There is one detail that does not seem apparent to me though - your mention that Amaziah was 'buried in a separate location from the rest of the Davidic line' and 'buried in a separate location from the rest of the Davidic line'.
2Kings14:20 NKJV seems to imply otherwise in saying that Amaziah 'was buried at Jerusalem with his fathers in the City of David' and that he 'rested/slept with his fathers' (vs 22, which according to the BSB refers to Amaziah rather than his son Ahaziah). Is there some textual/translation issue behind your comments here?
Do you have any thoughts on why Jehoram seems to be lumped in with the losers by the Chronicler but makes the cut with Matthew? Other than neatness on Matthew's part (getting the threes and fourteens right), is there anything about him that sets him apart in Chronicles from the other three?
Really good piece of work.
There is one detail that does not seem apparent to me though - your mention that Amaziah was 'buried in a separate location from the rest of the Davidic line' and 'buried in a separate location from the rest of the Davidic line'.
2Kings14:20 NKJV seems to imply otherwise in saying that Amaziah 'was buried at Jerusalem with his fathers in the City of David' and that he 'rested/slept with his fathers' (vs 22, which according to the BSB refers to Amaziah rather than his son Ahaziah). Is there some textual/translation issue behind your comments here?
Great article. Note: for Solomon slept with his fathers, the reference should be 2 Chron. 9:31.
Thanks James - this is fantastic.
Do you have any thoughts on why Jehoram seems to be lumped in with the losers by the Chronicler but makes the cut with Matthew? Other than neatness on Matthew's part (getting the threes and fourteens right), is there anything about him that sets him apart in Chronicles from the other three?