Prayer of Manasseh

Sep 11, 2024

Many readers may not be familiar with the Prayer of Manasseh. It is a short, penitential prayer attributed to King Manasseh of Judah (and I have no problem accepting that attribution).

Below I will draw attention to the outline above (including the more in-depth Landscape layout pdf file). In so doing, I will not only try to explain the multi-level chiastic structure of this prayer but also Manasseh’s reasoning in the prayer, which is entirely based on concepts related to the Mosaic covenant.

Introduction

The Prayer of Manasseh is considered apocryphal (non-canonical) by Jews, Roman Catholics and Protestants. However, it is accepted as a deuterocanonical book by the Eastern Orthodox Church. The prayer should ring a bell with Eastern Orthodox readers since it chanted during the Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic service of Great Compline. (Great Compline is a penitential liturgical office served most weeknights during Great Lent as well as during other fasting seasons.)

The Prayer of Manasseh is included in the 5th-century Codex Alexandrinus and in published editions of the Greek Septuagint (LXX) such as Rahlfs and the NETS translation. In the LXX, it appears among the fourteen Odes, just after the Psalms. Thus, it is Ode 12 in the Rahlfs edition of the LXX and “Prayer of Manasses” in NETS. The Orthodox Study Bible places the prayer at the end of 2Chronicles. It is not included in the Lexham translation of the Septuagint. However, Lexham opted to include it in a separate volume (Old Testament Apocrypha).

The prayer also appears in ancient Syriac, Old Slavonic, Ethiopic, and Armenian translations. It also appeared in the Apocrypha of the King James Bible, the original Douai-Rheims Bible and the Geneva Bible of 1599. It was placed at the end of 2Chronicles in the late 4th-century Vulgate. Later, Pope Clement VIII included the prayer in an appendix to the Vulgate.

Historical Background

Manasseh was the son of good King Hezekiah. He began his reign at age twelve, after his father's death in 698 BC. (Sidenote for amateur chronologists: there was likely no cogency of Manasseh with his father, as proposed by Edwin Thiele.) Manasseh reigned 55 years, the longest of all the kings of Judah or Israel. In 643 BC, when he was 67 years old, he died of natural causes and his son Amon ascended the throne after him. Unfortunately, Manasseh is also regarded as probably the most evil of all the rulers of Judah or Israel. 2Kings 21:16 says, “Indeed, Manasseh poured out large quantities of innocent blood until it filled Jerusalem from end to end. This in addition to the sins which he led Judah to commit, in doing evil in the sight of the Lord.” It’s likely that, because of Manasseh’s persecution, the official copy of the Torah scroll was hidden to keep it safe. It was only found some 70+ years later during the 18th year of Josiah in 624/623 BC. Talmudic tradition says Manasseh was so evil that he had the prophet Isaiah sawn in two inside a tree. Such wickedness is amplified by the fact that Isaiah must have been a very old man at the time. After all, he had been prophesying at least 61 years since the year of Uzziah’s death in 759 BC.

2Chron 33:9-11 states that Manasseh was disciplined by the lord for his evil ways and was led away in chains to Babylon: "So Manasseh led Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem astray to do more evil than the nations the Lord had destroyed before the sons of Israel. And the Lord spoke to Manasseh and his people, but they would not listen. Therefore, the Lord brought against them the captains of the army of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh with bonds, bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon."

The Didascalia (a 3rd-4th century treatise on church orders) contains a version of this same story. In the 7th chapter (addressed to Bishops) the treatise departs from the canonical version with a more embellished account:

"10. And the Lord brought down upon them the nobles of Assyria; and they seized Manasses, and tied him up, and put ropes around him, and led him away to Babylon (some mss add ‘in a brass statue,’ which tradition is also found in the targums) and shut him in a prison, bound and tied down with iron. Bread of bran was weighed out for him, and water mixed with a little gall* was given him, so that he might survive yet be afflicted and severely battered.” (*Gall was a mild sedative and reputed to numb the senses.)

This incident likely occurred sometime after 648 BC under Assyrian king Ashurbanipal. The back-story on when this occurred and why Manasseh would be led away to Babylon by an Assyrian king may be summarized as follows:

Šamaš-šuma-ukin was the elder brother of Assyrian king Ashurbanipal. Yet, he was not heir apparent. Instead, he was granted a position to rule in Babylonia, which was a vassal to Assyria at the time. However, in 652 BC, Šamaš-šuma-ukin revolted along with a coalition of enemies of Assyria. The revolt eventually ended in disaster for Šamaš-šuma-ukin. Babylon was captured by Ashurbanipal in 648 BC after a lengthy siege and Šamaš-šuma-ukin died (likely killed).

