The aim of this thesis is to examine the two portrayals of Manasseh which appear in the books of Kings and Chronicles, considering manifold critical issues including diachronic questions, structure, narrative, literary features, and theological problems. Part One consists of a detailed examination of the Manasseh text in Kings in which I investigate the diachronic issue surrounding the text. In a literary investigation the structure of the Manasseh account is re-examined.  Structurally, the focus of discourse is located in the announcement of Manasseh’s rejection of the call to repentance by Yahweh.  This thesis contends that, distinct from many scholars who see diachronic seams in the Manasseh text in Kings, we cannot find any convincing diachronic levels in the Manasseh account.  Rather, in spite of this terseness in dealing with source materials, Dtr used his own distinctive coherent literary scheme in the whole work on Samuel-Kings. To understand the character of Manasseh, I question Sweeney’s view which sees him a foil to Josiah.  At the micro level of the literary features I examine how the small semantic units of the text are integrated with each other and accomplish their textual purposes. Part two accesses the other face of Manasseh in Chronicles, where he is portrayed as a typical model of a repentant monarchy.  For an examination of the diachronic issues, I question Auld’s view that a common source existed which was used by the Chronicler and the author of Kings.  Within a literary discussion, the structure of the Manasseh narrative is discussed.  With regard to the character, I apply Kalimi’s ‘character creation’ examples to Chronicles, investigating whether his principles can be verified in the Manasseh account. Part Three focuses on the reasons why Kings and Chronicles should be read together, comparing how different meanings are delivered in each different context.

<p>In this thesis it was argued that the prime reason of the Deuteronomistic Historian (Dtr) for inserting the incomparability of God in Solomon's prayer was to convey his (Dtr's) theological interpretation of the history of Israel as history controlled by her sovereign God, Yahweh. Other reasons were also considered. This study does not pusue the incomparability formula throughout the Deuteronomistic writings, but confined itself to the prayer of Solomon and more specifically to the use of the incomparability formula. Therefore, this study intended to examine, in a scholarly and responsible manner, the main reason(s) for the insertion of the statement of the incomparability of God in king Solomon's prayer.</p>

<p>In this thesis it was argued that the prime reason of the Deuteronomistic Historian (Dtr) for inserting the incomparability of God in Solomon's prayer was to convey his (Dtr's) theological interpretation of the history of Israel as history controlled by her sovereign God, Yahweh. Other reasons were also considered. This study does not pusue the incomparability formula throughout the Deuteronomistic writings, but confined itself to the prayer of Solomon and more specifically to the use of the incomparability formula. Therefore, this study intended to examine, in a scholarly and responsible manner, the main reason(s) for the insertion of the statement of the incomparability of God in king Solomon's prayer.</p>

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Aberdeen University, 2008. / Title from web page (viewed on June 3, 2009). Includes bibliographical references.

Magister Theologiae - MTh / In this thesis it was argued that the prime reason of the Deuteronomistic Historian (Dtr) for inserting the incomparability of God in Solomon's prayer was to convey his (Dtr's) theological interpretation of the history of Israel as history controlled by her sovereign God, Yahweh. Other reasons were also considered. This study does not pusue the incomparability formula throughout the Deuteronomistic writings, but confined itself to the prayer of Solomon and more specifically to the use of the incomparability formula. Therefore, this study intended to examine, in a scholarly and responsible manner, the main reason(s) for the insertion of the statement of the incomparability of God in king Solomon's prayer. / South Africa

Magister Theologiae - MTh / In this minithesis, I argue that the prime reason of the Deuteronomistic Historian (Dtr) for inserting the incomparability of God in Solomon's prayer is to convey his (Dtr's) theological interpretation of the history of Israel as history controlled by her sovereign God, Yahweh. Other reasons are also considered. In order to argue the main reason and others, the sociohistorical aspects of the Davidic-Solomonic era are briefly highlighted as well as the Deuteronomistic Historian, his time and theology. A closer look at the Babylonian exile shows the significance of this event in terms of the theological thought of Dtr conveyed in the passage 1 Ki. 8:23-26 and the rest of Solomon's prayer.

