Sample Exegesis Paper – 2 Chron. 26:16-21
by Brian P. Irwin
This paper provides an example of how to write an exegesis paper using the steps
outlined in chapter three of Douglas Stuart’s, Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for
Students and Pastors (3rd ed. Louisville, KY; London: Westminster/John Knox, 2001).
Readers should note that what follows modifies Stuart’s method slightly in that his
sections on “Literary-Historical Context”, “Biblical and Theological Context”, and
“Grammatical and Lexical Data” have here been combined into one section following
“Form and Structure”. This was done so that I could get this example to you as soon as
possible. For your exegesis paper, you will likely find it best to follow Stuart’s steps
exactly as outlined in his book. While this paper illustrates Stuart’s “Short Guide to
Sermon Exegesis” (67-87), students should read and understand Stuart’s book in its
entirety before beginning their exegesis paper.
I.
Introduction
Second Chron. 26:16-21 stands as a strange and sad episode in the life of an otherwise
pious king. In this narrative, the good king Uzziah flaunts tradition and Torah and
enters the temple to offer incense. As a consequence of such hubris, the monarch is
struck with leprosy, banished from Jerusalem, and relieved of his royal duties. The
study to follow will examine this unusual episode and will assess what meaning it
might have had for ancient Israel and what significance it holds for Christians today.
II.
Text and Translation
In this section you should translate the passage and comment on your translation
choices. If you choose, for example, to render an unusual Hebrew phrase by resorting
to paraphrase or dynamically equivalent translation, you should alert the reader to this in
a footnote. You should also comment on any Ketib-Qere readings that are found in your
passage or on any textual problems that may be highlighted in the critical apparatus in
the BHS. If there are syntactical or grammatical problems in the text, you may wish to
comment on them by referring to a reference grammar or syntax. You may wish to
consult several scholarly commentaries for help with translation options.
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 2
16When he became strong, his pride increased until it corrupted him. He was unfaithful
to Yahweh his God and entered the house of Yahweh to offer incense on the altar of
incense. 17Azariyahu1 the priest went in after him and with him the priests of
Yahweh—eighty men of valour.2 18They stood beside Uzziyahu the king and said to
him, “It is not for you, Uzziyahu to offer incense3 to Yahweh, but for the priests, the
sons of Aaron, the ones consecrated to burn incense. Get out of the consecrated place,4
because you have acted unfaithfully and this will not bring glory from Yahweh
Elohim!” 19Uzziyahu was enraged. There was a censer in his hand and as he raged
against the priests, leprosy broke out on his forehead in front of the priests in the house
of Yahweh before the altar of incense. 20Azariyahu the chief priest and all of the priests
turned to him, and saw5 that he was leprous on his forehead, so they hurried him from
there. (Moreover, he hurried himself out,6 because Yahweh had struck him.) 21So
Uzziyahu the king was leprous until the day of his death. Being leprous, he lived in a
…whÎy-
1
Generally speaking, the longer theophoric ending
is found more frequently in earlier and southern
Biblical Hebrew (Kutscher, 60-61; Sáenz-Badillos, 65). The use of this form in a late work such as
Chronicles is perhaps due to the book’s preference elsewhere for plene spelling (Sáenz-Badillos, 116). It is
only in Late Biblical Hebrew that the shorter form
comes to predominate. English translations have
adopted this shorter form (e.g. Uzziah and Azariah) based on the LXX which uses it even when the MT
hÎy-
…whÎy- (Kutscher, 61).
Heb. lˆyDj_y´nV;b. The range of meaning for lˆyDj includes, “valour” (Judg. 11:1; 1 Chron. 5:24), “strength”
has
2
(Psa. 18:40, 33:17), “wealth” (Gen. 34:29; Num. 31:9), and “status” (Ruth 2:1; Neh. 3:34). Here, the
context of commoners confronting a monarch makes “men of valour” the most appropriate choice.
3
On the use of the preposition with the infinitive construct and the negative as a means of indicating
prohibition, see GKC §114 l.
4
Heb.
(“sanctuary”, NRSV). The rendering here, “consecrated place”, attempts to preserve
l
v∂;dVqI;mAh_NIm
the connection with the verbal form of the same root (
5
6
MyIv∂;düqVmAh) used earlier in the verse.
h´…nIh◊w (“and behold”).
Heb. PAj√dˆn. The meaning of this Niphal 3ms perfect form is reflexive and indicates that at this point
Heb.
