Paul Evans, «Divine Intermediaries in 1 Chronicles 21. An Overlooked Aspect of the Chronicler’s Theology», Vol. 85 (2004) 545-558
This paper challenges current scholarly opinion in regard to
the Chronicler’s belief in divine intermediaries. In 1 Chronicles 21, unlike in
the Chronicler’s Vorlage, the angel is clearly distinguished from Yahweh
himself, communicates Yahweh’s word to Gad, and flies. The Chronicler’s
replacement of Yahweh with N+# also reflects this
belief. Persian Dualism may have been influential but there is no
evidence that the Chronicler felt the need to remove all aspects of evil from
originating in God. Although not representing a complete doctrine of Satan, as
developed in later Jewish writings, 1 Chronicles 21 is an important stage its
development.
Divine Intermediaries in 1 Chronicles 21
An Overlooked Aspect of the Chronicler’s Theology(*)
Tremendous scholarly attention has been given to the census narrative
in 1 Chronicles 21, a reworked version of 2 Samuel 24, not only due to
the changes that are made in the account in Chronicles but also due to
the fact that elsewhere the Chronicler (1) (hereafter Ch) edits all of
David’s faults from his Vorlage while retaining this instance of
failure (2). Leaving aside the issue of how this account may, or may
not, mar the otherwise ideal portrait of David in Chronicles, two
notable changes are worth re-exploring: the expanded role of the angel
and the appearance of ˆfç in place of Yahweh as the one who ‘incited’
David to take a census. What to make of these intriguing changes has
led to varying interpretations.
The fact that in 1 Chr 21,1 ˆfç occurs without the definite article
has been interpreted in one of two ways. In the past, the majority of
commentators concluded that ˆfç had now became a proper name
instead of a title of an otherwise unspecified “adversaryâ€(3). Some
(*) The nucleus of this essay was presented at the Pacific Northwest Meeting
of the Society of Biblical Literature in Edmonton, Canada in May, 2000. Although
I take responsibility for the final form of this paper, I would like to thank E. Ben
Zvi (University of Alberta), T.F. Williams (Taylor University College), G.N.
Knoppers (Penn State) and J.G. Taylor (Wycliffe College) for their helpful
comments and suggestions in the process of writing and revising this article.
(1) By the Chronicler, I mean the author(s) of the Book of Chronicles.
(2) For various scholarly theories as to why this is, see G.N. KNOPPERS,
“Images of David in Early Judaism: David as Repentant Sinner in Chroniclesâ€,
Bib 76 (1995) 449-470; J.W. WRIGHT, “The Innocence of David in 1 Chronicles
21â€, JSOT 60 (1993) 87-89; M. NOTH, The Chronicler’s History (JSOTSup 50;
Sheffield 1987) 34, 55-56; W. RUDOLPH, Chronikbücher (HAT 21; Tübingen
1955) 141-149; P.R. ACKROYD, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah (TBC; London
1973) 73-77.
(3) C. Breytenbach and P.L. Day write “The majority of scholars...
understand ¢Ët≤Ën to be the proper name Satanâ€, (“Satanâ€, Dictionary of Deities
and Demons in the Bible [eds. K. VAN DE TOORN – B. BECKING – P.W. VAN DER
HORST] [Leiden 1995] 1375-1376). So H.G.M. WILLIAMSON, 1 and 2 Chronicles
(Grand Rapids 1982) 143; R. BRAUN, 1 Chronicles (Waco 1986) 216; G. VON
RAD, Das Geschichtsbild des chronistischen Werkes zur Geheimen Offenbarung
(BWANT 54; Stuttgart 1939) 8-9; R. SHARF, Satan in the Old Testament
(Evanston 1967) 155; W. EICHRODT, Theology of the Old Testament (Philadelphia
1967) II, 206-207.