ȱ

Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ
ȱ
PANCRATIUSȱC.ȱBEENTJES,ȱUTRECHTȱ

Readingȱ theȱ Bookȱ ofȱ Chronicles,ȱ oneȱ isȱ almostȱ spontaneouslyȱ inclinedȱ
toȱtakeȱintoȱaccountȱtheȱparallelȱnarrativesȱasȱhandedȱdownȱinȱ2Samuelȱ
orȱ 1Ȭ2Kings.ȱ Inȱ actualȱ practice,ȱ itȱ appearsȱ ratherȱ difficultȱ thereforeȱ toȱ
approachȱtheȱnarrativeȱofȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱwithȱanȱopenȱmind.ȱTimeȱandȱ
againȱthereȱisȱaȱthreatȱthatȱtheȱreaderȱisȱdistractedȱfromȱtheȱplotȱofȱtheȱ
Chronicler’sȱnarrativeȱbyȱsnatchesȱorȱreminiscencesȱofȱ2Samuelȱ24.ȱ
Inȱorderȱnotȱtoȱmissȱtheȱspecificȱpoint(s)ȱofȱ1Chroniclesȱ21,ȱfirstȱandȱ
foremostȱweȱwillȱexclusivelyȱconcentrateȱonȱtheȱChronicler’sȱtext,ȱpreȬ
tendingȱnotȱtoȱknowȱtheȱexistenceȱofȱitsȱparentȱtextȱ(I).ȱJustȱthereafter,ȱ
attentionȱwillȱbeȱpaidȱtoȱtheȱmostȱimportantȱdifferencesȱwithȱ2Samuelȱ
24ȱ (II).ȱ Finally,ȱ weȱ willȱ discussȱ theȱ presenceȱ ofȱ angelsȱ inȱ theȱ Bookȱ ofȱ
Chroniclesȱ(III).ȱ

PartȱI:ȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ

1.ȱTheȱNarrativeȱStructureȱofȱ1Chroniclesȱ211ȱ

Theȱ narrativeȱ inȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21ȱ hasȱ beenȱ shapedȱ inȱ aȱ wellȬbuiltȱ way.ȱ
Withȱ respectȱ ofȱ theȱ mainȱ agentsȱ itȱ isȱ markedȱ byȱ threeȱ episodes:ȱ (1)ȱ
David’sȱinitiativeȱtowardsȱaȱcensusȱinȱIsraelȱ(21:1Ȭ6);ȱ(2)ȱGod’sȱreactionȱ
(21:7Ȭ14);ȱ(3)ȱTheȱsceneȱatȱtheȱthreshingȬfloorȱofȱOrnanȱ(21:15Ȭ22:1).ȱ

1.1ȱDavid’sȱinitiativeȱtoȱnumberȱIsraelȱ(1Chrȱ21:1Ȭ6)ȱ

Theȱ openingȱ wordsȱ ofȱ theȱ narrativeȱ immediatelyȱ poseȱ aȱ problemȱ

which,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ theȱ reader’sȱ choice,ȱ couldȱ involveȱ farȬreachingȱ
theologicalȱconsequences.ȱTheȱmatterȱtouchesȱtheȱquestionȱinȱwhatȱwayȱ
theȱHebrewȱnounȱN+#ȱinȱ1Chrȱ21:1ȱshouldȱbeȱrendered.ȱUntilȱrecently,ȱitȱȱ
ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
1ȱȱ TextȱcriticalȱquestionsȱandȱnotesȱareȱamplyȱdiscussedȱinȱMcKenzie,ȱChronicler’sȱUseȱ
55Ȭ58;ȱ67Ȭ71;ȱKnoppers,ȱChroniclesȱ10Ȭ29,ȱ743Ȭ750;ȱKlein,ȱChroniclesȱ414Ȭ417.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
140ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