Thus, it seems most probable that Manasseh's (temporary) captivity by the Assyrians occurred at that time, approximately 5 years prior to Manasseh’s death.

Judah continued in sin and the Lord would not relent with regard to his promised judgment upon Judah for their evil ways. 2Chron 34:24-25 says,

"Thus says the LORD, Behold, I will bring disaster upon this place and upon its inhabitants, all the curses that are written in the book that was read before the king of Judah.

Because they have forsaken me and have made offerings to other gods, that they might provoke me to anger with all the works of their hands, therefore my wrath will be poured out on this place and will not be quenched."

However, it seems Manasseh genuinely repented of his sins and prayed for forgiveness. 2Chron 33:12-13 says, "Now when he was in affliction, he sought the face of the Lord his God and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed to him. And the Lord received his entreaty, heard his cry, and brought him back to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord was God.”

For further introductory information on the Prayer of Manasseh see: Introduction to the Prayer of Manasses_Maripaul.pdf

Structure

The rhetorical structure of the Prayer of Manasseh is quite complex. (In fact, I don’t think I have ever seen so many and such a variety of rhetorical structures concentrated in one composition of just fifteen verses.) Therefore, I will provide the following orientation regarding the two outlines included with this post. The “portrait" version (seen above) contains the three major chiastic structures of the prayer and as many of the minor structures as would readily fit in the left-hand column. The major chiastic structures are actually nested (somewhat like a Matryoshka Russian Doll, where dolls of decreasing sizes are placed one inside the other). The primary chiastic structure is shown in bold font beginning in vs 1. The minor structures mentioned above are also included for vs 1-7. Then, there is a central proposition in vs 8. Indenting has then been used to display the outline of the secondary chiasm, beginning in vs 9, and the third major chiasm beginning in vs 11. I would invite the reader to carefully examine the the “landscape” version where I have included many more underlying features and structures. For example, that outline makes note of how the author varies his references to the name “Lord” (and sometimes uses a doublet “dLd” before and after that word) to function as linguistic markers that systematically signal the attentive reader to various structural transitions.

Reasoning

The fifteen verses of the Prayer of Manasseh are punctuated by eight (a more than an average number of) Greek particles and conjunctions that are used to show cause or reason. I have shown each such occurrence in the outline using the word, “cause” and highlighted the Greek in the “landscape” version. In the spirit of Isaiah 1:18 (“Come now, and let us reason together,” says the Lord) these various reasons all support the author’s logic and reasoning with the Lord. The first half of the prayer might be view as the author’s “covenant premises” that he will utilize to form his logical “covenant conclusion” in the second half (which is handily summarized in a central proposition in the rhetorical structure of the prayer).

Covenant

Recall that the Mosaic Covenant was a form of ancient near eastern treaty. Such covenants were structured in various ways for different purposes. Examples of treaties, loyalty oaths, and land grants have all been found to play a role in the historical and cultural context of the ancient Near East (ANE), especially in the sphere of diplomacy between the kings of various nation-states. In the ANE, nation-states actively pursued the construction of networks of vassal states and they often used asymmetrical covenant treaties to shape the relationship. One type of asymmetrical covenant, the Suzerain/Vassal Treaty, bears a striking resemblance to the structure of the Mosaic Covenant. Both:

open with a preamble containing two parts: the identification of the Suzerain by his name and titles.
contain an historical survey summarizing what the Suzerain has done for the vassal (who therefore owes his allegiance to the Suzerain).
contain a list of 'stipulations,’ i.e., what the vassal is required to do to maintain right standing in the covenant relationship.
contain a section listing blessings and curses. The vassal will receive the Suzerain's blessings or cursings depending on the vassal’s adherence.

With regard to that last point, in particular, we should point out the directives in Deuteronomy 28 & 30. The blessings for keeping the covenant are covered in Deut 28:1-14. The curses for breaking the covenant (violating the covenant stipulations) are covered in Deut 28:15-68. Importantly, the directives regarding repentance and restoration of the covenant are covered in Deut. 30:1-10. In particular, Deut. 30:1-3 instructed that, while under the curses, the people should reflect in their heart upon the blessings and cursings (Deut 28) and then return to the Lord and ask for deliverance.

Covenant treaty texts have been found by archeologists. In fact, actual loyalty oaths have been preserved on a handful of tablets, known as Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty. These tablets record oaths taken in 672 BC (during the lifetime of Manasseh). These oaths are promises of support for the succession of Esarhaddon’s son Assurbanipal to the throne upon Esarhaddon’s death. When Manasseh was king, Israel had already been invaded and destroyed by Assyria back in the days of Hezekiah. So, Judah had already been a vassal state of Assyria for quite some time. The point is, apart from even the Biblical text, Manasseh was all too familiar with the repercussions of violating covenant stipulations. Thus, we can better understand this Biblical text (referring to covenant concepts) in light of the common cultural environment.

