![]() |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
From 2 Kings 17:24-41
The king of Assyria brought people from Babylon, Cuthah, Avva, Hamath, and Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria in place of the people of Israel; they took possession of Samaria, and settled in its cities. When they first settled there, they did not worship the Lord; therefore the Lord sent lions among them, which killed some of them. So the king of Assyria was told, ‘The nations that you have carried away and placed in the cities of Samaria do not know the law of the god of the land; therefore he has sent lions among them; they are killing them, because they do not know the law of the god of the land.’ Then the king of Assyria commanded, ‘Send there one of the priests whom you carried away from there; let him go and live there, and teach them the law of the god of the land.’ So one of the priests whom they had carried away from Samaria came and lived in Bethel; he taught them how they should worship the Lord.What I find interesting here is the awkward (or, better, intrusive) shift in focus: the third paragraph looks very much like a later addition.
__________________
-- gadol kvod habriot --
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The third paragraph may indeed be a later interpolation-- I think you're right in saying it bears the hallmarks of just that likelihood. But what I find interesting is that unlike many other later interpolations elsewhere in the text that seem to contradict or alter or retroject change into the earlier narrative structure, this one reinforces the narrative in the direction it was already moving. I think the episode as a whole is actually an excellent prooftext (not that one is really needed, but if it were ever called for) to reject forced proselytization and/or mass proselytization. It just doesn't work, and everyone ends up hurt because of it.
__________________
Quis custodiet ipsos custodies? |