David and Solomon Essay Example for Free

David and Solomon EssayIn 1 Kings 912-13, Hiram, the king of Tyre, is described as not delight with the kind of towns that King Solomon has repayn him. Perhaps expecting for something that would have equaled any the pine, cedar and gold that he gave Solomon, Hiram questioned the King about the towns that he received. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 82 merely commendations that Solomon reconstructed the villages that Hiram had given, after which he settled the Israelites in these villages.Following the passages in 1 Kings 910-28, Hiram named the cardinal towns in Galilee he received from Solomon as the Land of Cabul. The word Cabul means what does not please in Phoenician. The fact that the Hiram named the land Solomon has given him Cabul suggests that, indeed, Hiram was not pleased at all with the gestures of the King. Perhaps the reason to Hirams displeased reply is that he gave all the pine, cedar and gold that Solomon wanted only to get twenty lands which did not agree his taste.It might have been the case that Hiram had high expectations in return of his gestures to Solomon. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 82 suggests that Hiram gave the towns to Solomon instead of Solomon supposedly giving Hiram the twenty towns in Galilee in 1 Kings 911. In 2 Chronicles 82, it is mentioned that Solomon rebuilt the cities he received, implying that the cities were not in good condition. In the same passage, we are too told that Solomon eventually placed the Israelites to live in those rebuilt cities.The passage appears to point us the idea that Solomon was a king who was out to develop the undeveloped and to expand his district through the resources he garnered from his conquests. Moreover, Solomons men together with Hirams sailors returned home from Ophir delivering four hundred and fifty talents of gold to Solomon in 2 Chronicles 817-18. On the contrary, 1 Kings 928 narrates the same fleet of men sailing to Ophir but only delivering four hundred and twenty talents of gold to Solomon.The discrepancy in the amount of gold delivered suggests at least two ideas one is that Solomon was either exceedingly triumphant or not in his exploits and two is that he was either a well-respected ruler or not by his subjects. In essence, the accounts provided in 2 Chronicles 81-18 suggest that Solomon was a king who was exceedingly triumphant so much(prenominal) so that Hiram was compelled to give him cities which Solomon then rebuilt.On the other hand, the accounts provided in 1 Kings 910-28 suggest that Solomon was a ruler who, in general, did not give the appropriate dues to people who expected much from him insomuch as he was a ruler who the royal subjects can easily steal from due in part to a lack of honesty and respect. I think the two accounts differ with respect to the descriptions of the character and the actions of Solomon because of differing perceptions towards Solomon.I think the inclusion of the displeased reaction of Hiram in 1 Kings 912-13 may suggest that some people saw Solomon at the time of his rule as someone who could only foreboding less about how other people may see him and react against his actions. On the contrary, the omission of Hirams reaction in 2 Chronicles 82 may suggest that how people viewed Solomon with regard to his actions was irrelevant since he may have been seen as a righteous ruler who provided for his subjects their necessities.In general, the description of Solomons reign in 1 Kings is not only based on a variety of sources with a diametric provenance but also displays traces of different stages of redaction (Talshir, p. 233) or the combination of multiple source texts, thereby suggesting that the differences in the accounts can be largely attributed to their respective writers. In both 2 Samuel 81-18 and 1 Chronicles 181-17, the triumphs of David in all of his wars are narrated.In all of the wars revealed in the two accounts, David is portrayed as an able leader who is very much c apable of invading territories and still not forgetting to make offerings to God such as the gold and silver exploits. Both accounts agree that the master key helped David wherever he went, indicating that the Lord was pleased with the efforts of David. However, one major difference between the two accounts is that, in 2 Samuel 82, David is described as having been able to defeat the Moab forces which was followed by the execution the few remaining Moabites.In the selection process, the Moabites were made to lie on the ground in a line and those who were within two lines were charge to death while those in the third length were given the chance to live under the rule of David. Apparently, nothing about the process of the execution was mention throughout 1 Chronicles 181-17. The inclusion of the description of the execution of the Moabites in 2 Samuel 82 gives a rough image of how David was supposedly remorseless towards his conquered subjects.The passage gives us the impression t hat, although David was kind enough to randomly allow some of the Moabites to live, he was nonetheless a leader and a warrior who showed little pardon towards those who have survived the onslaught of his armies. The seemingly detailed account of the execution of the Moabites creates an eerie mental environment, appearing as a visual reminder that David was a vanquisher who displayed his authority and power with little mercy. And yet, David is still portrayed in the same passage as an abiding servant of the Lord who never forgets to provide his offerings to God.It signifies that, since the Lord helped David wherever he went, nothing can stand against the way and the disposition of David. In essence, it appears that the position of the writer in 2 Samuel 81-18 is that David was a earnest servant of the Lord while being a ruthless conqueror who can easily take the lives of his conquered subjects according to his will. On the other hand, the writer of 1 Chronicles 181-17 seems to sug gest that David was blessed by the Lord and that he was a leader who piously served and gave offerings to the Lord without the hint of ruthlessness revealed in 2 Samuel 82.The two accounts differ primarily because David, I think, was a ruler hated in his time by those who became victims of his military actions. It is therefore not surprising that at least one account pertaining to Davids military advances gave several details about how people were executed depending on the decision of David. However, those who saw David as a righteous ruler and those who benefitted from his triumphs are more inclined to put David on a more decreed regard. Roddy L.Braun suggests that the Chroniclerthe writer of the book of Chroniclespresents Davids kingship as greeted by the mixed multitudes of Israel with immediate and enthusiastic unanimity (Braun, p. 503) unlike the respective writers of Samuel and Kings. Such variations in writings can hardly be reconciled around entirely and that the only way to avoid the vicious circle that can commence from the failure to reconcile the accounts, as Sara Japhet suggests, is by studying the matter from its positive aspectsnot from what is omitted, but from what is existent (Japhet, p.206). Thus, it is not necessarily the case that the differences in the accounts mean that one account is true and the other is not. While Solomon may be portrayed in Kings quite differently from Chronicles or while David may be portrayed in Samuel differently from Chronicles, the differences may not essentially imply the truthfulness or falsehood of either one of the accounts.Rather, the presence of additional details in the each account provides more insight into the lives of Kings David and Solomon. Works Cited Braun, Roddy L. Solomonic Apologetic in Chronicles. Journal of Biblical Literature 92. 4 (1973) 503-16. Japhet, Sara. Conquest and Settlement in Chronicles. Journal of Biblical Literature 98. 2 (1979) 205-18. Talshir, Zipora. The Reign of Solomon in the Making. Vetus Testamentum 50. 2 (2000) 233-49