Uzziah himself was anxious to exit the sanctuary. The NRSV translates the entire phrase in formal
equivalence by, “he himself hurried to get out”, while the NIV translates in dynamic equivalence with,
“he himself was eager to leave”.
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 3
separate7 house, because he had cut himself off from the house of Yahweh. So Jotham
his son was in charge of the royal palace,8 ruling the people of the land.
III.
Form and Structure
This step requires you to determine the structure of the unit under discussion. You may
do this by analysing the passage and offering an outline. Often, the biblical authors
convey structure through the use of formulae that serve to initiate or conclude sections.
Sometimes changes in content are the major clues to structure. Recognising structure
will go a long toward helping you to understand the meaning of a particular passage.
When offering a structural outline, you should always present the reasons that led you
to your conclusions. The kind of skills developed from reading a book like Oletta Wald’s,
The New Joy of Discovery in Bible Study, will help you recognise the literary devices
used to convey structure.
The coherence of the passage under discussion is evident from an examination of its
place in the chapter as a whole. Chapter 26 may be outlined as follows based on content
and the use of formulae.
A. Ascension and Introduction (26:3-5)
7
tyIvVpDjAh tyE;b
Qere
; literally, “house of freedom” and so rendered by the Old Latin libertatis
(“freedom”). Contra Japhet (887), a “free house” is likely not a euphemism for “house of confinement”,
but rather a reference to a building that was not physically bound to others in the manner typical of those
in an ancient urban setting. Such houses would most likely be found outside the city. Consequently, the
translation “separate house” is probably the best rendering (following the ASV, NRSV, NIV, and NASB).
The Ketib (
) and the Qere (
) are both feminine singular nouns with abstract endings.
t…wvVpDjAh
tyIvVpDjAh
Despite the Qere, it is the case that the t…w- ending is common in Late Biblical Hebrew (Kutscher, 43) and
so is not out of place in a book like Chronicles. Moreover, the fact that the LXX transcribes affouswq
suggests that the Ketib rests on an ancient Hebrew tradition. Neither form changes the meaning of the
passage. In offering the Qere, the Masoretes are, 1) acknowledging the form found in the parallel passage
in 2 Kgs 15:5 (
) and, 2) recognising that the present form is built on the adjective
(“free”)—
tyIvVpDjAh
yIvVpDj
a pattern which tends to construct the abstract by the simple addition of
8
JKRlR;mAh tyE;b_lAo
t (GKC §95t-u).
Heb.
. The LXX either translates freely or is working from a slightly different Hebrew
Vorlage, reading Iwaqam oJ ui˚o\ß aujtouv e˙pi« thvß basilei÷aß aujtouv (“Jotham his son was over the
kingdom”). The parallel passage in 2 Kgs 15:5 omits
. Given the overall thrust of the passage in
JKRlR;mAh
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 4
B. Uzziah’s Success (26:6-15)
C. Uzziah’s Pride and Fall (26:16-21)
D. Conclusion (26:22-23)
Second Chron. 26:3 stands at the head of a new section. That this is the case is indicated
by the fact that the verse contains the same kind of ascension formula that appears at
the beginning of the accounts of several other kings in the immediate context (e.g.
Jotham, 27:1; Ahaz, 28:1; Hezekiah, 29:1). The introductory character of v. 3 is also
confirmed by comparison with the parallel passage in 2 Kgs 15:1-7 where the account of
Azariah (i.e. Uzziah) begins with the same ascension formula. In that context, 2 Kgs
14:21-22 stands as the source of the material found in 2 Chron. 26:1-2 and closes the
account of Azariah’s father Amaziah. In the intervening verses (2 Kgs 14:23-29), the
writer of Kings has the account of Jeroboam II of Israel. Thus separated from what
precedes, 2 Chron. 26:3-5 forms an introduction to the reign of Uzziah as a whole,
noting his ascension and his greatest achievement, the capture of the Red Sea port of
Elath. Within vv. 3-5, the rise of Uzziah is formally indicated in v. 3 by use of an
ascension formula, “A was B years old when he began to reign, and he reigned C years
in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was D.”9 Verses 6-15 stand as a separate section
dealing exclusively with the various high points of Uzziah’s reign. The dramatic shift
from success to moral failure that occurs at verse 16 marks verses 16 to 21 as yet another
section. The notice of Uzziah’s quarantine and Jotham’s elevation to de facto ruler form
the consequences of this moral failure and so bring the section to a close. Verses 22-23
Chronicles, the inclusion of
were
JKRlR;mAh
is perhaps intended to eliminate the meaning of “sanctuary” possible
tyb to appear alone (see v. 19).