wentȱwithoutȱsayingȱtoȱconsiderȱitȱaȱproperȱnameȱ(‘Satan’),ȱaȱrenderingȱ
thatȱ isȱ foundȱ inȱ almostȱ everyȱ Bibleȱ editionȱ andȱ commentary.ȱ Lately,ȱ
however,ȱasȱaȱresultȱofȱanȱincreasingȱnumberȱofȱpublicationsȱrelatingȱtoȱ
thisȱsubject,ȱtheȱearlierȱmassiveȱviewȱdisplaysȱsomeȱcracks.ȱ
Inȱ orderȱ toȱ makeȱ aȱ wellȬfoundedȱ decisionȱ inȱ thisȱ matter,ȱ aȱ shortȱ
overviewȱ ofȱ theȱ dataȱ isȱ inȱ order.2ȱ Inȱ theȱ Hebrewȱ Bibleȱ theȱ nounȱ N+#ȱ
occursȱ27ȱtimes,ȱinȱeightȱcasesȱofȱwhichȱitȱmeansȱ‘aȱ(military)ȱadversary’ȱ
(Numȱ22:22,ȱ32;ȱ1Samȱ29:4;ȱ2Samȱ19:23;ȱ1Kgsȱ5:18ȱ[5:4];ȱ11:14,ȱ23,ȱ25).ȱInȱ
Ps.ȱ109:6ȱtheȱnounȱ N+#ȱ denotesȱtheȱpositionȱofȱwhatȱnowadaysȱisȱcalledȱ
‘prosecutor’ȱorȱ‘accuser’.ȱItȱisȱofȱutmostȱimportanceȱtoȱemphasizeȱthatȱinȱ
allȱabovementionedȱtextsȱ N+#ȱoccursȱasȱanȱindefiniteȱnoun.ȱInȱseventeenȱ
biblicalȱ passagesȱ whichȱ withȱ noȱ exceptionȱ allȱ areȱ foundȱ inȱ Jobȱ 1:6Ȭ2:7ȱ
andȱZechȱ3:1Ȭ2,ȱN+#ȱisȱtheȱdesignationȱofȱaȱheavenlyȱbeingȱthatȱinȱGod’sȱ
courtȱofȱjusticeȱinȱheavenȱfunctionsȱasȱtheȱprosecutor.ȱInȱallȱtheseȱsevenȬ
teenȱoccurrencesȱtheȱnounȱN+#ȱisȱprovidedȱwithȱtheȱdefiniteȱarticle.ȱ
Assumingȱthatȱ N+#ȱinȱ1Chrȱ21:1ȱshouldȱdenoteȱsuchȱaȱheavenlyȱbeȬ
ing,ȱoneȱwouldȱexpectȱaȱdefiniteȱnounȱhere,ȱwhichȱisȱnot!ȱTherefore,ȱitȱ
hasȱmuchȱtoȱrecommendȱitȱthatȱ N+#ȱshouldȱbeȱinterpretedȱhereȱneitherȱ
asȱaȱpositionȱ‘prosecutor’ȱ/ȱ‘accuser’ȱnorȱasȱaȱproperȱnameȱ(‘Satan’).ȱAsȱ
anȱ additionalȱ argument,ȱ oneȱ canȱ pointȱ toȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ inȱ nonȬbiblicalȱ
HebrewȱliteratureȱwhichȱisȱofȱconsiderableȱlaterȱdateȱthanȱtheȱBookȱofȱ
Chronicles,ȱ N+#ȱisȱneverȱusedȱasȱaȱproperȱname,ȱbutȱalwaysȱinȱtheȱsenseȱ
ofȱ‘adversary’ȱ(e.g.ȱ1QHȱ4:6;ȱ45:3;ȱ1QSbȱ1:8).ȱAsȱaȱproperȱnameȱitȱisȱonlyȱ
foundȱinȱdocuments,ȱsuchȱasȱJubileesȱ(23:29)ȱandȱAscensioȱMoysisȱ(10:1),ȱ
thatȱwereȱwrittenȱduringȱtheȱpersecutionsȱbyȱAntiochȱIVȱ(ca.ȱ165ȱBCE).ȱ
Inȱ sum,ȱ oneȱ shouldȱ atȱ leastȱ reckonȱ withȱ theȱ possibilityȱ thatȱ 1Chrȱ 21:1ȱ
refersȱ toȱ anȱ unknownȱ (military)ȱ adversary,ȱ whoȱ takesȱ aȱ standȱ againstȱ
David.3ȱ
Theȱ mereȱ factȱ thatȱ Davidȱ orderedȱ toȱ numberȱ Israelȱ isȱ inȱ itselfȱ noȱ
unusualȱ phenomenonȱ inȱ aȱ documentȱ thatȱ isȱ fullȱ ofȱ listsȱ andȱ militaryȱ
registersȱ (1Chroniclesȱ 1Ȭ9;ȱ 23Ȭ26).ȱ Andȱ moreover,ȱ itȱ shouldȱ beȱ pointedȱ
outȱthatȱlaterȱonȱinȱtheȱBookȱofȱChroniclesȱseveralȱkingsȱwillȱcarryȱoutȱaȱ
census:ȱ Solomonȱ (2Chrȱ 2:17Ȭ18);ȱ Joshaphatȱ (2Chrȱ 17:13Ȭ19);ȱ Amaziahȱ
(2Chrȱ25:5);ȱUzziahȱ(2Chrȱ26:11Ȭ13).ȱȱ
Asȱ aȱ matterȱ ofȱ course,ȱ thisȱ bringsȱ usȱ toȱ theȱ crucialȱ question:ȱ whatȱ
exactlyȱwasȱdispleasingȱtoȱGodȱ(21:7)?ȱJohnȱWrightȱtakesȱtheȱviewȱthatȱ
itȱ mustȱ haveȱbeenȱ Joab’sȱ behaviour.4ȱ Joabȱ disobeyedȱ David’sȱ command,ȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
2ȱȱ ȱSeeȱ e.g.ȱ Day,ȱ Adversaryȱ inȱ Heaven;ȱ Breytenbachȱ /ȱ Day,ȱ Satan;ȱ Hamilton,ȱ Satan;ȱ
Evans,ȱIntermediaries;ȱKreuzer,ȱAntagonist.ȱ
3ȱȱ InȱhisȱVerdeutschungȱderȱSchrift,ȱMartinȱBuberȱforȱexampleȱhasȱrenderedȱN+#ȱ‘einȱHinȬ
derer’ȱ(someoneȱwhoȱhinders,ȱobstructs).ȱ
4ȱȱ Wright,ȱInnocenceȱ95Ȭ99;ȱseeȱtheȱreactionȱofȱBailey,ȱDavid’sȱInnocence.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
ȱ Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ 141ȱ

