Home » History » Comparison of the Two Deuteronomistic History Sources

Comparison of the Two Deuteronomistic History Sources

When we look at the scripture associated with both of these sources, it is evident that there are differences in the narration of events concerning the rise of David as king of Israel and also in his reign as king. To begin the comparison of these two different sources, the following are observations that I have made concerning stories that are present in the Tremendously History source but absent In the other(priestly) source.

To begin with, In 1 Samuel beginning In chapter 17:41 through verse 51, there Is an account of David slaying Goliath when he was a youth, and still small In stature, that Is not In the Chronicles. Then, the accounts of David being Installed In King Sail’s court and the subsequent conflict between David and King Saul including Davit’s fleeing from Saul and other related events in 1 Samuel 16 through 2 Samuel 1, is not mentioned at all in the Chronicles.

Also, the conflict between the house of Saul and the house of David concerning who would be king of all of Israel after Sail’s death that is in 2 Samuel 2 through 2 Samuel 5:3, is not mentioned in the Chronicles. Notably absent from the Chronicles also, is the story of Davit’s lust for Batches that resulted in an adulterous affair which precipitated his abuse of power that led to the death of Bather’s husband Uriah so that David could take Batches to be his wife.

This chain of events, and the devastating results that followed for Davit’s family, as a result of this sin, Is recorded In 2 Samuel 11-20. The Chronicler states In 1 Chronicles 1 1 that David was proclaimed king over all of Israel where 2 Samuel 2:4 states that he was appointed king over all of Judas. Also notable, Is the omission of the battle In 2 Samuel 21:18-22, where David is almost killed. Another story that was very violent in tauter that was also omitted in the Chronicles was referenced in 2 Samuel 21:1-14, which is the story of how David had seven of Sail’s descendants put to death.

The story concerning Abscissa’s service to an elderly King David in 1 Kings :1-4, is not present in the Chronicles either. Also, Davit’s charge to Solomon concerning avenging the death of Banner and punishing Scheme for the curse that he had placed upon David in 1 Kings 2:1-2, is not noted in the Chronicles When I looked at 1 Chronicles, there were things present in this book that are not mentioned In the Tremendously History source concerning King David.

In 1 Chronicles 21 :26, fire consumes Davit’s sacrifice which Is not noted In 2 Samuel 24:25. Also, I could not find a narration In the books of Samuel or Kings that paralleled the one In 1 Chronicles 22-29, which tells of David doing much of the preparation for the building implies that there was no opposition to Solomon being appointed the next king, but 1 Kings chapters 1 and 2 tell a different story. In Samuel, the author presents the story of Davit’s family, victories over enemies, and recounts the moving of the ark of the covenant.

In 1 Chronicles, King Davit’s story is told in a different order; the paving of the ark, family, victories over enemies, and then when the move of the ark is completed. Why is the story told in a different order by each source? In both of the sources, the story of King David is written to preserve the Jewish nation’s history, but in a selective way, according to the perspective of the source(author or authors).

From the Deterministic History point of view, the books of 1 and 2 Samuel and the first part of the book of 1 Kings that deal with King David, were looking backward and expressing the feelings of penitence. The breaking of the covenant with WHY, at mimes by David, by willful disobedience resulted in consequences. Ultimately, 1 and 2 Kings, show how Israel, under the reign of the Advice monarchy, ending up in captivity.

The answer to the question of why King Davit’s story is told is a different order by the other(priestly) source than it is by the Deterministic History source is that the other(priestly) source wanted to emphasize King Davit’s concern for the worship payoff and for his temple. This aspect of the Advice monarchy is related in order to establish a link between the house of David(monarchy) and the house of Aaron(priests). The other(priestly) source provided an account of an “unblemished” and glorious king who was victorious over all of Israel’s foes.

The passages of scripture about David that do not fit this unblemished image were simply left out. This image of King David gave the Israelites hope that as he was so will their Messiah be, perfect and victorious. So, instead of looking to the past, the other(priestly) source sought to look forward in hope to Israel’s future. The process of “critical” reading has been an enlightening one for me. I used The New Oxford Annotated Bible, New Revised Standard Version, that I purchased for this class and I have found t to be an extremely valuable resource.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this essay please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Leave a Comment