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 5
constitute a conclusion to the chapter as a whole and begin with a source citation which
invites the reader to consult the works of Isaiah son of Amoz for a complete account of
Uzziah’s life. This section and the chapter as a whole conclude with the king’s death
notice10 and the succession formula of his son Jotham.11
Within the section under discussion (vv. 16-21), the following structural arrangement is
observable, based on content.
IV.
1)
Overview of Uzziah’s Sin (v. 16)
2)
Description of Uzziah’s Sin (vv. 17-20)
3)
Consequence of Uzziah’s Sin (v. 21)
Literary-Historical and Biblical-Theological Context
This step in exegesis requires you to place the passage in the world in which it arose.
Things that were readily understood by the original audience are often lost on us
because of the historical distance that separates us from the text. In approaching any
passage, think about the characters, practices and institutions involved as well as the
general period under discussion. Consider also if there are details or concepts in the
passage that are developed elsewhere in scripture. It is in this section that you will
sometimes identify terms that require a word study. Works such as Bible dictionaries
and histories of ancient Israel will be helpful sources for explaining terms or names or
providing general background information.
9
This same formula is used to introduce the rule of other Judaean monarchs in 2 Chron. 25:1 (Amaziah), 2
Chron. 27:1 (Jotham), and 2 Chron. 29:1 (Hezekiah). Abbreviated forms of the same formula occur at 2
Chron. 28:1 (Ahaz), and 2 Chron. 33:1 (Manasseh).
10
For other examples of this form, see 1 Kgs 2:10 (David), 1 Kgs 11:43 (Solomon), 1 Kgs 14:20 (Jeroboam I),
and 1 Kgs 14:31 (Rehoboam). The burial notice of Uzziah differs from those of other kings by the addition
of the detail that he was buried with his ancestors in the burial field of the kings (2 Chron. 26:23). This
detail implies that because of his leprosy, Uzziah was not buried along with other past monarchs in the
royal tomb within the city of David (e.g. 2 Kgs 14:20). The parallel passage in Kings, however, states that
Uzziah was buried within the City of David (2 Kgs 15:7), so the Chronicler’s version may be a reflection
of his own cultic and levitical interests.
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 6
The passage under discussion falls toward the end of the reign of Uzziah (792/91740/39 BC), one of Judah’s most successful kings. The military and economic successes
achieved by this monarch were possible in part because this period was one of
weakness for the traditional world powers. To the north, Assyria was experiencing
internal difficulties that left it unable to project power internationally. Throughout the
reigns of Shalmaneser IV (783-774 BC), Asshur-dan III (773-756 BC), and Asshur-nirari
V (755-746 BC), Assyrian monarchs were preoccupied with internal dissent and the
rising power of the kingdom of Urartu (Bright, 256). To the south, Egypt was in a
similar position. By the mid-eighth century, the rival XXII (ca. 935-725 BC) and XXIII
(ca. 759-715 BC) dynasties had divided the land of the Nile between them (Bright, 47071) and left the kingdom so weakened that it was unable to cause problems for Judah
and her levantine neighbours. As a consequence, Judah and its sister kingdom of Israel
were able to engage in military ventures that a few years earlier would have brought on
the wrath of one or more of the traditional world powers.
Two institutions figure prominently in the passage under discussion—the kingship and
the cult. The cult includes the temple, which forms the locale for the narrative, and the
priests, who challenge king Uzziah. While both kings (Judg. 9:8; 1 Sam. 15:1) and priests
(Exod. 28:41, 40:13) were anointed to symbolise their god-ordained role in the world,
they did not have identical responsibilities. The purview of the priesthood was the
temple. In the post-exilic community in which Chronicles developed, it is clear that
temple sacrifice was conducted by, or under the supervision of, the priests. The absence
of the monarchy meant, of course, that there was no role for kings during this period.
11
For other examples of this form, see 1 Kgs 11:43b (Rehoboam), 1 Kgs 14:20b (Nadab), 1 Kgs 14:21b
(Abijam), and 1 Kgs 15:8b (Asa).
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 7
The role of the monarch in temple ritual in the pre-exilic period is much less clear. In
celebrating the arrival of the ark from Baale-judah, for example, David wears an ephod
and offers a sacrifice (2 Sam. 6:12-14, 18). In one enigmatic passage, 2 Samuel records
that …wyDh
MyˆnShO;k dˆw∂d y´nVb…w (“David’s sons were priests”)(2 Sam. 8:18).
