One internet Bible critic asks the above question in light of the fact that II Samuel 5-6 indicates it happened after defeating the Philistines while I Chronicles 13-14 says it happened before that time.
This is one of those occasions where fundamentalists and agnostics often find themselves as strange bedfellows on an issue. Both insist that the biblical accounts be 100% factually accurate, including issues involving chronology and specific numbers, otherwise they are nothing but bald-faced lies.
Such a hard-and-fact position betrays a complete misunderstanding of the nature of the Bible since its preoccupations are not primarily concerned with such matters that seem so important to us.
These are generally the same class of people I have met who brag that they have never read a short story or novel unless it was required reading at school. Instead, they rely wholly on history books and biographies to get the “real truth,” ignoring the fact that (a) the authors of such books are quite free in the selective way they use the facts at hand to convey their preconceived notions and (b) there is more than one way in which the truth can be presented, and non-fiction writings may not even be the best tool with which to accomplish that. With that said, let me quote the opinions of some prominent Bible scholars on the specific subject at hand, starting with comments on the II Samuel account.
McCarter: “As in the case of the relationship between the passages describing David's capture of Jerusalem (5:6-10) and his victories over the Philistines (5:17-25),...the editorial concerns governing the position of the present passage [II Samuel 6:1-19] are not chronological but thematic. We may not assume out of hand that the transfer of the ark succeeded the battles recounted in the previous section. In this case, however, the judgment of most modern historians vindicates the received arrangement.”
Davis: “2 Samuel 5 is a collage. It is not a single flowing narrative but a collection of 'chunks,' episodes or pieces of information placed side-by-side, all of which, however, relate to the establishing of David's kingdom...chronology enthusiasts may be delighted to note that the defeats of the Philistines in verses 17-25 may have preceded David's capture of Jerusalem in verses 6-8...Most of us, however, do not live and breathe chronology...My point is that biblical writers are not chained to chronological order – and in 2 Samuel 5 the chains have certainly fallen off. The chapter is orderly but not sequential. It is a collage; it is a collection of fragments intending to give us a proper view of the kingdom.” And Davis' point applies just as well to the quandary at hand.
Next, moving to the parallel episode in I Chronicles, consider the following:
Williamson: “From the establishment of David as king over all Israel, the Chronicler moves directly to the other of his great concerns, care for the Ark, which was eventually to be housed in the temple. This involves a rearrangement of the ordering of his Vorlage [i.e. source] (cf. 2 Sam. 5-6), showing once again that his material is presented on the basis of theme and theology rather than strict chronology. In the earlier listing, the whole account is given in one continuous chapter (2 Sam. 6)...The Chronicler, however, has divided this account between chs 13 and 15-16, using the indication in 2 Sam. 6:11 of a three month gap in the narrative to go back over the material previously omitted from 2 Sam. 5; by its new position, however, as well as some light editorial touches, this itself now contributes in a fresh way to the development of the Chronicler's main concerns.”
Myers: “The most striking feature of the story [in Chronicles] is that the attempted removal of the ark to the place where David was was a religious matter and not a semimilitary ceremony as in Samuel...Because it seemed right in the sight of all, the venture was made so as to remedy the defect in Saul's attitude toward the ark. Ostensibly this had to be the first move of the new king to prevent the same debacle befalling him as had befallen Saul. That is why the passage stands before the Philistine raids here whereas it follows them in Samuel. It must be remembered that the Chronicler's story is primarily religious and he arranges his material accordingly.”
Eskenazi: “Even when Samuel was still venerated as unbiased history, Chronicles was already read as if its particular literary constructs express its own theological and historical preoccupations...It is probably no longer necessary to reiterate that a literary approach does not demote the text from truth to fiction...” For one thing, “Placing the battles with the Philistines after the initial attempts to bring the ark toward its destination allows Chronicles to link the ark more firmly to the dialogue between David and God.”
My own literary analysis of both these passages (in bold in the figures below) in their overall context establishes that their respective ways of ordering events each make sense from a point of view of presenting a completely symmetrical organization. I am indebted to Dale Ralph Davis for much of the II Samuel organization seen below.
I Chronicles 11-20 Structure
1. Warriors and Battles (chs.11-12)
2. The Ark is Moved (ch.13)
3. David's House Established (ch.14)
2'. The Ark is Moved (chs.15-16)
3'. David's House Established (ch.17)
1'. Warriors and Battles (chs.18-20)
II Samuel 5-8 Structure
1. Various battles (II Sam. 5)
2. God's House (II Sam. 6)
3. The ark carried in (6:1-4)
a. Joyful response (6:5)
b. Inappropriate response (6:6-10a)
c. Obededom’s house blessed (6:9-11)
3'. The ark carried in (6:12-13)
a. Joyful response (6:14-15a)
b. Inappropriate response (6:15b)
c. David's house not blessed (6:20-23)
2'. David's House (II Sam. 7)
1'. Various battles (II Sam. 8)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments