T H E CHRONICLER'S SOLOMON

RAYMOND B. DILLARD

A ny effort to elucidate the purpose and theology of the Chron­icler must take into account the author's distinctive handling

of David and Solomon ; an extensive scholarly literature has ad­dressed this subject.1 The reigns of these two kings contrast sharply with the earlier record in Samuel/Kings ; both accounts are set in a theological framework largely motivated by the needs of their respective audiences.

This study will survey the Chronicler's distinctive handling of Solomon. The contours of his treatment appear in clear relief by examining both ( 1 ) his deletion of material from the Samuel /Kings account and (2) his use of models around which to shape his version of Solomon.

1 The following are noteworthy but do not exhaust the contributions : Ackroyd, Peter R. "History and Theology in the Writings of the

Chronicler," Concordia Theological Monthly, 38 (1967), 501-15. Braun, Roddy L. "The Message of Chronicles: Rally Round the Tem­

ple," Concordia Theological Monthly, 42 (1971), 502-14. . "Solomon, the Chosen Temple Builder: the Significance of 1

Chronicles 22, 28 and 29 for the Theology of Chronicles," Journal of Biblical Literature, 95 (1976), 581-90.

. "Solomonic Apologetic in Chronicles," Journal of Biblical Literature, 92 (1973), 503-16.

Brunei, A. M. "La théologie du Chroniste: Théocratie et messianisme," Sacra Pagina, 1 (1959), 384-97.

Caquot, A. "Peut-on parler de messianisme dans l'oeuvre du Chroniste?" Revue de théologie et de philosophie, 16 (1966), 110-120.

Freedman, D. N. "The Chronicler's Purpose," Catholic Biblical Quar­terly, 23 (1961), 436-42.

Stinespring, W. F. "Eschatology in Chronicles," Journal of Biblical Literature, 80 (1961), 209-19.

Williamson, H. G. M. "The Accession of Solomon in the Books of Chronicles," Vetus Testamentum, 26 (1976), 351-61.

. "Eschatology in Chronicles," Tyndale Bulletin, 28 (1977), 115-154.

289

2 9 0 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

I. The Chronicler's Omissions.

The deuteronomic2 historian had divided the reign of Solo­mon into two distinct periods, a time of blessing and obedience (1 Kgs 1-10) followed by apostasy and judgment in the form of the schism (1 Kgs 11-12). The concern with centralization of worship (Deut 12), particularly with the frequenting of the high places in Judah (1 Kgs3:2-4; 12:31-33; 13:2,32-33; 14:22-23; 22:43; 2 Kgs 12:3; 14:4; 15:4,35; 16:4; 17:11,29-41; 18:4,22; 21:3 ; 23:5-20), becomes the canon also for condemning the ac­tions of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:1-13). The era of blessing ends with attacks from adversaries (11:14-25) and rebellion from within (11:26-40) ; the schism itself is attributed to judgment for the sins of Solomon (11:1-6, 31-33). Solomon's corvée labor and his numerous wives make him the negation of the ideal king (Deut 17:17; 1 Sam 8:11-18; 1 Kgs 11:1-6; 4:6-7,22-28; 5:13-18; 9:15-23; 12:3-19).3 For the deuteronomic historian the record of the sins of Solomon, as well as those of David, is one more ingredient in the answer for the exilic community to the "why" for the destruction of Jerusalem ; though David and Solomon were Israel's glorious kings, they too had their part in the failure to live according to God's covenant with his people, a failure which ultimately issued in judgment.

In contrast the Solomon of the Chronicler is scarcely recog­nizable. Any fault or transgression which might tarnish the image of David and Solomon has been removed.4 Instead the

2 My use of the term "deuteronomic" should not prejudice the question of the date of that book. I do not consider Deuteronomy to have developed in the seventh century, but rather to have attained its essential present form at a time in the latter portion of the second millennium.

