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.

temptation-860x450_c

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:
Tags:

Related Reading

Was the Early Church Pacifistic? A Response to Paul Copan (#11)

In Crucifixion of the Warrior God (CWG) I argue that Jesus and Paul instruct Christians to love and bless their enemies and to unconditionally refrain from violence (e.g. Matt 5:39-45; Rom 12:14-21). Moreover, I argue that this was the prevailing attitude of Christians prior to the fourth century when the Church aligned itself with the…

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…

Sermon Clip: Does Romans 9 predestine you to Hell?

Did God predestine you to Hell? Can he even do that? In this short sermon clip, Greg Boyd talks about his own struggles when trying to understand Romans 9 which on the surface seems to imply that God determines who goes to heaven and hell. In the full sermon, Greg takes a deep look at…

Early Anabaptists and the Centrality of Christ

In a previous post, I wrote about the Christocentric interpretation of the Scriptures espoused by the magisterial Reformers, specifically Luther and Calvin. Their hermeneutic was focused on the work and the offices of Christ, but in my opinion the Anabaptists surpasses their approach because it focused on the person of Christ with an unparalleled emphasis…

Who is Responsible for Job’s Suffering?

In the prologue of the Book of Job, the author seems to ascribe the responsibility for Job’s affliction to Yahweh. For instance, Satan challenges God to “stretch out [his] hand and strike everything he has,“ believing that this would incite Job to curse God to his face (1:11). The fact that the Lord responds by…

What’s the Purpose of the Old Testament Law?

Whereas the old covenant was rooted in the law, the new covenant is rooted in simple faith, such as Abraham had. Whereas the old covenant was forged with one particular nation, the new covenant is available to all who are willing to accept it, regardless of their ethnicity and nationality. Whereas forgiveness of sins within…