The Narrow Path Ministries

When we look at the context of the following verses we see that they are describing the same events:

2 Samuel 24:1 Again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, "Go, number Israel and Judah."

1 Chronicles 21:1 Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to number Israel.

So was it Yahweh who incited David to number Israel? Or Satan?

Does each of these verses contradict the other?

Hi Paidion,

As they stand, these two verses do seem to contradict one another...unless, of course, they are both true.

There are some who suggest that the writer of Chronicles (or a later copyist) altered the original, because he thought it inappropriate to suggest that God incited David to sin. This speculative scenario is not impossible, of course, but I do not like to resort to theories of deliberate redacting or of textual corruption until all possibilities have been considered that may discover the meaning of the two passages in the form that they have come down to us, in such a manner as to remove the apparent difficulty.

I see no reason why both statements could not be true. It seems no less likely that God and Satan, each in his own way, would be involved in David's testing, than that God and Satan were both involved in Job's testing (a fact that is reported unambiguously in Job 1 and 2).

Chronicles tells us of Satan's role as David's tempter. However, Samuel tells us that David was incited because of God's prior anger toward Israel, leading God apparently to bring judgment upon Israel, which is what the final outcome of the chapter describes. The original reason for God's anger and His bringing judgment on Israel is not revealed to us, but it is not hard to imagine, given Israel's penchant for rebellion, that God's displeasure was well justified. The proximate cause of God's judgment was the role of David in numbering the people. Why this should be regarded as wrong, again, we are not told—but even Joab knew it was the wrong thing to do (1 Chron.21:3, 6), and we can assume that David knew this as well.

In order to judge Israel for earlier (undisclosed) offenses, God incited David (through the agency of Satan) to do that which provided the immediate occasion of a brief season of severe judgment. Certainly, without the balancing parallel in Chronicles, we would get the impression, from Samuel, that God directly commanded David to number the people. If this was so, however, one could hardly find fault with David for obeying a command from God. Thus, Chronicles lets us know that this urging of David to take the census was done through the mediation of Satan—making it a divinely-permitted temptation for David to commit an evil act, rather than a direct command from God.

While this explanation may not be correct, it is not demonstrably incorrect, and it harmonizes with what we read of God and Satan's roles in the things that came upon Job.

Another twist that is sometimes suggested is that "Satan," in Chronicles, is not to be taken as a proper name for the devil, but as the generic "a satan" (Heb. satan—i.e., an adversary), meaning some threatening nearby ruler, whose hostilities intimidated David, causing him to wish to number the people in preparation for battle. This would change little, in terms of the harmonization of the two pasages, except that it would take the devil out of the loop, and it would mean that God used an earthly opponent of David (rather than a supernatural one) as the instigator of David's temptation to number the people.

I appreciate you thoughtful explanation, Steve.

Another twist that is sometimes suggested is that "Satan," in Chronicles, is not to be taken as a proper name for the devil, but as the generic "a satan" (Heb. satan—i.e., an adversary), meaning some threatening nearby ruler, whose hostilities intimidated David, causing him to wish to number the people in preparation for battle.

I recently encounted this twist, but with a further twist, that God Himeself acted as adversary in this case.

However, I noticed that in the Seputagint translation of the passage, the word ςατανος (adversary) is not used, but rather διαβολος ("devil" or possibly "slanderer", or metaphorically, "a man opposing the purposes of God"). If the Septuagint correctly translated the Hebrew to Greek, then it does not seem that the word could be applied to God. Nor would it apply to some hostile human being who was opposing the purposes of God, for the purpose of God, according to the 2 Samuel passage, appears to be that David WOULD number Israel.

Of course, one could speculate that God had two purposes here, one of David fulfilling righteousness by NOT numbering Israel, and the other in judging Israel by David doing so.

Or one could simply say the Septuagint translators made a mistake in translating the Hebrew word as "διαβολος".

Unfortunately, the question cannot be settled by appealing to the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scolls since only a single fragment of Chronicles remains, containing 28:7 and 29:1-3

There is mystery here, which may not be able to be resolved entirely with the information that has been given to us. There are other "contradictions" in the two accounts of the numbering, as well (e.g., different census numbers, different lengths of the suggested judgment, etc.)—most of which have to do with numerals, which could possibly be blamed upon copyist errors.

On the use of diabolos in the LXX, I am no expert on either Greek or Hebrew, but what I have read in the past has given me the impression that diabolos is the correct Greek translational equivalent for the Hebrew satan. Neither really function, in their own languages, as proper names. However, satanos is the Grecianized transliteration (not translation) of the Hebrew satan, the retaining of which by the New Testament writers seems to transform Satan into a proper name.

However, satanos is the Grecianized transliteration (not translation) of the Hebrew satan...

Correct. This is why I was hoping the Dead Sea Scrolls would contain the passage. I thought it might be a possibility that the ORIGINAl Hebrew and thus possibly the Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew might turn out to be a different word from "Satan", one that might either be transliterated into Greek as διαβολος, or legitimately translatedinto Greek as διαβολος. The Masoretic text from which our Old Testaments have been translated is a pretty late Hebrew (I recognize that the Masoretic text has been altered throughout the centuries, and that there were earlier forms of it).

I wonder if the purpose wasn't that "as the king goes, so goes the nation". The pestilence that was sent upon Israel because of David's numbering them was the area covered by Saul's kingdom. A few chapters before in 2 Sam we see that Absalom had caused a split amongst them to rebel against David. Then Sheba gets the 10 tribes to follow him. Also when David comes to Gilgal and Judah calls the people to meet him there, a dispute with the 10 tribes rises up because of jealousy and they refuse to go. I believe with all the factioning that had been going on in the land that judgment was due Israel and David's sin was used to bring it about. When the king is blessed so is the nation - and vice versa. Israel needed to be united under the king God had given them. Which means the rebels had to be put down. Saul was the one who started all their troubles with his disobedience and there were apparently a few trouble makers left over from his rule. And so God used this sin of the king to bring an end to them.