3 It is striking that the deuteronomic historian did not use other attri­butes of the ideal king (Deut 17:14-20) as condemnatory of Solomon; though he records the large number of horses from Egypt and the large amounts of silver and gold, both the deuteronomist and the Chronicler treat these as signs of divine blessing (1 Kgs 10:14-29; 2 Chr 1:14-17).

4 This is with the exception of the narrative of David's census (1 Chr 21 ; 2 Sam 24). Although the text in the two histories is quite similar, the Chronicler's major addition to the text shows that he is putting the account to quite a different purpose than the earlier history (1 Chr 21:28-22:1): the Chronicler's concern with the legitimacy of the cult, in particular the legitimacy of the temple site, required the use of the census narrative, even at the expense of tarnishing David. A similar con-

THE CHRONICLER'S SOLOMON 291

Chronicler portrays glorious, obedient, all-conquering figures who enjoy not only divine blessing but the total support of the people as well ; he presents us not only the David and Solomon of history, but also the David and Solomon of his messianic expectation.5 With reference to Solomon in particular, the ac­count of the accession is striking. Instead of the bed-ridden, aging David who only saves the kingdom for his son Solomon at the last moment due to the promptings of Bathsheba and Nathan ( 1 Kgs 1 ), the Chronicler shows a smooth transition of power without a ripple of dissent: David himself publicly an­nounces Solomon's appointment and is present for his annoint-ing ; Solomon's designation as successor is greeted with enthusi­astic and total support on the part of the people, including the other sons of David, the officers and mighty men in the army (1 Chr 28:1-29:25) who had presumably participated in Ado-nijah's attempted coup (1 Chr 29:24; 1 Kgs 1:7-10). The Chronicler also deletes the record of Solomon's compliance with David's request that he take vengeance on David's enemies after his death (1 Kgs 2). Gone too are the sins for which the deuter­onomic historian had condemned Solomon (1 Kgs 11) ; even the blame for the schism is shifted from Solomon to Jeroboam (2 Chr 13:6-7).

While the Chronicler's idealization of Solomon is effected by his deletion of any blemish found in the Kings account, these are not the only omissions he makes in line with his own central concerns ; not just Solomon's sins are missing, but also accounts which would have enhanced his portrayal of the king. The Chron­icler's account of Solomon's reign is given almost exclusively to

cern with the cult even at the expense of idealizing David can be seen in the account of the movement of the ark (1 Chr 13, 15-16).

5 The nature of the Chronicler's eschatological expectation is highly de­bated. Scholarly opinion is divided between two extremes and a host of mediating positions: on the one hand, many find the author's messianic/ eschatological expectations central to these books, while others view the Chronicler as espousing the view that the purposes of God were so re­alized in the restoration community as to leave little if any place for es­chatological expectation. This same tension appears also to have char­acterized the restoration community itself. For a survey of the scholarly positions and bibliography, see Braun, "Apologetic," pp. 506-7; a recent and quite balanced study of the issue is found in Williamson, "Escha­tology."

2 9 2 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

his concern with the cult (2 Chr 2-7) ; narratives not showing any involvement with the cult are often omitted. Even the en-duement with wisdom is not wisdom in the abstract (1 Kgs 3:16-4:34), but is specifically wisdom to build the temple (see below, II C, "Solomon and Huram-abi as the new Bezalel and Oholiab," and III, "Literary Structure").

II. The Chronicler's Models.

It is not sufficient to look at what the Chronicler omits alone ; it is also necessary to assess his positive contributions. In the case of his account of Solomon the author appears to have used three distinct models to shape the record.

