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
Rethinking Transcendence
Going back to pre-Socratic philosophers and running through the major strands of the church’s theological tradition, the conception of how God (or, in ancient Greece, “the One”) was arrived at primarily by negating the contingent features of the world that were deemed inferior and in need of explanation. God transcended the world, for example, by…
When God Endorsed Polygamy
We often find God acting as if he supports things we know, by other means, that he does not. For example, though his ideal was monogamy, it’s clear in the biblical narrative that, once God decided to permit men to acquire multiple wives and concubines, he was not above bearing the sin of his people…
How Revelation Uses Violent Images in an Anti-Violent Way
All the violent scenes in Revelation are symbols for the battle of truth and deception. They never involve literal violence. In fact, they symbolize ANTI-VIOLENCE. The ingenious way John helps us get free of deception of trust in violent power is by taking a standard violent symbol and juxtaposing it with a symbol that undermines…
Podcast: How Does God’s Wrath Fit within a Cruciform Theology?
Greg considers God’s wrath. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0390.mp3
Why Are Jesus’s Parables So Violent? (podcast)
Greg pops the hood to offer a helpful tutorial on how parables operate. Episode 609 http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0609.mp3
Podcast: Overflow Episode 1 — Dust, Flashlights, and Heathens
Dan and Brianna tackle some tough questions: —Is it okay for Christians to be cremated? —How can we preach from the OT with authority? —What should a Christian academic know in a secular school? http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0320_overflow_1.mp3