death into a sentence, such as in 2 Kings 23:29, lest it draw too much attention. Josiah’s However, the Chronicler did choose to depict in detail. Much attention has been paid to death, and the retributive pattern could effectively induce his audience Josiah’s Chronicler’s to infer that such a death was a consequent punishment to specific unfaithfulness. Josiah’s Thus, what is important is to first ask how persuasively and clearly the Chronicler has demonstrated a retributive causality in his depiction. A strong inference is made that Josiah disobeyed the word of God conveyed through the mouth of Neco, and was consequently punished. However, as previously mentioned, the audience may have been reluctant to accept such an explanation. This is because such behavior does not fit earlier or traditional image as one of the most pious kings in Josiah’s Israel. The pious king was unlikely to choose such foolish behaviour of disobedience. So, for this inference, two premises need to be established: firstly, word must have been the Neco’s word of God. Second, Josiah must have known the divine authority in word. Indeed, Neco’s the Chronicler effectively resolves these premises. The former is resolved through the commentary, and the latter through a parallel plot. In other words, the narrator’s Chronicler’s audience may have brought out his/her hypothesis and inference through the help of those rhetorical devices. A Commentary on the Reliability of Words Narrator’s Neco’s It may seem that the audience had no way of recognizing the reliability of Neco’s words claiming the divine authority of his act. The Egyptian claim is more likely to be king’s a human threat rather than a divine command. Some may point to some divine speeches delivered by gentile kings in Chronicles, such as those from Hiram the king of Tyre (2 Chr
Josiah’s death into a sentence, such as in 2 Kings 23:29, lest it draw too much attention. However, the Chronicler did choose to depict in detail. Much attention has been paid to Josiah’s death, and the Chronicler’s retributive pattern could effectively induce his audience to infer that such a death was a consequent punishment to Josiah’s specific unfaithfulness. Thus, what is important is to first ask how persuasively and clearly the Chronicler has demonstrated a retributive causality in his depiction. A strong inference is made that Josiah disobeyed the word of God conveyed through the mouth of Neco, and was consequently punished. However, as previously mentioned, the audience may have been reluctant to accept such an explanation. This is because such behavior does not fit Josiah’s earlier or traditional image as one of the most pious kings in Israel. The pious king was unlikely to choose such foolish behaviour of disobedience. So, for this inference, two premises need to be established: firstly, Neco’s word must have been the word of God. Second, Josiah must have known the divine authority in Neco’s word. Indeed, the Chronicler effectively resolves these premises. The former is resolved through the narrator’s commentary, and the latter through a parallel plot. In other words, the Chronicler’s audience may have brought out his/her hypothesis and inference through the help of those rhetorical devices. A Narrator’s Commentary on the Reliability of Neco’s Words It may seem that the audience had no way of recognizing the reliability of Neco’s words claiming the divine authority of his act. The Egyptian king’s claim is more likely to be a human threat rather than a divine command. Some may point to some divine speeches delivered by gentile kings in Chronicles, such as those from Hiram the king of Tyre (2 Chr
%28PhD%20Thesis%29%20THE%20WISDOM%20OF%20CHRONICLES%20Buyoung%20Son%20120107117.docx