In the Prayer of Manasseh, it is informative for our understanding to observe common Biblical terms such as "sinned/sinner," “repentance,” and "forgiveness” being used within a covenant context. In the prayer, we can plainly see an unfaithful vassal king (who has violated the stipulations of the covenant). In so doing, Manasseh has “sinned" against the Suzerain, who, in this case, is the Lord God. In the prayer, sin is an act of disobedience. Since Manasseh has been disloyal to the Suzerain Lord, he now rightly understands he is regarded as a “sinner” in his covenant status. As a result, he is under threat of the curses of the covenant. The appointed means to remedy to this situation, that is, to move back into the good graces of the suzerain - is “repentance.” Thus, I submit that “repentance" and, with it, “forgiveness” are also covenantal concepts.

For 21st century readers, explanation of Biblical texts in terms of a covenantal perspective can lead, not only to a better understanding of the Old Covenant context but also to the implications when there are parallels with the New Covenant.

I mention this because, when we Christians flip the page, turning from the Old Testament to the New Testament, we tend to also flip off a switch in our thinking. We tend to ignore covenant related theological concepts related to the Gospel.

Of course, certain texts make explicit reference to the covenant context. The prime example in the Gospels would be Matt. 26:28 - "for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

Other texts are implicitly related to the covenant context. For example, when the John the Baptist preached repentance for the remission of sins, we would be remiss if we failed to understand that he was acting in the manner of an OT prophet. He was acting as God’s prophetic agent to enforce the covenant. John’s ministry revolved around a common theme:

Mark 1:4 - "John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins."

Luke 3:3 - "And he (John) went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins."

The reason John preached repentance for the forgiveness of sins was due to Israel’s violation of the Mosaic Covenant stipulations.

When we keep flipping the pages and turn from the Gospels to the Epistles, we are getter further away from the Old Testament. So, it may seem as if we are also progressing further away from a covenantal perspective. We might reason within ourselves that Christians are no longer under the Mosaic Covenant, which was a treaty God made with Israel. However, we should remember that Jesus Christ came, not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them. From Matthew 26:28, cited above, we understand that Christ's sacrificial death on the cross ratified and inaugurated the New Covenant. In Galatians (and elsewhere), St. Paul teaches that those who are “from the faith of Abraham” are the sons of Abraham (Rom 4:16, Gal 3:7). Galatians 3:16-17, 19 tells us, “...the (covenantal) promises were made to Abraham and to his seed,” that is, to his Offspring - who is Christ. He goes on to explain that, “The law…does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void,” and that the Mosaic law was “added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made."

So, we have become sharers in the New Covenant in Christ. And we understand the New Covenant in continuity with what came prior to the Mosaic Covenant. That is, the New Covenant is the renewed fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant.

While the New Covenant has been inaugurated through redemption accomplished by the death and resurrection of Christ, repentance was still required for forgiveness of sins committed under the Mosaic Covenant.

Acts 2:38 - "And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

St. Peter’s preaching of “Repent and be baptized” to his Jewish audience was paralleled by “faith and baptism” in St. Paul’s teaching (to his Gentile audience). This is especially evident in Galatians 3:22-27. For St. Paul, the act of believing (i.e., becoming loyal/allegiant) is viewed in parallel with being baptized. Thus, for St. Paul, faith and baptism are viewed as "the obedience of faith” - which is the obedience of covenantal loyalty.

Thus, we should understand, not only repentance, but also faith (loyalty/allegiance) in covenantal perspective. Our covenantal loyalty to Christ (in Christ) is what now puts us in right standing in terms of our covenantal status. This standing in grace is not only in Christ, before God, but also, through the Spirit, in the new covenant community (the church, the body of Christ). Through our life in Christ, the seed of Abraham, we participate in the life and blessings of the New Covenant age of the Spirit.

Conclusion

Perhaps it may be appropriate to close with a quotation that bears striking resemblance to what we have observed in the Prayer of Manasseh. It is by Yeshua ben Sira, who was a respected Hellenistic Jewish scribe from the Second Temple period before Christ.

In the Deuterocanonical, “Wisdom of Sirach,” chapter 17, he exhorts us:

"But he provides a return to those who repent,

And he comforts those who lack endurance.

Turn to the Lord and forsake your sins,

And pray in his presence and reduce your offense.

Return to the Most High and turn away from wrongdoing,

And hate an abomination exceedingly."

Perhaps we might be all the wiser to take these things to heart.

<< Revelation 12:1-17