other words, the role of Chronicles might be assumed to fill in the missing information in its preceding historical books from Genesis to Kings. Thus, Chronicles would be understood to share a non-divergent theology with the Deuteronomistic tradition, serving it by including some materials left out. It has even been questioned whether Chronicles is authoritative enough to justify its inclusion in the canon: have always been astonished that they have “I been included in the Bible by men who shut out from the canon the books of Wisdom, Tobit, and the others II, 10.5). Theologico-Political Treatise styled apocryphal” (Baruch Spinoza, In the Hebrew canon, however, Chronicles has a rather different profile. Firstly, in most ancient Hebrew manuscripts, the book is placed at the end of the Hebrew Bible as the final book of Ketuvim and the close of the Tanakh [the entire Hebrew Bible]. [“Writings”], Although some manuscripts place Chronicles at the beginning of Ketuvim, followed by the grouping Psalms/Proverbs/Job (in various orders), the canonical position of Chronicles as Ketuvim is obvious. The canonical position of Chronicles might support the hypothesis that it has a somewhat distinct theological viewpoint from the other historical writings which are grouped as the Former Prophets or Nevi’im. It is commonly acknowledged that the Ketuvim books were shaped after the Exile and canonized before the second century BCE. However, this does not mean that Ketuvim was merely a collection put together by later authors. There were competing scriptures and competing systems of classification in the Babylonian and Persian period until the three-part division of books was eventually settled in the final form of the Hebrew canon. In other words, the final three divisions of the Hebrew canon are not the mere product of historical accidents, but of This implies that certain theological intents can be argued as ‘works art’. accounting for the arrangement of the Hebrew canon. Thus, the canonical position of Chronicles could mean that its theological viewpoint might best be understood in relation to
other words, the role of Chronicles might be assumed to fill in the missing information in its preceding historical books from Genesis to Kings. Thus, Chronicles would be understood to share a non-divergent theology with the Deuteronomistic tradition, serving it by including some materials left out. It has even been questioned whether Chronicles is authoritative enough to justify its inclusion in the canon: “I have always been astonished that they have been included in the Bible by men who shut out from the canon the books of Wisdom, Tobit, and the others styled apocryphal” (Baruch Spinoza, Theologico-Political Treatise II, 10.5). In the Hebrew canon, however, Chronicles has a rather different profile. Firstly, in most ancient Hebrew manuscripts, the book is placed at the end of the Hebrew Bible as the final book of Ketuvim [“Writings”], and the close of the Tanakh [the entire Hebrew Bible]. Although some manuscripts place Chronicles at the beginning of Ketuvim, followed by the grouping Psalms/Proverbs/Job (in various orders), the canonical position of Chronicles as Ketuvim is obvious. The canonical position of Chronicles might support the hypothesis that it has a somewhat distinct theological viewpoint from the other historical writings which are grouped as the Former Prophets or Nevi’im. It is commonly acknowledged that the Ketuvim books were shaped after the Exile and canonized before the second century BCE. However, this does not mean that Ketuvim was merely a collection put together by later authors. There were competing scriptures and competing systems of classification in the Babylonian and Persian period until the three-part division of books was eventually settled in the final form of the Hebrew canon. In other words, the final three divisions of the Hebrew canon are not the mere product of historical accidents, but ‘works of art’. This implies that certain theological intents can be argued as accounting for the arrangement of the Hebrew canon. Thus, the canonical position of Chronicles could mean that its theological viewpoint might best be understood in relation to
%28PhD%20Thesis%29%20THE%20WISDOM%20OF%20CHRONICLES%20Buyoung%20Son%20120107117.docx