The Northern Kingdom is often referred to as Israel or Samaria, and the Southern Kingdom as Judah.
A prima facie reading of the texts — the books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles — might lead the reader to conceptualize the Northern Kingdom as bad, and the Southern Kingdom as good.
But a closer reading of the texts raises questions: Could it be that the authors of these texts were Southerners? Is there an anti-Northern prejudice in the text?
There is evidence in the text which prevents the reader from embracing a simple polarity in which North is bad and South is good. If the hypothesis of a pro-Southern favoritism on the part of the author is accepted, then it might be that the author recorded the data despite himself.
Consider:
- God sent prophets to both kingdoms, not only to the South. To the North He sent Elijah, Elisha, Hosea, and Amos. Some prophets had messages for both kingdoms. The South therefore cannot claim exclusive reception of the Word of God.
- There was apostasy leading to idolatry in both kingdoms.
- Individuals in both kingdoms committed the atrocity of human sacrifice.
- In both kingdoms, among those who refrained from idolatry, there was a mixture of well-executed and poorly-executed worship of the Lord.
- In both kingdoms, there was a continuous “remnant” of people who were faithful to the Lord.
- Both kingdoms, by the time each of them ended, had become largely displeasing to God.
It is possible to discern different leanings among biblical authors. The New Testament authors of the four Gospels seem each to have had his own target audience, and his own purposes in writing; yet the four Gospels relay the same facts. That the authors had their distinct angles and twists in their telling of the events in no way undermines or rules out the veracity of the text.
If the four New Testament Evangelists each offer their own unique packaging of the same account, then it is clear that the human personality colored, but did not violate, the truth of the message given by God.
To ascribe distinctive personal predispositions to the authors, and to hypothesize that these predispositions are detectable in the final form of the text, is in no way to violate the doctrine and dogma that Scripture is infallible, inspired, and true.
To assert that the four New Testament Gospels reflect the distinctive temperaments of their authors is in no way to doubt the reliability of Scripture: so, in the same way, to say that the author or authors of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles had a pro-Southern partiality is in no way to question the accuracy of those texts.
The pro-Southern interpretation of events might be seen, e.g., in the readiness of the author to condemn as apostasy and idolatry actions in the North which might simply have been less-than-ideal implementations of the worship of the one true God.
Correspondingly, the author seems to be more lenient of similar events in the South, accepting as sincere worship which was perhaps suboptimally performed.
Does this question of historical interpretation point to a deeper spiritual axiom?
Perhaps it is salutary to be reminded that God is always at work in every person’s life — those in the Southern Kingdom as well as those in the Northern Kingdom. God has concern for every human being, and desires that all should be in a healthy relationship with Him. The Northern Kingdom fell into apostasy and idolatry quicker, and perhaps with more gusto, than the Southern Kingdom, but in the end, sin is sin, and all fall short.
The important lesson to be learned from these texts is perhaps not about the moral and spiritual decline of the Northern Kingdom, but rather about the smug self-assuredness of the Southern author: a cautionary tale, warning the reader against a sinful and arrogant version of pride.
Consider the fact that individuals often have a distinct handwriting style. Often the reader can readily recognize the penmanship of a family member or close friend. Different people might write out the same sentence, each with her or his distinctive handwriting; but the differences in longhand do not affect the meaning of the text.
Likewise, the authors whom the Holy Spirit inspired to write Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles may have recorded the narratives in their own peculiar styles — possibly including an anti-Northern bias — without affecting the truth of those accounts.
The authority and integrity of Scripture is in no way questioned or undermined by observing that the process of inspiration used human authors, whose humanity, and whose individual personalities, shaped the formation of texts which nonetheless faithfully transmit divine truths.