A. Solomon as a second David.

Braun has developed these parallels at some length.6 Solomon, like David, is king by divine choice; in ways not paralleled in the deuteronomic history, the Chronicler has twice introduced Solomon's name into divine pronouncements regarding David's successor (1 Chr 22:7-10; 28:6). The only occurrences of the term ΊΠ2 in reference to the divine choice of any king after David in the Old Testament are found in 1 Chr 28:5-6,10 ; 29:1 in reference to Solomon.7 As king by divine election Solomon, like David, also enjoys the complete and immediate support of all the people; the Chronicler had elaborated at length on the support of "all Israel" for David at his accession (1 Chr 11-12), and the same is true for Solomon (1 Chr 29:22-25). Both kings are shown as having extensive concern with the cult and the temple and its personnel. In some respects Solomon is even more idealized than David in Chronicles: no blame whatsoever at­taches to Solomon as it had to David (1 Chr 21) ; Solomon en­joys the privilege of building the temple that had been forbidden to his father. While the earlier history could say that "Solomon did evil . . . and did not follow the Lord completely, as David his father had done" (1 Kgs 11:6), the Chronicler can praise Rehoboam's early years as a time when they walked "in the ways of David and Solomon" (2 Chr 11:17).

β Braun, "Apologetic," pp. 506-514. 7 See Braun, "Solomon, the Chosen," pp. 588-590.

THE CHRONICLER'S SOLOMON 293

B. The succession of Moses and Joshua as a paradigm for that of David and Solomon.

Williamson develops the argument that the transition of lead­ership from Moses to Joshua provided the model used by the Chronicler to portray the transfer of leadership from David and Solomon.8 He notes the following ingredients of the Chronicler's account:

1. The disqualification of Moses and David from achieving their chief goals, the one to enter the land, the other to build the temple, is intimately related to the appointment of their respec­tive successors (Deut 1:37-38 ; 31:2-8 ; 1 Chr 22:5-13 ; 28:2-8), under whom these goals are realized.

2. The installation of Joshua had been the object of earlier form critical studies; Williamson9 and Braun10 both note the presence of the same elements for this Gattung in the appoint­ment of Solomon. Not only are the various elements of the genre present, but there are also numerous phrases directly parallel in the two accounts:11

KÛN1 pm: Deut 31:7, 23; Josh 1:6,7,9; 1 Chr 22:13; 28:20 (cf. Deut 31:6 and 1 Chr 28:10) ;

ΠΠη 5K1 ΚΤΓ) to and equivalents: Deut 31:8; Josh 1:9; 1 Chr 22:13; 28:20 (cf. Deut 31:6) ;

ΤΠ5Κ mm *p>V and equivalents: Deut 31:6,8,23; Josh 1:5,9; 1 Chr 22:11,16; 28:20; 2 Chr 1:1;

ΐηΤΓ « ^ 1BT «•? and equivalents: Deut 31:6,8; Josh 1:5; 1 Chr 28:20;

stress on prospering through observance of the law: Deut 31:5; Josh 1:7-8; 1 Chr 22:12-13; 28:7-9.

3. Both Moses and David make double announcements re­garding the appointment of their successors, once in a private meeting (Deut 31:23; 1 Chr 22:6) and also publicly (Deut 31:2; 1 Chr 28:8).

4. Both Joshua and Solomon enjoy the immediate and

8 Williamson, "Accession," pp. 351-356. *Ibid. io Braun, "Solomon, the Chosen," pp. 586-588. 1 1 Williamson, "Accession," pp. 353-354.

2 9 4 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

wholehearted support of the people (Deut 34:9; Josh 1:16-20; 1 Chr 29:23-24).

5. It is twice reported of both Joshua and Solomon that God "magnified" each (Josh 3:7; 4:14; 1 Chr 29:25; 2 Chr 1:1).

A sixth point could be added to Williamson's five: both Joshua and Solomon lead the Israelites into "rest" (Josh 11:23; 21:44; 1 Chr 22:8-9) ,12

Other parallels between Joshua and Solomon are not unique to Chronicles but should be mentioned. ( 1 ) The conscription of alien labor for construction and further service in the tabernacle and temple: Joshua impresses the Gibeonites into service at the place of worship (Josh 9:26-27), just as Solomon would also conscript alien labor13 (2 Chr 2:17-18; 8:7-10). The tTJhnj

