Talk:Books of Chronicles/Archive 1

Unattributed quotes
This article contains two unattributed quotes. Both appear in the paragraph beginning, "In their general scope and design ...." The first quotes says, "The genealogies, so uninteresting to most modern readers, ...." The second says "the threads of the old national life ...." Are these two perhaps from Easton's Bible Dictionary, listed at the bottom of the page? Regardless, their source needs to be indicated. &mdash; Nowhither 20:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikification
This page needs to be Wikified. Anyone agree?


 * I do, O Unsigned One. &mdash; Nowhither 20:35, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Ezra
Was not at one point the begining of Era added to the end of the book to make it end happy?-unsigned "The Book of Chronicles is a book in the Hebrew Bible (also see Old Testament). It was originally written as one book, but at some time the book came to be divided into two, probably in accordance with more managable scroll sizes, and thus in Christian bibles it is usually published in two parts, I Chronicles and II Chronicles." This must be theology, for it certainly has nothing to do with the sources, editing and creation of the works in question. Somebody must be more interested in Chronicles than this... Wetman 03:45, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I must disgree. Of course splitting a book into parts is related to the editing of the book. &mdash; Nowhither 20:35, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Disagree with what? Not that it was originally written as one book, nor that the book came to be divided into two, nor that in Christian bibles it is usually published in two parts, surely. --Wetman 21:33, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I diagree with your statement that, "This must be theology, for it certainly has nothing to do with the sources, editing and creation of the works in question." On the contrary, it isn't theology; it's part of the history of a text. And it clearly does have to do with the editing of the text. Splitting a book in two is editing, isn't it? &mdash; Nowhither 22:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Removed quotation marks from unattributed quotes
Since no one has replied to the request to show sources of unattributed quotes in paragraph beginning, "In their general scope and design..." as is mentioned above, I have removed the two sets of quotes.

Mockingbirdbat 15:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Lead section
Hi, maybe you are right that I overdid it. Should give at least some explanation of the book's importance.

On the other hand, many WP article leads are extremely verbose. This seems to me one them. Would there be a way to briefly explain the contents and importance of the book, without repeating so much of the info below? Dovi 18:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The more verbose a page is, the more important it is that the lead be thorough (so that a casual reader can read the lead, get the gist, and skip the eye-glazing verbosity that plagues so many pages). But these sentences could be condensed: " In the masoretic text, it is the last book of the Ketuvim and thus the last book of the Tanakh. In the Septuagint, it is split into two sections and entitled "Supplements." In the Old Testament, it is split and follows 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings, as a supplement to them. The Books of Chronicles largely duplicate the Books of Samuel and the Books of Kings.[1]" Information such as author, place in history, and important contents belong in the lead. Jonathan Tweet 18:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Divrei Hayamim
"Chronicles" means more or less the same thing as "Divrei Hayamim" - in Greek at least - but it's inaccurate to id est it. Divrei Hayamim means "things" - or "matters" - "(of) the days". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.229.185.172 (talk) 15:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC).

Error at the end of II Chronicles
Why does this article not address the "error" at the end of II Chronicles? I thought it was at least semi-famous. I'm referring to II Chronicles 36:23, which ends mid-sentence.

{36:23} Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath the LORD God of heaven given me; and he hath charged me to 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.

This is copied from Ezra, but the final half of the last sentence is chopped off.

{1:2} 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. {1:3} Who [is there] among you of all his people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the LORD God of Israel, (he [is] the God,) which [is] in Jerusalem.

Is there a rational explanation for this, other than just crying "error"? I think the article should address this issue either way, as the issue is somewhat well known, I believe. Bueller 007 19:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Date of Chronicles
The dating discussion is confusing. The first part claims that the book(s) were written between about 400 BCE and 250, at various dates. But then it states "The author was likely contemporary with Zerubbabel." If so, the author would have had to be extraordinarily long lived, as Zerubbabel led the return from captivity around 538 BCE. The use of "likely," "probable," etc should be made more consistent. Mewnews 09:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)]]