Untimely Death of a Good King

Sunday School Lesson 2 Chronicles 35:20-27 by Lorin L. Cranford All rights reserved © Untimely Death of a Good King A copy of this lesson is posted in Adobe pdf format at http://cranfordville.com under Bible Studies in the Bible Study section A note about the blue, underlined material: These are hyperlinks that allow you to click them on and bring up the specified scripture passage automatically while working inside the pdf file connected to the internet. Just use your web browser’s back arrow or the taskbar to return to the lesson material. ************************************************************************** Quick Links to the Study I. Context II. Message a. Historical a. A Dumb Mistake, vv. 20-24a b. Literary b. Wrap up, vv. 24b-27 *************************************************************************** When a good leader is killed, what happens next? King Josiah of Judah from the time of his ascension to the throne in Jerusalem at the age of eight in 640 BCE sought to lead the nation in the ways of God. When he was sixteen years old he began a passionate quest to walk in God’s ways and to faithfully serve the God of Abraham. In the eighteen year of his reign (622 BCE) when he was twenty six years old the discovery of the “book of the Law of God” in the temple dramatically turned his life toward God. Thus from ap- proximately 640 to 609 BCE, the southern kingdom was led by a ruler with a deep desire to lead his country faithfully to serve God. Because of this religious devotion, God promised to spare him the coming agony of seeing his nation die in a horrible slaughter at the hands of the Babylonians after the turn of the century. Thus, his premature death in 609 at the Battle of Megiddo was both providential and a tragedy for the nation as well. The vacuum left by his death was quickly filled by placing his son Jehoahaz on the throne when he was but twenty three years old. This proved to be a disaster and very quickly the Egyptian Pharaoh Neco II replaced him with another son of Josiah by the name of Elia- kim whom he renamed Jehoiakim, a twenty five year old puppet king at the mercy of the Egyptians. The beginning of the end of the southern kingdom was now set in motion. The tragedy is that most of this could have been averted had Josiah paid attention to the plea of the Egyptian Pharaoh to step aside and not fight him at Megiddo. Neco was on his way to Carchemish on the Euphrates River when Josiah intercepted him at Megiddo. The Egyptians had no quarrel with the Israelites; they were after the Babylonians instead. But for some unexplained reason by either biblical account, Josiah was determined to do battle with the Egyptians and it cost him his life. What a tragedy! In 605 BCE, Neco II was Page 1 of 2 Chron. 35:20-27 Bible Study soundly defeated by Nebuchadrezzar II (630-562 BCE) at the battle of Carchemish four years after Megiddo. The Assyrian Empire disappeared from history completely and the Egyptians retreated back home to never again become a significant power in the Middle East. By now the die was cast and Judah’s fate sealed through their link to the defeated Egyptians. The exploding power of the Babylonians would extend itself increasingly west- ward until it engulfed the southern kingdom with the ultimate destruction of the city and the temple by 586 BCE. I. Context Consideration to the background material will be given with much of it being drawn from previous studies in both 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles. a. Historical External History. The compositional history of the Israelites is told places the temple in Jeru- of 1 - 2 Chronicles lies in the misty past of ancient salem as the stack pole for the telling of the story. Hebrew writings that preceded the beginning of The two kings who stand as the ultimate standard the Christian era. As is the case with virtually all of are David and Solomon. The southern kingdom is the documents in the Old Testament, the standard favored over the northern kingdom largely because “reporter questions”1 tend to escape clear answer. it remained committed to the temple in Jerusalem. Roddy Braun (“1 Chronicles,” Word Biblical Com- Thus, especially given the ending of 2 Chronicles, mentary, Logos Systems) provides a helpful starting and the obvious affinity of Ezra-Nehemiah for the point for the discussion: writing style etc. of 1 - 2 Chronicles, this material The name given 1 and 2 Chronicles in the He- took on its final shape as early as the Exile or early -the words (or events) Post-Exilic period. But more common among schol“ ,םימיה ירבד brew Bible is of the days.” These two books are counted as one in ars today is a much later period, as Braun (WBC, the Hebrew canon, where they normally stand at