question (4): why do the books, Chronicles & Ezra, seem to overlap?

Question

This question highlights the way in which the, supposed, word of God, was bound together with such disorder.
the last two verses of Chronicles read as follows; 22) "Now in the year of Cyrus, King of Persia, that the word of the Lord, spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah, might be accomplished, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, King of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout his Kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying 23) Thus saith Cyrus, King of Persia, all the Kingdoms of the earth hath the LordGod of Heaven given me: and he hath charged meto build him an house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all his people? the Lord his God be with him, and let him go up."
Go up where? This abrupt end/break shows, as I have already said, the disoder and ignorance of the text, in which the bible was mashed together, as you can see by the first three verses of Ezra; 1:1-3;.....................................................

" Now in the frst year of Cyrus, King of Persia, that the of the Lord, by the mouth of Jeramiah, might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, King of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his Kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying 2) Thus saith Cyrus, King of Persia, the Lord God of Heaven hath given me all the Kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah 3) Who is there among you of all his peole? his God be with him, and let him go UP to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of theLord of Israel ( he is the God) which is in Jerusalem.

This proof, among others, shows the uncertainty of the authors, we just need look at the first three verses in Ezra and the last two verses of Chronicles; for by whatkind of cutting and shuffling has it been that the three first verses in Ezra, which comes after Chronicles in the bible, should be the same as the last two verses of Chronicles, or is it that the last two verses in Chronicles should BE the first three verses inEzra. To look at this it is hard to believe that the authors knew their own work at all, or tha,t the most likely explanation, was that the compilers of the bible didn't know the authors work, thus the text becomes just page after page of work that has no titles, no beginning and no end. It feels like this was the case, that the compilers read what they wanted to read and then placed it into the bible, giving the names it required to give the word credability, but paying no attention to the layout. The over lap is an oversight, probably done by another compiler

....who had no knowledge of the other compilers work.
this aside, the books are nothing more than a history of the jews and has no more relevance to the word of God, than a history of the civil war!

Answer 1

you have proven your point of how the bible has so many mistakes in it and things are out of order, they really did a fine job at the Nicene counsel! Matter of fact they even left out books that they said were heresy, i often wonder what did they hide, was it something that could of condemned them or put the idiots out of their big business called religion.

Answer 2

The commonly accepted Protestant version of the Bible contains books not found in the Hebrew Tanahk (Old Testament). These books from among the midrash and commentaries. Yet other works from the Hebrew canon were excluded. Esdras and other apocrypha are found in the Roman Catholic version of the Bible. Even as late as Martin Luther, Revelations was not considered a true part of the New Testament. You can find antique editions that do not include this book. Gospels that were excluded by the Nicene Council are mostly of a Gnostic nature. Many were lost for centuries, but were unearthed near Nag Hammadi, Egypt in the late 1940's. Translations of these works have been available to the public for a very long time now, unlike the Dead Sea Scrolls. There is also the Book Of Enoch and the Kebra Nagast which are considered part of the Bible by some Orthodox Christian sects and are included in their versions of the Bible, yet most American Christians haven't even heard of them.

Answer 3

Well my dear Tudor Rose. It is observably that the two texts were written by two different authors.

These two historical texts started by Deuteromonist (Deut) and followed by his prologue the Chronicler (Chron).

Deteromonist began the earlier episodes and reworks them in the light of his own historical situations while in Exile in Babylonian. 588-538 BC. Chron the Chronicler who was Deteromonist protege based his finishing touches of reactionary efforts to include Joshua 1&2, Samuel, and the histrory of Isral. These allternating reforms and anti-reforms from the words of the prophets of past measages was given a flaveourist means of the new times ahead in literature

The Chronicler presents his work or makeover of the texts concerned of the Chronicles 1&2, Ezra and Nehemiah whith his style of writing probably enhancing future scribes.

Albeit the Chronicler has followed freely the sacred history with theological thesis and to be followed by the facts of the remunerations according to God.

The Chronicler main thrust is really about the loyelty of the centeral Temple while expressing King David and Soloman in a mythicial song of history.

In fact if this works by the Chronicler was pressented today as a liturey for world writers he would surely take the top prize as the writer of the year.

What did Chronicler do at the end of the chronical 2 was the flow on effect when he started Elzar scroll as in serial writing which includes a refresher for following the story of the period concerning and prompting the listerners to where they were at.

Well that is my theroy anyway take it of leave it.

Answer 4

Israel was divided into the House of Israel and House of Judah.

1Ki 11:29 And it came to pass at that time when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way; and he had clad himself with a new garment; and they two were alone in the field:
1Ki 11:30 And Ahijah caught the new garment that was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces:
1Ki 11:31 And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee:

Basically Kings is the House of Israel.
Basically Chronicles is the House of Judah.

The captivities of the two houses were at different times.

Daniel is of Judah during their captivity.

This is why many make huge mistakes in not knowing who true Israel is, the northern 10 tribes, not Judah.