12 See the discussion of the Chronicler's use of the "rest" concept in Braun, "Solomon, the Chosen," pp. 582-586.

13 See the parallel texts at 1 Kgs 5:13-18 (MT 5:27-32) ; 9:20-23. The question of whether Solomon imposed corvée labor on Israelites has caused considerable discussion. Both the Chronicler and the deuteronomic his­torian insist that such labor was exacted from resident aliens alone (2 Chr 2:17-18; 8:7-10; 1 Kgs 9:15,20-22). Israel imposed compulsory labor on subservient peoples, just as it had been imposed on them (Gen 49:15; Exod 1:11; Deut 20:10-11; Josh 9:21-27; 16:10; Judg 1:28,33; Isa 31:8). Rainey notes {Israel Exploration Journal, 20 (1970), 199) that part of the purpose of the census under both David and Solomon would be to register those liable for compulsory labor in the previously unconquered territory and Canaanite enclaves.

In spite of the number of arguments which would suggest compulsory labor was confined to aliens, there remain several elements which indicate it was also imposed on native Israelites: (1) In the parallel text at 1 Kgs 5:13-18 (MT 5:27-32) the deuteronomic historian names yet another group of 30,000 workers sent to Lebanon in shifts of 10,000, so that each man spent one month per quarter in the logging operations ; this group is omitted by the Chronicler and may have been native Israelites. The deuteronomic historian does say that the levy was "from all Israel" (1 Kgs 5:13; [MT 5:27]). (2) Jeroboam had served as the corvée officer over the house of Joseph, implying Israelite servitude in the corvée (1 Kgs 11:28). (3) The plea of the northern tribes for easing the yoke and their subsequent stoning of Adoniram, the officer in charge of the corvée, portray the degree to which the forced labor was despised by the Israel­ites (1 Kgs 12:3-4,18-19). (4) The warning of 1 Sam 8:10-17 must be understood on the background of the existence of the practices it con­demns.

THE CHRONICLER'S SOLOMON 295

(nethinim) continued this alien service in the temple.14 (2) Both men received divine endowment with wisdom (Deut 34:9; 2 Chrl).

Many efforts have been made to resolve this conflict ; the following are representative: (1) Mendelsohn ("On Corvée Labor in Ancient Canaan and Israel," Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 167 (1962), 31-35) and Gray (/ & II Kings, pp. 155-156; 251-252) dis­tinguish between mas, to which Israelites were occasionally subject, and mas 'ôbèd, a form of permanent serfdom to which the Canaanites were subjected. On this approach, the difference between these two categories would be that the Israelite was not reduced to permanent forced labor. (2) Finding that this distinction is not borne out by the use of the biblical terms, Rainey ("Compulsory Labor Gangs in Ancient Israel," Israel Ex­ploration Journal, 20 (1970), 191-202) distinguishes instead between mas and sêbel with essentially the same results, that non-Israelites were sub­ject to the former and Israelites to the latter. Arguing that the nôéê* sabbai were those subject to the sêbel, Rainey notes that the no se' sabbäl were conscripted to work in Israel while the mas laborers worked in Lebanon; Jeroboam was over the sêbel of the house of Joseph (1 Kgs 5:13,15 (MT 5:27,29); 11:28). Though the northern tribes may have reluctantly acquiesced to sêbel duty under the charge of Jeroboam (1 Kgs 11:28), Rehoboam's desire to extend the hated mas to Israelites as a way of making the yoke even heavier resulted in the death of Adoniram. How­ever, since 2 Chr 2:17-18 (MT 16-17) regards aliens as composing the nose' sabbäl, Rainey concludes with many others that the Chronicler is here seeking to exonerate Solomon from imposing any forced labor on Israelites. (3) Lemke {Synoptic Studies in the Chronicler's History, Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1963, p. 29) concludes that the opposition to forced levies was already found in 1 Kgs 9:20-22, and that the Chronicler was merely trying to make sense of already conflicting sources.

