GENESIS-II KINGS: THE PRIMARY HISTORY OF ISRAEL

A more detailed analysis of this subject will be sent on request. Contact me at elmerphd21@hotmail.com

The books from Genesis to II Kings, with the exception of Ruth, constitute what has been called the Primary History of Israel. The Hebrew Bible encompasses these books into two divisions: the Pentateuch and the Former Prophets. Other intended groupings, however, have been proposed by scholars due to the natural affinity certain of these writings have with others in the canon. Without going into the detailed arguments regarding the probable process of composition underlying these works, the main options can be presented as follows:

Figure 1: Proposed Divisions for the Primary History

Hebrew Bible          Genesis–Deuteronomy         Joshua–II Kings

 (Pentateuch)                    (Former Prophets)

Noth                      Genesis–Numbers              Deuteronomy–II Kings

(Tetrateuch)              (Deuteronomistic History)

Wellhausen          Genesis–Joshua                      Judges–II Kings

                                                (Hexateuch)                  (Collected Traditions)

Of the three options, that of Wellhausen appears to be the most problematic. There is little persuasive reason to completely divorce Joshua from the rest of the Former Prophets in light of the strong connection between the books of Joshua and Judges. Both deal with the settling of the Promised Land, with Joshua forming the “prelude” to Judges. In addition there is a certain amount of overlap between the material in the last two chapters of Joshua and the first two chapters of Judges.

The Structure of the Pentateuch

As in the previous discussions of individual books, it is profitable to go beyond the subject of proposed pairings of books to see if there is a coherent, symmetrical architecture encompassing the whole. Despite its uncertain history of composition, the present text of these five books demonstrates a unity that was for years all but ignored in the endless search by scholars for original sources. Steiner blames this earlier critical consensus for the fact that “questions of the literary structure of the Pentateuch scarcely occur at the popular level, and relatively few proposals have appeared even in the commentary literature.”

It is possible to see this collected history as dealing specifically with the Jewish people except for the universal history of Gen. 1-11 that precedes it. David Clines proposes this same two-fold division for topical reasons by pointing out that the first eleven chapters of Genesis deal with the results of man’s sin while the rest of the Pentateuch centers on God’s promise and fulfillment.  At the same time, the whole structure of the Pentateuch can be said to be “shaped by the promises to Abraham and their fulfillments.” (Clines)

As useful as these observations may be, it is still tempting to look for traces of symmetry in the Pentateuch that would help to unambiguously determine its intended structure. One promising approach that respects the five books as discrete compositions begins with the detailed word count analysis on the Hebrew Bible conducted by David Noel Freedman. He discerns a numerical pattern wherein the total number of words in Genesis and Deuteronomy is practically equal to that in Exodus and Numbers combined. Confirmation of these suggested pairings and the centrality of Leviticus to the Pentateuch is found when he extends this analysis to the remainder of the Hebrew Bible. A great deal of additional evidence for Freedman’s chiastic organization can be marshaled.

A. Genesis

B. Exodus

C. Leviticus

B'. Numbers

A'. Deuteronomy

Deuteronomistic History

Several different chiastic patterns have been proposed for the books of Joshua through II Kings. Freedman’s word count analysis leads him to pair Joshua and Kings with Judges and Samuel.  On the other hand, Boling and Wright propose the following structure for these same books:

A. Conquest of the land under charismatic leadership (Joshua)

B. Possession of the land under charismatic leadership (Judges-I Samuel)

                        C. Possession of the land under monarchical government (II Samuel-I Kings)

D. Loss of land under monarchical government (II Kings)

They conclude, “In terms of literary proportions, A and D are comparable as are B and C.”

Another symmetrical structure can be proposed based on the insight of Kyle McCarter, Jr. that “the stories of Samuel, Saul and the young David stand at mid-career in the Deuteronomistic history.”  While the Samuel stories in I Samuel look backwards to the time of Judges, the David/Saul saga is preparation for David’s rule as king. If I Samuel then represents a watershed in the history of Israel, a chiastic structure such as pictured below might be intended.

A. Joshua

B. Judges

C. I Samuel

B'. II Samuel-I Kings

A'. II Kings

One very strong piece of evidence in favor of such an arrangement is the fact that the key transition phrase “after the death of...” appears in Joshua-II Kings only in Josh. 1:1, Judges 1:1, II Sam. 1:1 and II Kings 1:1 (in other words, at the beginning of sections A, B, B' and A').

One commonality in all these analyses is their exclusion of the book of Deuteronomy. This is a major omission for books that are widely labeled as Deuteronomistic History. Some literary ties between Deuteronomy and the following books can be cited even though it must be admitted that most of Deuteronomy looks backwards, not forward. In the separate analysis of the structure of Deuteronomy, chs. 31-34 are appropriately labeled “Israel’s Future.” The dual themes of this section were stated to be continuity of Israel’s leadership and of the covenant. Added confirmation that this four-chapter “appendix” should be treated separately from the rest of Deuteronomy comes from the fact that Deuteronomy 30 and 34 both end with similar formulas:

“...the land which the LORD swore to...Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.”

            “This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, ‘I will give...’”

