“Discuss the respective interpretive paradigms being used by the Chronicler and the Deuteronomist that draw a favorable, or unfavorable, assessment of a king’s leadership from the respective writers of Chronicles and Samuel/Kings.” Begin by identifying what bottom-line quality you personally look for in a leader, apart from Chronicles or Samuel/Kings in the Bible. What would lead you today to vote for a person in an up-coming election? “Effective leadership requires decisiveness”; “Effective leadership requires compassion” etc …. You don’t have to prove your thesis, since you are the authority on what you personally believe. Once where you personally stand is clarified, then from the perspective of your personal thesis, critique [which means evaluate] two relevant illustrations: 1) one drawn from Chronicles; and 2) one drawn from Samuel/Kings. Perhaps discuss the two different presentations of the same king. In your discussion, be sure to contextualize your evaluation to the social and political context of the Deuteronomist for Samuel/Kings and Persian occupied Yehud for Chronicles. For the Chronicler, focus on the advice being given by the Chronicler to the faithful who have survived the exile and are now having to deal with the Persian occupation of their homeland; for the Deuteronomist, focus on the social and political context of Josiah’s reign and the implications of the Assyrian threat.
THESIS: “Effective leadership requires humility.” Attaching the images of the illustrations to be critiqued