If one does not follow Rainey in identifying the nose* sabbäl with those subject to sêbel, it is possible to view the former as a job category ("por­ter" or "carrier") and the second as a category of conscription. In this case the distinction between mas (which would include both the nôéê' sabbäl and the hôsêb bähär) and sêbel would cover the data without con­tradiction. However, the evidence for this approach is slim: it consists of the use of sablum in extra-biblical texts as a corvée class (summarized by Rainey) and the one reference to this use of sêbel in 1 Kgs 11:28.

14 The nethinim (DiJ'JH) and the "sons of Solomon's servants" (nûto Hip iJl) formed distinct groups in the restoration period and are traced in Ezra/Nehemiah to the time of David (Ezra 2:43,55,58,70; 7:7,24; 8:20; Neh 3:26,31; 7:46,57,60,73; 10:28; 11:3,21). Many of their names are foreign or unusual, and it is the dominant scholarly consensus that they represent the remnants of the Canaanite population pressed into service

296 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

C. Solomon and Huram-abi as the new Bezalel and Oholiab.

The third model which the Chronicler borrows to fashion his account of Solomon derives from the building of the tabernacle. The Chronicler draws numerous parallels between the building of the tabernacle and the building of the temple ; particularly he casts his Solomon and Huram-abi as the new Bezalel and Oholiab.15

1. Solomon as the new Bezalel. Of the thousands who labored in the building of both the tabernacle and the temple, Bezalel and Oholiab and Solomon and Huram-abi are the only ones to be named for their roles. More particularly Bezalel is singled out as the one chosen by God by name (Ex 31:1-11 ; 35:30-36:2 ; 38:22-23) ; Oholiab is in the secondary role as a helper (31:6). Solomon too is singled out for the building task (1 Chr 22:9-10 ; 28:6-29:2). Solomon and Bezalel are both of the tribe of Judah (Ex 31:2; 35:30; 38:22). Both receive wisdom from God for the building task (Ex 31:1-3; 35:30-35; 2 Chr 1). It is strik­ing to note that the only reference to Bezalel outside the accounts of the building of the tabernacle in Exodus are found in Chron­icles (1 Chr 2:20; 2 Chr 1:5). It is only after his seeking God at the altar built by Bezalel (2 Chr 1:5) that Solomon is endued with wisdom. For the author of Kings this was wisdom in gen­eral, wisdom shown in judicial decisions (1 Kgs 3:16-28), effec­tive administration (4:1-28), and international reputation (4:29-34). But for the Chronicler it was specifically wisdom for build­ing: he omits 1 Kgs 3-4 and proceeds directly to the building of the temple (2 Chr 2-7).16

by David (1 Chr 22:2) and Solomon (2 Chr 2:17 [MT 2:16]). The fact that the Chronicler does not designate them by the same titles as used in Ezra/Neh argues for the fact that Chronicles is not to be viewed as a literary unit with the other two books. See Japhet, "The Supposed Com­mon Authorship of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah Investigated Anew," Vetus Testamentum, 18 (1968), pp. 351-354.

15 I wish to express my thanks to a former student, Mr. Terry Eves, for a stimulating class paper on this subject. His observations have served as a basis for my own further reflection.

16Kapelrud ("Temple Building, a Task for Gods and Kings," Or, 32 (1963), 56-62) noted ten items usually present in ancient Near Eastern literature depicting a temple built by a king; these items and their cor-

THE CHRONICLER'S SOLOMON 297

2. Huram-abi as the new Oholiab. The Chronicler's presenta­tion of Solomon as a second Bezalel is enforced by his handling of Huram-abi as the second Oholiab. This is seen by modifica­tions the Chronicler introduces in three areas: arrival time, skill inventory, and ancestry. The deuteronomic historian records the labor of Huram-abi only after he has reported the completion of the temple and palace (1 Kgs 6:38-7:1) ; Huram arrives only to cast the bronzes needed for the temple construction (1 Kgs 7:13-47).17 In contrast the Chronicler makes it clear that

responding passages in Chronicles and the tabernacle account are as follows :