Logos Systems) notes: the end (although a few manuscripts place them at We may conclude then that the author was the head) of the Writings, the third major portion interested above all in presenting the Jerusalem temple of the canon, preceded somewhat anomalously by as the only legitimate temple of Yahweh. While it is Ezra-Nehemiah, commonly considered their sequel. impossible to date his message with precision, it may, The division into two books in our English Bible, as contrary to current consensus, best be placed prior to the well as their position with the “historical” books, time when tensions between Judah and her neighbors, especially the Samaritans, became severe and hardened can be attributed to the influence of LXX, which into intransigence. This statement, however, becomes named the books Παραλειπομρνων (Paralipomenon), less than helpful for determining the date of the work, i.e., “the things left over,” and placed them after since it has become apparent that this happened much Kings. Unfortunately this somewhat derogatory and later than assumed before (cf. Waltke, New Perspectives nontheological view of Chronicles has often been on the OT, 219–39; Coggins, Samaritans and Jews; Braun, shared by later readers, who have tended to see it JBL 96 [1977] 59–62). Chronicles is concerned to in large measure as a repetition of Samuel-Kings, present the temple as the common property of both supplemented by a collection of priestly trivia, and north and south. At the same time that the north is hence have ignored its unique contents and mes- invited to return to it, the south is urged to commit sage. itself wholeheartedly to participation in its cult, to These two documents do contain a distinctive theological interpretation of the history of the Isra- of sacred history.” From that statement is derived our name elites.2 The theological slant from which the story “Chronicles.” While the books have sometimes been viewed suspiciously, their canonicity has not been seriously questioned. 1Who wrote it? When was it written? Where was it written? The remark of Jesus recorded in Matt 23:35, referring to the To whom was it written? Why was it written? death of the priest Zechariah, would indicate that at his time 2In its present form, Chronicles stretches from Adam (1:1) these books were considered Scripture and stood at or near the to the Persian king Cyrus (2 Chr 36:22–23), justifying Jerome’s end of that collection (cf. 2 Chr 24:20–22). [Braun, 1 Chronicles, statement that we might call it “the chronicle of the whole Word Biblical Commentary, Logos Systems] Page 2 of 2 Chron. 35:20-27 Bible Study the support of its services, and to experience the joy resulting from it. These exhortations are reinforced with countless examples from Judah’s past and supported with the promise of rewards for faithfully seeking Yahweh and the threat of punishment for forsaking him. Arguments for dating Chronicles have thus far been inconclusive, varying widely from the early Persian period to as late as the Maccabees. Williamson has argued that the daric was a Persian coin first minted at the earliest in 515 B.C. (TynBul 28 [1977] 123–26), and fragments of Chronicles have been said to have been found among the Qumran manuscripts, (cf. Myers, lxxxvii) thus establishing the extremes within which the work is to be dated. Welten (Geschichte) has supported a date about 300– 250 B.C., but his major argument probably results from a misreading of 2 Chr 26:15. Polzin’s study (Late Biblical Hebrew) of linguistic data concludes that Chronicles and the Ezra Memoir are linguistically similar, which would appear to favor a date shortly before 400 B.C., but his methodology and conclusions are insufficiently critical when dealing with the data of Chronicles. Most Cuneform text from Babylonian Chronicles recently Williamson (15–16) has opted for a date of mentioning the caputre of Jerusalem about 350 B.C., but accepted the authenticity of many passages more commonly considered later additions. in 609 BCE, some four years earlier. The precise In general, it may be said that while any date duration of this encounter is not specified by either from about 515–250 B.C. is possible, the separation of Hebrew narrator. From all indications Josiah’s death Chronicles from Ezra-Nehemiah at a minimum permits took place toward the beginning of the battle and an earlier dating for Chronicles than would otherwise resulted in a rout of the Israelite forces. be the case. While certainty is impossible, it is at least The place markers in the passage locate three interesting to consider a date nearer the rebuilding of primary areas: 1) Carchemish on the Euphrates; 2) the temple as the occasion for the initial stratum of the plain of Megiddo; and 3) Jerusalem.

Load more