Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

THE PREACHER'S COMMENTARY

ON THE

BOOKS OF CHRONICLES.

THE

Preacher's Complete Homiletical

COMMENTARY

ON THE

OLD TESTAMENT

(ON AN ORIGINAL PLAN).

Twith Critical and Explanatory Notes, Indices, &c., &c

BY

VARIOUS AUTHORS.

New York

FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY

LONDON AND TORONTO

1892

A

HOMILETICAL COMMENTARY

ON THE BOOKS OF

CHRONICLES.

BY

REV. JAMES WOLFENDALE.

New York

FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY

LONDON & TORONTO

1892

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

HOMILETIC COMMENTARY

ON

THE BOOKS OF CHRONICLES.

INTRODUCTION.

The two Books of Chronicles, like the Books of Kings, formed originally one, and were divided, as in the English Bible, by translators of the Septuagint. The division was adopted in the Latin Vulgate by Jerome, whence it passed into various branches of the Western Church. In Hebrew the title is Dib-rey hayyamim, meaning "The acts of the days" (acta not verba dierum), a title applied to accounts which historians wrote of kings. A daily record, a sort of “ Court Journal,” was usual at Oriental palaces (see Esth. ii. 23; vi. 1; x. 2), cf. Speak. Com. The Books record the leading incidents of the times. The term chronicon was suggested by Jerome, as equivalent to the Hebrew title; and this in the plural form, chronica or chronicorum liber, was adopted in some editions of the Vulgate, whence the English translators took it.

The Author. Ascribed to Ezra generally. Its close connection with the book of Ezra is very apparent. “The same spirit breathes through both, and numerous little expressions, identical or nearly so in the two works, indicate almost certainly the same hand. The curious fact, moreover, that the one Book ends and the other begins with the same passage, suggests the same author, and probably indicates that originally the two books were united and formed but one work, which it was afterwards thought better to divide into two" (Speak. Com.).

The Date. Internal evidence proves that Chronicles were written after the Captivity. This opinion is supported by the orthography and the nature of the language employed, both of which are Aramæan in complexion, and harmonise with books written after the exile. “If Ezra was the author, the date could not be much later than B.C. 435, for Ezra probably died about that time. There is nothing in the contents or style of the work make the date B.C. 450-435 improbable; for the genealogy in ch. iii. 23, 24, which appears to be later than this, may be a subsequent addition" (Speak. Com.).

The Style. The work is one, a record of annals, a supplement of former historic books. The Septuagint designates the work Paraleipomena, things left out or unnoticed. We have repetitions of Samuel and Kings, and important supplements to fill up earlier narratives. A high value is set upon “ Levitical spirit,” that is, regard to externals in religion. Its history has been termed

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »