One conversation: two versions

Peter Kirk Peter_Kirk at sil.org
Tue Mar 6 06:09:25 EST 2001


Maybe, but we don't have to posit that this information was revealed
supernaturally to the Chronicler. There are many things in Chronicles which
are not in Samuel-Kings. Perhaps the Chronicler invented them
him/herself/themselves. Perhaps all of this was directly revealed by the
Holy Spirit. But to me the most likely explanation is that the Chronicler
had sources independent of Samuel-Kings, probably originating from the
Temple archives. These may very well have preserved the information that
David paid 600 shekels of gold for the site (MAQOM). Or this information
could have been preserved by oral tradition. Then, we can hypothesise, the
Chronicler found an apparent discrepancy between this information and that
in Samuel and corrected the material.

Of course this version of Harold's argument depends on this information
having been preserved accurately for several hundred years. No problem with
written records, and it can happen with oral ones. The argument then relies
on the Holy Spirit ensuring that the Chronicler only included accurate
information, but not on the Holy Spirit actually providing this information.

Peter Kirk


-----Original Message-----
From: Harold R. Holmyard III [mailto:hholmyard at ont.com]
Sent: 06 March 2001 02:27
To: Biblical Hebrew
Subject: One conversation: two versions

<long snip>

... The compilers of Chronicles could
have been led by the Spirit to include certain new things and take out old
things from the record in Samuel and Kings. That does not trouble me in
itself.

<snip>




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list