The Chronicler's main interest in David's reign, as we have seen, focused on the Davidic Covenant with its promises to David and his descendants. In recounting the events of Solomon's reign he proceeded to emphasize the temple that Solomon built. Almost everything he mentioned about Solomon ties in with the temple somehow. The writer of Kings, on the other hand, emphasized many different aspects of Solomon's reign, though his interest was particularly Solomon's fidelity to the Mosaic Covenant (1 Kings 1-11). In the rest of 2 Chronicles the writer likewise pointed out how the kings who succeeded Solomon cared for the temple and perpetuated temple worship.
When the Chronicler wrote his history there was controversy over the second temple (i.e., the temple that Ezra built). Some of the residents in and around Jerusalem opposed its construction (Ezra 4:4-24; Hag. 1:2-4). If the returned exiles were to renew their (Mosaic) covenant relationship with God, they had to have a temple. There they could obey the laws regarding expiation of sin, worship, and fellowship with God (cf. Exod. 25:8).
Furthermore, when the Chronicler lived the Israelites realized that God had not fulfilled the promises concerning David's son completely in Solomon's day or during any of his successors' reigns. They looked for a Messiah to appear who would be both a king and a priest. The prophets had given revelation that such a person would come someday. He would be a perfect king who would rule the whole world, not just Israel (Ps. 2; et al.). Moreover he would be a priest, not of the Aaronic order, but of the order of Melchizedek (Ps. 110; et al.). David was the first king of Israel who served as a faithful priest after this order. He personally offered sacrifices and led the people in worship as well as in government. David's successors on the throne did the same things. The prophets promised that Messiah would build a house (temple) for God. He would give attention to His people's worship of God and their fellowship with God. He would be a man of peace compared to David who was a man of war (1 Chron. 22:7-9). David's rule was the kind of rule the coming King would establish. Consequently the writer of Chronicles measured all David's successors by the standard of David and his kingdom.
Concern for temple worship marked David's rule, as we have seen in 1 Chronicles 17-29. The King who would fulfill God's covenant promises to David would have to possess similar zeal for temple worship (cf. John 2:17). The writer viewed Solomon as a second David and compared him to David as Joshua compares to Moses.2The Chronicler reviewed the histories of David's successors to see if any one of them was that King. He showed in 2 Chronicles that none was. He was yet to come.
When Solomon began to rule he stepped onto a political stage in the ancient Near East that God had prepared. There were no major empires reaching out to conqueror surrounding territories because these empires had internal problems that demanded their attention. Some of them were experiencing harassment from their neighbors. Consequently Solomon was free to solidify David's gains in an atmosphere of peace.
"With the close of Solomon's reign we embark upon a new phase in Chr.'s account of Israel's history. That account can be broadly divided . . . into the pre-Davidic era, the time of David and Solomon, and the period of the divided monarchy up until the Babylonian exile."24
". . . the Chronicler never regarded the northern monarchy as anything but illegitimate and a rebellion against God's chosen dynasty. As far as he was concerned, all Israel had one and only one ruling family."25
The writer continued his sermon by evaluating each of Solomon's successors with the same yardstick he had used on Solomon, namely, the example of David. His intent appears to have been to show that none of David's descendants measured up to him much less surpassed him. Consequently the promised Son of David was yet to appear. The relationship of each king to temple worship showed his heart commitment to God. Consequently there is much in what follows that deals with the kings' relationship to the temple and temple worship.