Answer 5

Jewish tradition credits Ezra with authorship of Chronicles, probably in the latter half of the fifth century BC. This would have been in Ezra's lifetime. The Chronicles were written for the exiles who had returned to Israel after the Babylonian captivity, to remind them that they were still God's chosen people, even though there was no longer any Davidic king and they were subjects of Persia. These were important concerns for Ezra.

Answer 6

This is because the books were edited afterwards.

Ezra and Nehemiah

Fifty years after the Babylonian exile, by 538 BC, the Persians under Cyrus overran the Babylonian Empire and the Jews were allowed to return to Jerusalem. The exiles returned in several waves. From about 521 to 485 BC, the time of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the second Temple was built. Around 450 BC (the dates are uncertain, perhaps as early as 460 BC, perhaps as late as 398 BC), Ezra the scribe and Nehemiah the governor re-established centralized Judaism in Jerusalem.

The books of Ezra and Nehemiah tell the story of that era of regeneration and rebirth. "Miraculous" is not too strong a word--no other people, in all of history, has been re-established and reborn after conquest and exile.

Originally, Ezra and Nehemiah was a single book, and ancient Hebrew and Greek manuscripts treat them as such. They're still only one book in the Hebrew Bible. The book was split in two by Jerome, at the end of 4th century AD, and appears as two books in the Catholic and Protestant bibles.

Authorship is generally attributed to Ezra, who was a scribe and a priest, and to Nehemiah; or alternatively to a party known as the Chronicler (who might have been Ezra, anyway). As a side note, Richard Friedman suggests that Ezra might have been the final redactor (editor) of the Torah, the first five books of the Bible.

Tradition credits Ezra with codifying the script used in Torahs and settling all controversies as to where paragraphs begin and end, use of small and large letters, and missing or extra letters. Of course, tradition also says that all these go back to Moses and that Ezra's actions were merely clarifications of ambiguities that had arisen over the centuries. Whatever Ezra may have done, tradition and scholarship (at least some scholarship) again agree in assigning him an important editorial role.

Chronicles

Chronicles tells the story of Israel from the earliest days through the Babylonian Exile in 586 BC. Of main importance is the history of the kings, from David (1000 BC) onward. In the Christian Bible, Chronicles is two books; in the Hebrew Bible, it is only one.

In the original Hebrew, the scroll of Ezra-Nehemiah was attached to the book of Chronicles--This is where your question arises, as the later editor seems to have duplicated the last verses of Chronicles - which are identical to the opening verses of Ezra, thus making each work make sense in isolation.

You have to remember that in Greek, a book was only 30 pages long, small enough as a scroll to fit into the human hand. Later editors simply spliced the books together, afraid to remove any obvious

The author is often called the Chronicler by scholars. Some (including Spinoza) speculate that the Chronicler was Ezra; others, not surprisingly, disagree. Chronicles was likely written (or edited into final form) about the same time as Ezra/Nehemiah, around 450 - 400 BC. Tradition says the book was begun by Ezra and completed by someone else, perhaps Nehemiah.

Chronicles is a fascinating book. It seems to have been written as a revision of or response to the Deuteronomistic history of Israel as told in the books of Joshua through Kings, which it clearly post-dates. At some points it copies the Deuteronomistic history from the books of Samuel or Kings verbatim; in other places the D-tradition is ignored, changed or omitted.

The Chronicler (whether one person or a school) viewed himself as an interpreter of the past and used history to make moral points - nothing new then (sic). He included or excluded material according to how well it fit his ethical outlook. The theological perspective is pretty clearly a priestly one, which makes sense in light of the traditional view of Ezra as author, since he was a priest as well as a scribe. Where Deuteronomistic history judges kings on their adherence to the laws of Deuteronomy, Chronicles judges kings based on their treatment of the priesthood. The two frequently arrive at the same conclusion on "good" vs. "bad," but there are some minor differences.

The Chronicler viewed Israel not as a nation but as a religious community. The center of the religion was the Temple and the priests and Levites, and Zion was the Holy City. This perspective is different from that of the Deuteronomistic editor of the book of Kings, who viewed Israel as a nation.

Another explanation of the difference between Chronicles and Kings arises from the fact that in Jewish scripture the book of Kings is included in the section called "Prophets." Kings is mainly a rebuke of Israel, since that was what the prophets did. Chronicles is in the section called "Writings," inspirational messages. Chronicles thus focuses on matters that will help rebuild the nation, looking toward the future.

But to put a scientific edge onto the discussion, the date is very loose indeed. To given you an idea of the complexity of dating: If a text contains a Hebrew rendition of a Greek word, some scholars argue that the text (or that portion of the text, anyway) must date after Alexander the Great, roughly after 300 BC, when the Israelites were exposed to Hellenism.

On the other hand, other scholars may say that the Greek word itself is derived from a much older Assyrian word, and thus the Hebrew could also be derived from the Assyrian, not the Greek. So the presence of a seeming Greek cognate doesn't necessarily date the text as post-Hellenistic.