Thesis advisor: Andrew R. Davis / The figure of Saul became the focus of exilic reflection on election, rejection, obedience, and repentance. The Saul rejection accounts became, more broadly, about the election and seeming rejection of Israel because of infidelity to the Horeb covenant. The accounts became part of a wider deuteronomistic attempt to persuade an exilic audience of the importance of obedience centered on the YHWH-Israel bond articulated in Deuteronomic law. The Saul rejection accounts were placed at strategic points late in the development of the text of 1 Samuel. Both accounts appeal for obedience to the commands and words of YHWH (13:13-14; 15:1). In the end, these commands and words share the same referent—the book of the law—the priority of the final editors (DtrN). Following an introduction describing context, model, and method (Chapter One), this work focuses on the positive contribution—and shortcomings—of some synchronic approaches, identifying the need for an appropriate biblical poetics (Chapter Two). The value of a careful synchronic reading is complemented by a diachronic reading contributing to an understanding of the text’s development and final shaping (Chapter Three). Four stages are identified, ranging from 1) older, positive, Saul stories, to 2) prophetic tradition, to 3) a Deuteronomistic History expressive of preexilic hope informed by Davidic promise (Josianic), to 4) exilic, deuteronomistic thought, grappling with the crisis of exile while attempting to understand and articulate a response. The response of this final redactor (DtrN) consists of a call to renewed obedience to the book of the law expressive of the YHWH-Israel bond. These diachronic stages are also identifiable in the rejection of Saul passages. Both passages (1 Sam 13:7b-15 and 15:1-35) are carefully studied, synchronically and diachronically, resulting in several theological conclusions (Chapter Four). These conclusions are then compared and contrasted with a classic articulation of “Deuteronomistic Theology” (Noth and Von Rad), leading to even further refinement (Chapter Five). This is followed by a General Conclusion offering a final methodological, theological, and pastoral reflection. Out of exilic reflection, DtrN prioritizes the Deuteronomic law: it is, after all, expressive of the incomparable YHWH-Israel relationship in covenant. There can be no compromise. Yet one of the great strengths of Deuteronomistic Theology, modified by the theological conclusions drawn here, is that the prophetic voice still speaks through the final deuteronomistic text. The embedded call to repentance (šûḇ) tempers the final urgent call to obedience with hope of return to and renewed acceptance by YHWH. Awareness of the diachronic stages allows the later reader to hear, not only the voice of the final DtrN redactor, but also earlier voices. The multi-voiced model, about which concerns are raised in Chapter Two, contributes in its own way to a greater appreciation of the rich theological depth of these texts (Chapters Four and Five). It is the synchronic-diachronic methodological combination adopted that permits the theological message to emerge more clearly in its fullness. A debt is owed to the Deuteronomistic writers for the preservation, transmission, and adaptation of earlier strands. This dynamic of interacting traditions recalls the often overlooked vibrancy of Deuteronomistic Theology, suggesting a renewed appreciation. The Deuteronomistic writers formulated their own vision through interaction with received traditions. On the one hand, Deuteronomistic Theology is robust and uncompromisingly challenging: “Obey the words of YHWH!” (1 Sam 15:1). On the other hand, it is realistic, reconceptualizing, and compassionate: people will fail, but there is a way back. I suggest that the Deuteronomistic theologians offer a biblical foundation for the pastoral model of accompaniment. / Thesis (STD) — Boston College, 2020. / Submitted to: Boston College. School of Theology and Ministry. / Discipline: Sacred Theology.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 1999. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 171-179).

Starting from the observation that Deuteronomy commands a tradition of performing the Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32.1-43), in this dissertation I explore ways in which the performance of the Song contributes to Deuteronomy's educational program through an effect on those who perform the Song. In order to do so, I employ a performance-based approach that stresses the dynamic of re-enactment that operates in traditions of performance; I argue that performers of the Song are to be transformed as they re-enact not only the characters within the Song but also those who came before them in the history of the Song's performance, particularly YHWH and Moses, whom Deuteronomy depicts as that tradition's founders. In support of this thesis, I provide a close reading of the text of the Song (as preserved in Deuteronomy and as informed by Deuteronomy's account of its origins and subsequent history) that examines how the persona of the performer interacts with these re-enacted personas in the moment of performance. I also argue that the various composers of Deuteronomy themselves participated in the tradition of performing the Song, adducing examples from throughout the book in which certain elements originally found in the Song have been adopted, elaborated, acted out, or simply mimicked while being put to another use. / Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations

Mass., Brandeis Univ., Diss.--Waltham, 2003.