Andrew E. Hill writes: "during the last two decades biblical researchers have questioned the literary ties between Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah. Today most Old Testament scholars recognize the unity of the two books of Chronicles but separate them from the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, citing thematic differences such as the lack of Davidic messianism, 'second exodus' overtones, and the 'pan-Israelitic' emphasis in the latter. At present it seems best to recognize the books of Chronicles as a unified composition written by an unknown chronicler. Given the writer's pointed interests in the temple and its priestly and levitical personnel, it is likely that he was a priest or Levite employed in the service of the temple. The exact relationship of the Chronicler's writings to the books of Ezra-Nehemiah remains an open question." (A Survey of the Old Testament, p. 217)
Robert North writes: "Two dates are thus favored: ca. 400 and ca. 200. But when we examine them in detail, we find these extremes to be based on strangely identical reasoning. The solid core of Chr-Ezr, whether we call it source material or Frist Chronicler, exhibits a maximum conservatism and unawareness of Seleucid era developments. But to this core everyone admits noteworthy additions. Some exercise their ingenuity in isolating a complete block or actually a book which they call the Second Chronicler, consisting of the whole genealogical vestibule of 1 Chr 1-9 plus long cognate passages from throughout the work (Hänel, Welch). Their ingenuity helps more moderate scholars to recognize the fact of extensive accretion, even though common sense appraisal of the text disinclines them to postulate a single block of interpolated material, or even a single interpolator or time. What we can call the Second Chronicler must really represent a continuing series of recombinations and adaptations from 400 to 170, or even later. Browne's emphasis on the silence about Alexandrinism does not prevent him from postulating minor redactional insertions, which could just as well have been made after Daniel (160), whom he regards as a predecessor of the Chronicler." (The Jerome Biblical Commentary, vol. 1, p. 404)
Roddy L. Braun writes: "While it may not be possible to place the author in a specific historical context, his message to his readers does much to bring to life his audience and the problems that they faced. At the center of his concern is surely the Temple and its worship, and to that end the entire history of the nation is directed. The whole work of David and Solomon, with which no less than twenty-six of the sixty-five chapters of the book are concerned, is directed toward the construction of the Temple. That interest in the Temple itself is maintained throughout the remainder of the book, whether its original conclusion be met in the account of the removal of the Temple vessels (2 Chron. 36:18) or Cyrus's edict to rebuild the Temple (2 Chron. 36:22-23) or the rebuilding of the Temple itself (Ezra 1-6)." (Harper's Bible Commentary, p. 343)
Please buy the CD to support the site, view it without ads, and get bonus stuff!