There is another natural division in the text, after II Kings 23:25. It is at this point that the fate of the Jewish people becomes inextricably linked with and overshadowed by the powerful neighboring nations. As evidence, there is more mention of Egypt and Babylon than of Judah in II Kings 23:26-25:30. Therefore this final section of II Kings should be broken out as a separate literary unit in agreement with most critical scholars, who treat these verses as a later appendix to the Deuteronomist History proper. (11) Consideration of these two new sections leads to the organization pictured in Fig. 2.

Figure 2: Structure of Deuteronomy-II Kings

A. Introduction: Entering the Promised Land (Deut. 31-34)

B. Conquering the Land (Joshua)

C. Possessing the Land: A Mixed History (Judges)

D. Transition of Leadership (I Samuel)

C'. Possessing the Land: A Mixed History (II Samuel-I Kings)

B'. Losing the Land (II Kings 1:1-23:25)

A'. Conclusion: Leaving the Promised Land (II Kings 23:26-25:30)

The Pentateuch Revisited

With the separation of Deuteronomy into two sections, a further refinement of the Pentateuch's structure is possible by also incorporating the earlier insight that sees Genesis 1-11 as a unit apart from the rest of Genesis.

Figure 3: Revised Structure for the Pentateuch

A. Prelude (Genesis 1-11)

B. Covenant Relationship Defined (Genesis 12-50)

C. In the Wilderness: Part I (Exodus)

D. The Law (Leviticus)

C'. In the Wilderness: Part II (Numbers)

B'. Covenant Relationship Ratified (Deuteronomy 1-30)

A'. Epilogue (Deuteronomy 31-34)

Overall Structure

One literary device by which the Primary History is connected, according to Freedman, is the systematic presentation of examples of violations of the Ten Commandments to provide “The Secret Progress of Israel’s Sins.” In each of these cases, summarized in Fig. 6, God takes part in the exposure of the wrongdoer and assesses the penalty.

1. Apostasy (Exod. 32)

2. Idolatry (Exod. 32)

3. Blasphemy (Lev. 24:11)

4. Sabbath observance (Num. 15:32-36)

5. Parental respect (Deut. 21:18-21)

6. Murder (Judg. 19-21)

7. Adultery (II Sam. 11-12)

8. Stealing (Josh. 7:1)

9. False testimony (I Kg. 21)

10. Coveting (none)

Note that Freedman sees no examples dealing with the last commandment and must combine two violations in the Exodus 32 narrative and rearrange the traditional order of commandments 6-8 for his scheme to work. He provides adequate explanations for all these anomalies, but a slight variation of his proposal would appear to remove some possible objections. In the first place, if one widens the scope of his inquiry to include all of mankind, not just the Jewish people, then two stories that bracket the Primeval History in Genesis 1-11 would seem to provide excellent examples of worshiping a god, namely oneself, other than the God. In both, the story of mankind’s fall in the garden and building of the tower of Babel, the involved parties are clearly guilty of attempting to rival God himself.

As Freedman points out, the last commandment is qualitatively different from the first nine in that it deals with motives, not deeds. Even so, the narrative of I Kings 21 provides one of the best examples in the whole Bible of such a motive and could do double duty in illustrating the last two commandments much as Freedman utilizes Ex. 32 for the first two. A second, more subtle, possibility is to see the story of II Kings 20 as a sort of reversal of the pattern by which Hezekiah’s prideful action in opening the treasure house to visiting Babylonians triggers their covetousness. This event will culminate in the fall of Judah at their hands, as prophesied by Isaiah. Lastly, from a Christian perspective the absence of the last commandment in the scheme of the Primary History may be purposeful and point ahead to the NT teachings of Jesus, which center on issues of motive more than than on specific actions.

If Genesis-II Kings is indeed a literary unity in its present form, that fact should be reflected in its overall structure. This results by simply melding the patterns shown in figs. 2 and 3.

Figure 4: Structure for the Primary History

IA. Prelude (Gen. 1-11)

IB. Covenant Relationship Defined (Gen. 12-50)

IC. In the Wilderness: Part I (Exodus)

ID. The Law (Leviticus)

IC'. In the Wilderness: Part II (Numbers)

IB'. Covenant Relationship Ratified (Deut. 1-30)

Center: Deuteronomy 31-34

IIB. Conquering the Land (Joshua)

IIC. Possessing the Land: A Mixed History (Judges)

IID. Transition of Leadership (I Samuel)

IIC'. Possessing the Land: A Mixed History (II Samuel-I Kings)

IIB'. Losing the Land (II Kings 1:1-23:25)

IA'. Conclusion: Leaving the Promised Land (II Kings 23:26-25:30)

This pattern takes the unusual form of two interlocking seven-membered chiasms encountered elsewhere in the overall structure of Samuel-Kings. Another way in which Deut. 31-34 serves as an interlocking agent is by having the opening of this section look forward to the beginning of the following section while its conclusion looks backwards to the end of the previous section:

“Be strong and courageous...possession of the land sworn to the ancestors” (Deut. 31:7, 23; Josh. 1:6,7)

“obey the law” (Deut. 31:9-13; Josh. 1:7-8)

“the land I/the LORD swore to... Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob” (Deut. 34:4; Deut. 30:20)

Hawk describes the complex interweaving of themes present in this crucial center section of the Primary History, which together demonstrate “the necessity of continuing human leadership after the death of Moses.”