler also specifies the nature of Jehoshaphat's crying out as prayer
during the battle (18:31 / / 1 Kgs 22:32; however, the inclusion of the phrase "and God saved
him" in Lucianic texts of Bas suggests that the phrase was probably already found in the
Chronicler's Vorlage of 1 Kgs 22:32. See the discussion of the textual evidence in de Vries,
Prophet 13-18.
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.