(1) A temple to be built —Exod 25:1-8; 1 Chr 28:11-21 (2) The king visits a temple overnight — Exod 24:12-18;

2 Chr 1:2-7 (3) A god reveals what to do and gives plans — Exod 25:8-30:38;

1 Chr 28:2-3; 11-19; 2 Chr 1:7-12 (4) The King announces intentions to build — Exod 35:4-10;

36:2,35; 2 Chr 2:1-10 (5) Master builder and materials (cedar, gold, silver) secured —

Exod 31:1-6; 35:4-29; 36:3-7; 1 Chr 22:14-15; 29:1-9; 2 Chr 2:7-14

(6) Temple finished according to plan —Exod 39:42-43; 2 Chr 5:1; 6:10

(7) Offerings and dedication — Exod 40:9-11; 2 Chr 6:12-42; 7:4-7 (8) Assembly of the people —Exod 39:32-33; 42-43; 2 Chr 5:2-13 (9) God enters the temple —Exod 40:34-35; 2 Chr 5:13-14; 7:1-3

(10) The King is blessed and promised dominion — 2 Chr 7:12-18

The account of the building of the temple in Chronicles shows its de­pendence on the tabernacle pericope; the Chronicler's account follows the ancient Near Eastern form more exactly than that found in Kings: the securing of the wise master builder at the outset of construction instead of at the end (1 Kgs 7) and the stress on the divine origin of the plans (1 Chr 28:11-19) follow the tabernacle account more closely. Chapter 1 fills the second and third slots of this form. It should also be noted that the form embraces both the work of David and Solomon, again enforcing their unity in the one great work of building the temple. Kapelrud is also troubled with why the narrator in Kings does not go immediately from Solomon's vision to the building narrative without the digression of 1 Kgs 3:16-4:34 and suggests that "Solomon's visit to Gibeon and his announce­ment of his intention were originally connected and have been divided by an author who wanted to bring in the wisdom theme" (p. 60) ; Kapelrud does not notice that the sequence of Chronicles fits his expectation.

17 It would appear best to view the order in Kgs as topical or thematic — the metal work, which was presumably done throughout the construe-

2 9 8 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

Huram-abi was involved in the building activities from the very beginning, just as was Oholiab ; for the Chronicler Huram-abi's services are offered by Hiram of Tyre in his first exchange of correspondence with Solomon (2 Chr 2:12-14 [MT 11-13]). Nor are his labors to be confined to bronze alone as was the case in Kings (1 Kgs 7:14); the Chronicler greatly expands his skills inventory (2 Chr 2:14 [MT 13] ) so that it is the same as the skills of Bezalel and Oholiab (Ex 31:1-6; 35:30-36:2; 38:22-23). While the author of Kings reports that Huram's mother was a widow from the tribe of Naphtali (1 Kgs 7:14), the Chronicler alters the record to make her a widow from Dan (2 Chr 2:14 [MT 13] ), thus giving Huram-abi the same tribal ancestry as Oholiab (Ex 31:6; 35:34; 38:23).1 8

The Chronicler is not the only biblical author to exploit the Bezalel/Oholiab model for his readers. Paul appears to regard himself as the Bezalel of the new covenant (1 Cor 3:5-17). In the church/temple (3:9,16-17) at Corinth there were two build­ers, Paul and Apollos, "God's fellow workers" (3:9). The terms used in the LXX to translate the craftsman/builder terminology of Exod 31:4; 35:32,35; 37:21 (MT 38:23) are άρχιτεκτονεΐν and άρχιτεκτονία, terms which occur only once in the New Tes­tament in Paul's statement that he is the σοφός αρχιτέκτων, the

tion period, is only taken up after the basic construction has been re­counted. The order of events in Chronicles more precisely reflects the ac­tual chronological order. The Chronicler's concern with chronology is a characteristic feature of his compositional technique ; see my article, "The Reign of Asa (2 Chr 14-16) : an Example of the Chronicler's Theological Method," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 23 (1980), 207-218, particularly p. 215 and notes 36 and 37.

