Some LDS apologists (myself included) believe that the Bible references missing books, some which may have been inspired (“God-breathed”), such as “the” original first epistle to the Corinthians referenced in 1 Cor 5:9-11. One proof-text for “missing books” in the Bible is 1 Chron 29:29. However, it appears a plausible case can be made that these are not referencing missing books, but works that are available in our current Old Testament. Consider the following from Ralph W. Klein and Gary N. Knoppers:
29 The deeds of David, the
first and the last: The book of
Kings did not have a formula citing sources for the reign of David. The formula
“the first and the last” is used for nine kings by the Chronicler, and in none
of these cases was it found in his Vorlage
(Solomon, 2 Chr 9:29//1 Kgs 11:41; Rehoboam, 2 Chr 12:15//1 Kgs 14:29; Asa, 2
Chr 16:11//1 Kgs 15:23; Jehoshaphat, 2 Chr 20:34//1 Kgs 22:46; Amaziah, 2 Chr
25:26//2 Kgs 14:18; Uzziah, 2 Chr 26:22//2 Kgs 15:6; Ahaz, 2 Chr 28:26//2 Kgs
16:19; Josiah, 2 Chr 35:26–27//2 Kgs 23:28). In fact, this formula is never
used in any of the source citations in the book of Kings.
in the acts of Samuel the seer: It is unlikely that the Chronicler
is alluding to noncanonical sources in this and the following two references.
Rather, he is attributing prophetic authorship to 1-2 Samuel, which is included
among the “Former Prophets” in the Jewish canon. A reference like 1 Chr 28:4
(Yahweh’s choice of David among the sons of Jesse) might have led the
Chronicler to think of Samuel’s role in the anointing of David in 1 Sam 16:1–13.
Samuel is called “the seer” (הראה) in 1 Sam 9:9, 11, 18, 19, but in 1 Sam
9:9 this title is equated with “prophet.” Samuel plays a very minor role in
Chronicles, though he is given Levitical ancestry (1 Chr 6:13 [28], 18 [33];
9:22 [where he is also called “seer”]; 11:3; 26:28; 2 Chr 35:18 [where he is
called “prophet”]). By using three prophetic terms for Samuel, Nathan, and Gad
the Chronicler stresses the entire range of prophetic activity.
in the acts of Nathan the prophet: Here the Chronicler may have
thought of 1 Chronicles 17//2 Samuel 7 (cf. 2 Chr 9:29; 29:25). Did Nathan’s
prominent role in 1 Kings 1–2, which the Chronicler knew but did not quote
extensively, lead to the idea that Nathan had authored these chapters? For the
title “the prophet” with Samuel, see 1 Chr 17:1//2 Sam 7:2.
in the acts of Gad who saw visions: Gad appears in the account of
David’s census, 1 Chronicles 21//2 Samuel 24. Gad is specifically called a
“seer” (חזה) in 2 Sam 24:11//1 Chr 21:9 and 2 Chr
29:25 (without Vorlage). A much later
apocryphal source is called “The Words of Gad the Seer.” I have chosen the
translation “who saw visions” in this verse to distinguish Gad from Samuel the
seer (הראה) earlier in the verse. (Ralph
W. Klein, 1 Chronicles: A Commentary [Hermeneia—a Critical and
Historical Commentary on the Bible; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 2006],
543-44)
29:29. “the acts of King David,
former and latter.” A typical regnal formulation in Chronicles (e.g., 2 Chr
9:29; 12:15; 16:11), but lacking in Kings for David.
“records of Samuel (dibrê šĕmûʾēl) the seer.” For almost
two centuries scholars have debated the import of this extended citation
(Peltonen 1996). The reference is not unique. Prophetic compositions are cited
elsewhere (2 Chr 9:29; 12:15; 13:22; 20:34; 26:22; 32:32; 33:19). Do these citations
refer to prophetic, annalistic, midrashic, or biblical traditions? Or are the
prophetic-source citations merely a literary convention? Of the various
possibilities, the prophetic stories of Samuel-Kings are the most likely source
because almost all of the prophets who appear in the Chronicler’s citations are
found within these books. Two of those who do not—Iddo and Ḥozai—may be derived
from source material within Samuel-Kings (Schniedewind 1995: 227). Moreover,
the Chronicler’s accounts of these prophets do not contain any additional
material to that which appears in Samuel-Kings. The prophetic-source citations
found in the concluding formulas of 1 Chr. 29:29 resemble the editorial
superscriptions of two prophetic books—Jeremiah (dibrê yirmĕyāhû) and Amos (dibrê
ʿāmôs). This may suggest that the author drew upon the editorial
superscriptions of these books in composing his prophetic source citations
(Schniedewind 1995: 218; cf. Freedman 1987).
We have been discussing the
origins of the prophetic-source citations. An interesting and related question
involves what the prophetic citations say about the author’s attitude toward
the prophetic figures and the larger literary work of which their stories are a
part. To begin with, the very fact that David has three prophetic figures
commenting upon his reign is itself a compliment to his kingship (Glatt 2001).
Each one of the prophetic figures who plays a role in David’s reign is also a
compiler of events in his reign, a writer concerned with recording traditions
for posterity. In the Chronicler’s depiction, Samuel, Nathan, and Gad appear as
literati, scribes who take a consistent interest in writing about the times in
which they lived. Moreover, the interest of these seers is in more than
national events; their writings comprehend David’s “kingship” and “power,” as
well as “the kingdoms of the lands” (v. 30). The Chronicler stands, therefore,
within a tradition of interpretation, preserved in the divisions of the HB,
that views the historical books of Joshua through Kings as prophetic in
character (the Former Prophets). As such, the Deuteronomistic work carries a
certain prestige for the Chronicler. Indeed, one can make the case that the
Former Prophets have more authority for the Chronicler than whatever
extra-biblical source material may have been available to him. (Gary
N. Knoppers, 1 Chronicles 10-29: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary [Anchor Yale Bible 12A; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008],
958-59)