12
Even here,
however, there is no direct evidence that David or his sons engaged in priestly activities
within a specific shrine. While at earlier times, kings and commoners could engage in
sacrifice13, the temple in Jerusalem was clearly a domain in which the Zadokite
priesthood held sway.
In the narrative under discussion, the pious and successful Judaean king Uzziah
becomes proud and, overstepping his authority, attempts to offer incense in the
Jerusalem temple. This particular offering was made before the altar of incense and so
took the priest to the very curtain separating the inner sanctuary (ryIb√;d) from the outer
room (lAkyEh)(Exod. 30:6-9). As such, the incense offering was one that took an ordinary
priest as far into the temple as he was permitted to venture. In this cultic action, Uzziah
is opposed by the assembled priests who frustrate his efforts and forcibly remove him
from the sanctuary. What moves the priests from fear to action is the leprosy (tAoårD…x)
that breaks out on the king as he attempts to make his offering (2 Chron. 26:20). Most
interpreters note that the impurity conveyed by this disease and the suddenness of its
onset demonstrates that Uzziah was unfit for temple service.14 Leprosy functions in a
12
The LXX at this point reads aujl a¿rcai (“court rulers”), a rendering which appears to underlie the
NIV’s translation, “royal advisers.”
13
During the Primeval and Patriarchal eras, the head of the clan is sometimes depicted as building an
altar and sacrificing (Gen. 8:20, 21:7, 26:25).
14
See Ackroyd, 170-71; McConville, 220; Dillard, 211; Japhet, 884-5; Selman, 471; Thompson, 332.
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 8
similar way in Num. 12:10 where it designates Miriam (and by proxy, Aaron) as unfit to
serve Yahweh in the same manner as did Moses.15 Elsewhere, Gehazi, the servant of
Elisha is similarly afflicted when he solicits gifts in contravention of his master’s stated
wish (2 Kgs 5:15-27). In this incident, the leprosy that had belonged to the Syrian
general Naaman is apparently transferred to the unfaithful servant who had coaxed
gifts out of the healed foreigner. Generally overlooked, however, is the fact that 2
Chron. 26:19-20 twice identifies the disease as first appearing on the king’s forehead
(jAxEm)(2 Chron. 26:19-20).16 The word jAxEm occurs only thirteen times in the Hebrew
Bible, appearing first in Exod. 28:36-38 where it identifies the location of the golden
rosette worn on the head-dress of the high priest. This ornament bore the words, “holy
to Yahweh” (hÎwhyAl
v®dOq) and identified the wearer as one permitted to minister before
the god of Israel. By specifying this particular location, the author is drawing attention
to the high priest and his associates surrounding Uzziah and dramatically contrasting
their mark of legitimacy with the king’s impurity.17 Uzziah’s leprosy thus functions as a
case of divine demonstration that communicates both Yahweh’s general condemnation
and the king’s cultic unsuitability.
As a number of interpreters note, the two passages are connected by use of a very similar phrasing (NRpˆ¥yÅw
+ h´…nIh◊w and o∂rOxVm/tAo∂rOxVm)(Williamson, 340; Selman, 471). Why Aaron is spared the sentence of leprosy
15
meted out to Miriam is explained on source critical grounds by Noth (92-94). It is as likely, however, that
here the editor is conscious of traditions later preserved among the P material by which it was the high
priest who declared the healed leper to be clean (Lev. 13:1-44). Thus, the editor may spare Aaron his
sister’s fate because if Aaron himself were afflicted with leprosy, he as priest would have been unable to
carry out this priestly function (Lev. 21:16-23).
16
Japhet makes note of the appearance of the leprosy on the king’s forehead, but concludes that it appears
there because it was “the most conspicuous place on the king’s body” (Japhet, 885-6).
17
A fact noted also by Johnstone (169). Japhet cites Exod. 28:36-38 and the “priest’s ‘plate of pure gold’”
along with Ezek. 9:4-6 and rabbinic tradition concerning the mark of Cain, as examples of items that were
placed on the forehead. Despite this, she doesn’t suggest a connection concerning the declaration on the
priest’s headgear as a means by which Uzziah’s impurity is emphasised.
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
V.
Page 9
Application
In this section, you are required to pull together everything that you have done so far
and make an attempt at stating the purpose and meaning of the text. Here you should
begin by attempting to state what the text meant to its original audience. From this, you
should try to identify a general principle that is based on this meaning of the text. Finally,
you should find a corresponding contemporary setting in which this general principle is
applicable. It is important that your application is clearly based on your exegesis of the
text. It is often at this stage that students ignore their own exegesis and “go with their
gut” or revert to what they learned in church. Out of this stage will come the main point
of any sermon you might preach on the passage.
A. Original Setting
While the passage under discussion records events that occurred in the mid-eighth
century BC, the audience that received the narrative in its final form was a post-exilic
one (2 Chron. 36:20-23). During this period, the people of Judah were back in the land as
a struggling community centred in Jerusalem. Although some members of the royal
house of David returned at this time, they did so not as kings but as Persian-appointed
administrators (Hag. 1:1) or private citizens. No longer was the temple an institution
supported by their personal patronage. While Davidic monarchs may have enjoyed a
measure of cultic influence in the past, in this new era, authority over the sanctuary
would rest solely with the Zadokite priesthood. Among the great challenges faced by
this priesthood was resurrecting a temple cult that had been dormant for half a century.
In this revived centre of worship, both priests and the people would need to be reeducated regarding how to work and behave in the sacred precincts. Those former
exiles who for decades had worshipped Yahweh locally without benefit of a holy
sanctuary (or perhaps even of priests) would need to adapt to worshipping Yahweh at a
central sanctuary through the offices of the priest. This task of reintroducing the sanctity
of the shrine was made more difficult by the fact that the rebuilt temple inspired none
of the awe that was the case with the complex built by Solomon (Ezr. 3:10-13).
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 10
In this setting, the earlier story of a cultic violation by an otherwise pious king becomes
instructive. Uzziah thought that his achievements (vv. 6-15) qualified him to enter the
presence of God. Filled with pride, he tried to barge into God’s house and was
punished as a result. If even one of Israel’s most pious and fondly remembered kings
had been unable to enter the sanctuary, then how much more so the people of the postexilic period. For the former exiles, the case of Uzziah reinforced the sanctity of the new
temple and the holiness of the God who dwelt therein.
B. General Principle
A general principle that may be taken from this passage is that when we try to
approach God on the basis of our own achievements, we show that we do not respect
his holiness. Attempting to approach God in this way is not worship at all and can
disqualify us from the role he does have for us.
C. Application Today
In applying the general principle found in this passage, the setting of the church as
God’s redeemed community provides an appropriately parallel context to the setting of
Chronicles in which it is Israel that is being addressed. For Christians, this passage
provides a powerful reminder not only of the holiness of God, but also of the need to
regard our skills and successes as gifts from God that do not make us better than
anyone else, but rather equip us to serve God better. Believers who do not appreciate
this fact may miss out on the work that God has in store for them.
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 11
Bibliography
Here you should provide a list of all of the works you consulted during your research.
Include also those items that you read but didn’t cite directly. You should never,
however, include works that you didn’t actually use firsthand. This section allows
readers to check on the accuracy of your work. There is no need to include Bibles
unless you have cited the notes of a reference Bible.
Ackroyd, Peter R. I & II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah. Torch Biblical Commentaries.
London: SCM, 1973.
Bright, John. A History of Israel. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1981.
Dillard, Raymond B. 2 Chronicles. Word Biblical Commentary, 15. Waco, TX: Word,
1987.
Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar as Edited and Enlarged by the Late E.
Kautzsch. Second English Edition Revised in Accordance with the Twenty-Eighth
German Edition (1908) by A.E. Cowley. Oxford: Clarendon, 1910.
Japhet, Sara. I and II Chronicles: A Commentary. Old Testament Library. Louisville, KY:
Westminster/John Knox, 1993.
Johnstone, William. 1 and 2 Chronicles. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
Supplement Series, 254. Vol. 2: 2 Chronicles 10-36, Guilt and Atonement. 2 vols.
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.
Kutscher, Eduard Yechezkel. A History of the Hebrew Language. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1984.
McConville, J. Gordon. I & II Chronicles. Daily Study Bible (Old Testament).
Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1984.
Myers, Jacob M. II Chronicles: Translation and Notes. Anchor Bible, 13. Garden City, NY:
Doubleday, 1965.
Noth, Martin. Numbers: A Commentary. Old Testament Library, ed. James D. Martin.
London: SCM, 1968.
Sáenz-Badillos, Angel. A History of the Hebrew Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1993.
Selman, Martin J. 2 Chronicles: A Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries,
10b. Downers Grove, IL; Leicester: InterVarsity, 1994.
Sample Exegesis (2 Chron. 26:16-21)
Page 12
Thompson, J. A. 1, 2 Chronicles. New American Commentary, 9. Nashville, TN:
Broadman & Holman, 1994.
Williamson, H. G. M. 1 and 2 Chronicles. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982.