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 21 555
in angels where there were none in the original OT text. Often the
writer would introduce intermediaries to perform an act which God
himself performs in the original story (41). In a similar manner, Ch
replaces the original narrative’s account of God directly inciting David
with a heavenly intermediary — ˆfç.
3. Other Instances of Divine Intermediaries in Chronicles
Ch’s belief in divine intermediaries can be seen in other angelic
appearances in the book of Chronicles. Already we have noted the
instance in 2 Chronicles 32 which provided evidence of Ch’s concern
to differentiate between Yahweh’s direct involvement and mediation
(see above). Another angelic occurrence is found in 2 Chronicles 20
when “Yahweh set an ambush against the Ammonites†(v. 22). This is
the only time in the OT where Yahweh is said to set an ambush; in all
other instances where an ‘ambush’ is laid it is done so by humans. This
text is unique in that respect and seems to suggest these were more
than human ‘ambushers’. In other battles, where there is no angelic
intervention, we do not read of Yahweh ‘sending in the army’ or
‘directing’ human troops in any way. Therefore, this passage is also
evidence of Ch’s concern with divine intermediaries. This seems to be
another incident of Ch indicating the work of angels or the like (42).
While this is the extent of angelic appearances in Chronicles, we
should not necessarily expect Ch to introduce angelic intermediaries in
more instances than he did. Although having had a more advanced
view of angelic intermediary involvement than the Deuteronomist, by
and large Ch only mentioned the angels when they were found in his
Vorlage (43). Yet it is clear that when his sources mentioned angelic
(41) C. NEWSOM, “Angels: In the Old Testamentâ€, Anchor Bible Dictionary
(New York 1992) I, 252.
(42) While this is acknowledged by most commentators, e.g., WILLIAMSON, 1
and 2 Chronicles, 300; W.A.L. ELMSLIE, The Books of Chronicles (Cambridge
1916) 254; E.L. CURTIS – A.A. MADSEN, The Books of Chronicles (Edinburgh
1910, 1976) 409; RUDOLPH Chronikbücher, 261. Japhet argued against such an
understanding because other ‘ambushers’ mentioned in the OT are human
(Ideology, 131). In fact, there is only one other time in the OT where µybram
“ambushers†are mentioned, which hardly holds as proof that in this instance they
must be human (the exact wording µybram “ambushers†(masculine plural Piel
participle) occurs only twice in the OT, here and in Judges 9,25).
(43) Japhet is close to the truth when she wrote that Ch “accepts their [angels’]
existence when found in his sources but makes no additions of his own†(I & II
Chronicles, 381).