I would certainly disagree with 'to some degree conjectural'. They are
frankly speculative.
In this case
>we can compare the tendency of the entire work of Chronicles with that of
Samuel-Kings
>and see that the differences are consistently in the direction of
glorifying the piety,
>splendor, & successes of the rulers of Judah and focussing attention on
the Jerusalem
>temple & its cult. It starts with the first human being & concludes with
the command to
>build "a house" for "the God of heaven". It is not an unreasonable
conjecture to say
>that there is some purpose behind the way in which the writer has dealt
with his
>sources, and that the tendency of these modifications helps us to
understand that
>purpose.
> Just multiplying the sizes of armies, amounts of gold &d could be chalked
up to
>bragging. But the _omission_ (see below) of the Bathsheba-Uriah episode,
Solomon's
>idolatry &c cannot be sp easily explained in that way. But this is
consistent with an
>attempt to portray the Davidic line as the ideal kings.
Or, to show how speculative such motivations can be, it might be that the
source available to the chronicler did not contain the event, or it might
be that the chronicler was afraid for his head or it may be what you say.
There is not a very great constraint on picking motives out. I used to
bluff my way through English classes by detecting symbolism. I could make
stuff up out of novels that even the author didn't know was there. I kept
getting A's until one class, English for non-English majors, where the Prof
wanted Freudian analyses of the characters in Light in August by Faulkner.
I had never taken Psych at the time, so I got a D in the class. THat was
the last english class I took. But I will tell you I was quite good at
making up motives and symbolisms for the various characters. All of which
was bunk but useful bunk because it got me A's.
> I know you aren't an inerrantist. You are a concordist & generally want
there
>to be as much historical detail as possible in a text consistent with
archaeological &c
>data. (Recall our discussion of Jonah.)
I do agree with you here. I will admit that I would push as hard as I can
to find the data to support the details, but small details being wrong
don't really bother me that much.
The example of Chronicles & Samuel-Kings is
>valuable because without the latter we would have what on the face of it
seems to be a
>straight historical narrative & our tendency as people who believe it to
be inspired
>Scripture might be to say that that was the way it really happened,
million man army &
>all. When we compare it with the equally inspired Samuel-Kings we can see
(with some
>study) that while the Chronicler has made use of historical material, it
has been
>modified consistently to make a sustained theological statement.
> Now you can say here, "OK, but Chronicles still has a core of history &
thus
>satisfies my basic concordist requirement." Let's focus then on the
specific episode
>of the million man army in 2 Chron.14:9-15. From your language above &
your general
>approach, my guess (but you may surprise me) is that you'll argue that
there was _some_
>Ethiopian army which was defeated by Asa. In view of the fact that this
episode is
>unknown to Kings, that we have no knowledge of any "King Zerah", as well
as the fact
>that an army of 10^6 men in the field at that time seems implausible, I
think it's much
>more likely that the whole episode is fictional, again serving the overall
purpose of
>showing how the ideal kingdom defeats all enemies through its reliance on
the Lord.
The number inflation in the Bible does bother me. But it is minor compared
to making up the army etc. It bothers me because it places doubts on the
credibility of other things. That should be a concern to everyone. If our
Bible isn't credible, then exactly what are we worshipping--our own
imagination? But remember, not every king who actually lived has left a
historical record. I used to have an ancient coin, now lost, which had the
picture of a guy who was ruler in Lebanon during the Roman empire. There
was no other reference tothe guy in any historical documents. They found a
pile of coins in a well with his name and likeness. Kings with lesser PR
events, are not remembered at all.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution