Bennett opens by acknowledging the challenge of expounding Chronicles after Samuel, Kings, Ezra, and Nehemiah have already been treated in the same series. He describes his task as gleaning scattered ears from a field already harvested, a metaphor that signals his method: he will focus on what is distinctive to Chronicles rather than rehash parallel passages. The preface immediately establishes a critical, source-conscious approach, promising to treat sections common to the older histories as briefly as possible while preserving narrative continuity.

The Chronicler's Selective Use of Prophetic Sources

Bennett devotes considerable attention to the Chronicler's curious attitude toward the canonical prophets. He notes that the Chronicler largely follows the book of Kings in making no reference to Isaiah, yet inserts references to Jeremiah not taken from Kings. This selective citation, Bennett argues, is deliberate: the Chronicler had access to all the literature of the monarchy, Captivity, and later times, as shown by his numerous extracts from the Historical Books, Pentateuch, and Psalms. Bennett suggests that the strictures of Isaiah and Micah on the priesthood and ritual may have made the Chronicler unwilling to give them prominence. He also observes that the Chronicler makes two references to Haggai and Zechariah, while ignoring Amos, Hosea, and Micah—possibly due to their connection with the northern kingdom. This pattern, Bennett contends, has important bearing on textual criticism of the early prophets, implying that if they were neglected by Temple authorities between Ezra and the Maccabees, the possibility of late additions and alterations increases.

Prophet and Priest: Contrasting Portraits

Bennett draws a sharp distinction between the Chronicler's depictions of prophets and priests. Both are religious personages, he writes, but they differ widely in almost every particular; the term “office” has to be almost unjustifiably strained to apply it to the prophet. The Chronicler's prophets are not institutional figures but individuals who deliver divine messages, often in tension with the established order. Bennett highlights the Chronicler's account of Josiah, where the king “hearkened not unto the words of Neco from the mouth of God,” but the Chronicler amends this to say Josiah did not regard “the words of the prophet Jeremiah spoken by the mouth of the Lord.” This altered statement, Bennett notes, is borrowed from the Chronicler's account of Zedekiah, who “humbled not himself before Jeremiah the prophet.” Such editorial changes reveal the Chronicler's theological emphasis on prophetic authority and the consequences of disobedience.

Pacing and Theological Emphasis in the Final Chapters

Bennett observes that as the inevitable ruin of Jerusalem draws near, the Chronicler's narrative pace shifts. In these last days, he writes, “where sin abounded, grace did yet more abound.” The Chronicler portrays Jehovah exhausting the resources of His mercy: “Jehovah, the God of their fathers, sent to them by His messengers, rising up early and sending, because He had compassion on His people and on His dwelling-place.” Yet the people mocked the messengers, despised His words, and scoffed at His prophets, until the wrath of Jehovah arose, “till there was no remedy.” Bennett notes that the Chronicler includes two other references to Jeremiah's prophecies in the concluding paragraphs, but the history of prophecy in Judah closes with this last great unavailing manifestation of prophetic activity. This rhetorical acceleration—from repeated warnings to final judgment—underscores the Chronicler's didactic purpose: to show that divine patience has limits, and that persistent rejection of prophecy leads to catastrophe.

Bennett's commentary rewards readers who attend to the Chronicler's editorial fingerprints: the altered quotations, the selective citation of prophets, and the deliberate pacing of judgment. Rather than a simple retelling, Chronicles emerges as a theological reinterpretation shaped by post-exilic concerns. Bennett's method—comparing Chronicles with its sources—invites readers to consider what the Chronicler chose to include, omit, or reshape, and to ask why those choices were made.