1 8 The following harmonizations are the obvious possibilities: (1) Naph­tali may be used geographically as the location of her residence, and Dan as her actual genealogical relationship, or (2) her lineage may have been through parents of two different tribes. However, rather than be dis­tracted by a harmonistic problem, it is more important in this case to see that the Chronicler has assigned Huram-abi a Danite ancestry to perfect further the parallel with Oholiab. Historically the Danites had long­standing connections with Tyre and Sidon (Judg 18:7, 27-30; see the dis­cussion in Katzenstein, The History of Tyre [Jerusalem: Schocken Insti­tute, 1973], pp. 65-67). See also Talmon, "The Gezer Calendar," Journal of the American Oriental Society, 83 (1963), 181, and Mazar, "The Cities of Dan," Israel Exploration Journal, 10 (1960), 65-77, especially p. 71.

THE CHRONICLER'S SOLOMON 299

wise master builder (Isa 3:3, LXX). Paul goes on to elaborate that only certain building materials (those used in the tabernacle and temple) are worthy of the gospel temple.

III. Literary Structure.

There is a sufficient amount of repetition in the Chronicler's narrative of Solomon to suspect that it was constructed around a chiastic or palistrophic pattern.10 The following items set this structure in broad outline:

A. Solomon's wealth and wisdom (1:1-17) (Trade in horses, 1:14-17)

B. Recognition by gentiles/dealings with Hiram (2:1-16) ( Yahweh's love for Israel, 2:11)

C. Construction of temple/gentile labor (2:17-5:1) (Gentile labor, 2:17-18) (Completion of temple, 5:1)

D. Inauguration of temple worship (5:2-6:11) a. Assembly (5:2-3) b. Sacrifice and song (5:4-13) c. Glory cloud (5:13-14) d. Solomon speaks to the people (6:1-11 )

E. Prayer of dedication (6:12-42)

D'. Inauguration of temple worship (7:1-22) c. Glory cloud (7:1-2) b. Sacrifice and song (7:3-7) a. Assembly (7:8-10) d. God speaks to Solomon (7:11-22)

19 I am indebted to a former student, Mr. Karl Cooper, for first calling my attention to the possible presence of this device; I have considerably revised the structure he initially suggested. The use of a chiastic frame­work for Hebrew narratives has received considerable attention in recent literature. See the series of articles by Y. Radday, "On Chiasm in Bib­lical Narrative," Beth Miqra, 20-21 (1964), 48-72; "Chiasm in Samuel," Linguistica Biblica, 9-10 (1971), 21-31; "Chiasm in Tora," Linguistica Biblica, 19 (1972), 12-23; "Chiasm in Joshua, Judges, and Others," Lin­guistica Biblica, 27-28 (1973), 6-13; "Chiasm in Kings," Linguistica Bib­lica, 31 (1974), 52-67. See also G. J. Wenham, "The Coherence of the Flood Narrative," Vetus Testamentum, 28 (1978), 336-348.

300 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

C Other construction/gentile labor/temple com­pleted (8:1-16)

(Gentile labor, 8:7-10) (Completion of temple, 8:16)

B'. Recognition by gentiles/dealings with Hiram (8:17-9:12)

(Yahweh's love for Israel, 9:8)

A'. Solomon's wealth and wisdom (9:13-28) (Trade in horses, 9:25-28)

In a chiastic structure it is ordinarily the central item which is the author's pivotal interest.20 Even a cursory examination of this outline of the reign of Solomon shows the centrality of the cult in this narrative.

Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia

20 The structure of the chiasm is perfect except for the item d in D and D\ One would have expected D'd to be in initial position, had the author rigidly adhered to this device.

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.