We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
Satan or God: Who Tempted David to Sin?
The author of 2 Samuel says that Yahweh caused David to sin by taking a census of his military personnel (2 Sam 24:1) while the author of 1 Chronicles attributes this temptation to Satan (1 Chr 21:1). It is clear that the author of 2 Samuel had no problem accepting that Yahweh was capable of inciting David to sin and then punishing him for doing what he incited him to do by slaughtering 70,000 of his subjects with a plague (2 Sam 24:10-7). The Chronicler, on the other hand, understandably found this theology objectionable and so changed the reference from God to Satan. As people developed a heightened sense of the moral character of God and of the depth of evil that engulfs this world in the centuries leading up to Christ, we find other examples of people amending Scripture in this way and/or emphasizing the role of angels to distance God from morally dubious activities.
This alteration is theologically significant inasmuch as it demonstrates how in the progress of revelation, later, more enlightened authors discerned “something else going on” when earlier authors ascribed immoral behaviors to Yahweh. Yet, the crucientric significance of this alteration only becomes apparent when we interpret it in light of the cross, for it confirms that in earlier times Yahweh was willing to stoop as far as needed to remain in covenantal solidarity with his people and to continue to further his historical purposes through them. Not only does this bear witness to the merciful, accommodating character of Yahweh supremely disclosed on the cross, it bears witness to God’s willingness to assume responsibility for all he allows. While the later Chronicler correctly understood that Satan is the one who incites people to sin, God stooped to allow the earlier author to depict him as Satan, thereby making him look guilty of something that he merely allowed.
Category: General
Tags: Cruciform Theology
Related Reading
The Cross Reveals God’s Love
The central way Christ functions as the perfect image and exact representation of God is by dying on the cross. While Christ’s entire life manifests the true God, Christ came primarily to die. It was his death that defeated the devil and freed us from bondage. The one who does what is sinful is of…
God of Sense and Traditions of Non-Sense
As the title suggests, in his book, God’s Problem: How The Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question – Why We Suffer, Bart Ehrman argues that the Bible has nothing compelling to say about the problem of evil. Well, I just put down a beautifully written four-hundred and fifty page book that compellingly argues…
The Bible is Infallible NOT Inerrant
While the cruciform understanding (explained here) of the “God-breathed” nature of Scripture is in tension with the way most talk about inerrancy (See previous post on inerrancy), I do not believe it is at all incompatible with what the Church has always sought to express by affirming the “infallibility” the Scripture. The core conviction is that Scripture will…
Do We Read Bible-Violence to Children? (podcast)
Greg on children and Bible violence. Episode 658 http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0658.mp3
A Coming Storm
There is a storm beginning to brew on the horizon. It is a debate among Evangelicals about the violent depictions of God, stirred up largely by Eric Seibert’s Disturbing Divine Behavior. Here is a post that sounds “the clarion call.” The debate is presently around two options. Option #1: Traditionalists argue we must simply embrace…
Podcast: Do We Apply a Cruciform Lens to the Writings of Paul Even Though He Writes After Christ?
Greg talks about Paul and Peter and the slow acclimation of Christ’s message in the early church. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0413.mp3