Dating wasn't done according to a common calendar system. We can date only by inference and correlation and counting, when we have a common event reported by different sources that can tie two calendars together. The different languages make such correlation difficult: does an Egyptian reference to the "Ivri" correspond to "Hebrew"?

Further, it was not uncommon in ancient times to attach a famous name to an anonymous work, to give it greater authority. A scroll attributed to Solomon would be more likely to be preserved than a scroll written by some unknown poet of the same period.

And finally we are also often dealing with prophets who, well, prophesized the future. If a prophet writes that the "walls are fallen," and if we know that the walls fell in the year X, then scholars tend to date the writing after year X. However, religious tradition may say that this was prophecy, not fact, and so could have been written before X. Verb tense in ancient Hebrew does not use "past" and "present" and "future" as does English, so the same words might easily been used for "have fallen" and "are fallen" and "will fall."

Answer 7

The people of that day, of the culture to whom this was written, would have understood the words "go up" to mean "go to Jerusalem".

The same way today, when someone says you should take a trip "down under", you know what place they are talking about without them having to name it.

Answer 8

Well seeing as vs 23 also tells us that the House of God is to be built in Jerusalem, it is obvious that there is a request to
go up to Jerusalem. We always go up to Jerusalem.
Seeing as Ezra probably wrote Chronicles as well, it is a
prequel & then he tells of how it all came together in Ezra.
Easy really!!!!

Answer 9

BIBLE AND WORLD HISTORY AS GOD WANTS MAN TO KNOW ABOUT MAN

Egypt Empire #1 & Moses died 1513 B. C. 3520 yrs ago.
Assyria Empire #2, 10 tribes in time of Isaiah 714 B. C. 2721 yrs ago.
Babylon Empire #3, Desolates Promised Land, 606 B. C. 2613 yrs ago.
[[[ Yr.3460, plus daniel gives 2520 years Dan.12:1-13 [ Rev.12:7-12; Satan's
short time in the time of the end, presently, 2613 years have passed ]]];
Cyrus in Empire #4, give decree to rebuild, 536 B.C. 2543 yrs ago.
Greece Empire #5, Daniel fore told, at 336 B. C. 2343 yrs ago.
Rome world Empire #6, Jesus & John in #6. Rev.17:5,6,10-14 [ #7 ended ];
Eight Empire is of the 7th, Satan's short time in 8th to Rev.20:1-6; Prophecy.

Ruth 4:18-22 [ David's family ], 2Sam.5:4,5 [ David's time born 1107 B.C. is king 1077 to 1037 B. C. ]; 1Ki.2:10,11 [ David's time ]; 1Chr.3:9-17 [ David's Family ]; 1Chr.29:26 [ David's time ]; 2Chr.1:1 [ Solomon 1037 B. C. to 7:11; Temple done,9:30,31; Solomon dies, 997 B. C., Jechoniah 36:9, 11; Jechoniah 617 B. C. Zedekiah 606 B. C. end of 2 Chronicles, and Jechoniah spoken of in 2 Ki.25:27; & Jer.50:31; at 598 B. C. then onto Cyrus in 70 years and he will be 536 B. C.

At year 3460, [ 606 B. C. Matt.1:1-17; 14 generations to Rome Empire #6 ]; 1804 yrs aft-flood, 907 yrs after Moses dies, there's no 420 year old temple of Solomon 391 years after his death, the Promised Land is desolate, no Judah kings, all is captive to Babylon world Empire #3. 2Ki.25:8; 2Chr.36:20-23; Jer.25:12; Dan.9:2; 10:1;
Books: Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel 1:2; Daniel [ 633 ], 606 B. C. [ 533 ];

Cyrus Ezra 1:1-3; 536 B.C. [ Isaiah 44:28; 827 to 714 B. C. Cyrus to come ];

Books: Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, Zachariah & Malachi, 443 B. C.

At yr 2513, O.T. 1110 yrs, 39 books, many write done 443 before Christ.

Moses year 2513 to 2553 plus 1Ki.6:1; 480 yrs to 3033, Solomon had 36 yrs to 3069 [ 997 B. C. ], plus Judah kings 391 yrs 3460 [ 606 B. C. ], [ Jehoiachin
Eze.1:1; age 18, year 3449 [617 B.C., 19 yrs at 598 B.C. Jer.50:31-34; of the lineage of Joseph, husband of Mary, Mary lineage of Nathan, Mary will be the mother of Jesus and will be in Rome world Empire #6 ]; plus Jer.25:12; Dan.10:1; 2Chr.36:20-23; 70 yrs to Cyrus world Empire #4, 3530 [ 536 B. C. ]; plus 93 yrs to Malachi, year 3623 [ 443 B. C ], plus 200 years to Greece world Empire #5, year 3730 [ 336 B. C. ]

Answer 10

Although I completely agree with this line of enquiry that you have started to show the truth about the bible, I feel you are not going to get through to anybody the christians are just to pigheaded to look at the bible for what it is, bollocks