sinceȱ‘heȱdidȱnotȱincludeȱLeviȱandȱBenjaminȱinȱtheȱnumbering,ȱforȱtheȱ
king’sȱ commandȱ wasȱ abhorrentȱ toȱ Joab’ȱ (21:6).5ȱ However,ȱ ifȱ Wright’sȱ
viewȱwouldȱbeȱcorrect,ȱDavid’sȱreactionȱinȱverseȱ8ȱisȱhardlyȱtoȱunderȬ
stand,ȱsinceȱinȱthatȱcaseȱtheȱonlyȱpossibleȱwayȱoutȱwouldȱbeȱthatȱDavidȱ
takesȱtheȱresponsibilityȱforȱJoab’sȱdecisionȱnotȱtoȱincludeȱLeviȱandȱBenȬ
jaminȱinȱtheȱnumbering.ȱDavid’sȱactionȱinȱv.8,ȱhowever,ȱratherȱappearsȱ
toȱreferȱtoȱtheȱnumberingȱasȱsuch,ȱwhichȱwasȱtheȱking’sȱdecision.ȱNowȱ
heȱrealizesȱthatȱitȱwasȱaȱsinȱandȱaȱfoolishȱact.ȱ
Inȱ myȱ view,ȱ theȱ keyȱ toȱ theȱ solutionȱ whatȱ isȱ reallyȱ goingȱ onȱ inȱ
1Chroniclesȱ21ȱisȱwhatȱtheȱnarratorȱmakesȱJoabȱsayȱinȱverseȱ3.ȱHisȱreȬ
sponseȱ toȱ David’sȱ commandȱ consistsȱ ofȱ aȱ wishȱ andȱ threeȱ questionsȱ
whichȱtogetherȱshouldȱbeȱconsideredȱaȱdamȱtoȱpreventȱDavid’sȱplan.ȱ
Joab’sȱ wishȱ –ȱ ‘Mayȱ YHWHȱ increaseȱ theȱ numberȱ ofȱ hisȱ peopleȱ aȱ
hundredfold!’ȱ(v.3)ȱ–ȱcouldȱbeȱinterpretedȱasȱanȱallusionȱtoȱGod’sȱpromȬ
iseȱ toȱ Abrahamȱ (Genȱ 15:5;ȱ 22:17;ȱ cf.ȱ Deutȱ 1:10Ȭ11).ȱ Anotherȱ possibilityȱ
wouldȱbeȱthatȱJoabȱwantsȱtoȱmakeȱitȱclearȱtoȱDavidȱthatȱitȱisȱGod’sȱpeoȬ
pleȱand,ȱasȱaȱconsequence,ȱtheȱcensusȱneedsȱGod’sȱapproval.ȱOrȱwouldȱ
theȱrealȱreasonȱofȱJoab’sȱanswerȱbeȱthatȱtheȱpeopleȱisȱalreadyȱcountlessȱ
(cf.ȱ 1Chrȱ 27:23)?ȱ Finally,ȱ oneȱ couldȱ takeȱ theȱ viewȱ thatȱ Davidȱ forgotȱ toȱ
implementȱtheȱinstructionȱofȱExodȱ30:12Ȭ16ȱ–ȱ‘Whenȱyouȱtakeȱaȱcensusȱ
ofȱtheȱIsraelitesȱtoȱregisterȱthem,ȱatȱregistrationȱallȱofȱthemȱshallȱgiveȱaȱ
ransomȱ forȱ theirȱ livesȱ toȱ YHWH,ȱ soȱ thatȱ noȱ plagueȱ mayȱ comeȱ uponȱ
themȱforȱbeingȱregisteredȱ…’. 6ȱ
Theȱ rhetoricalȱ questionȱ whichȱ isȱ putȱ forwardȱ byȱ Joabȱ –ȱ ‘Areȱ theyȱ
not,ȱ myȱ lordȱ theȱ king,ȱ allȱ ofȱ themȱ myȱ lord’sȱ servants?’ȱ –ȱ accentuatesȱ
thatȱ aȱ censusȱ isȱ needless,ȱ sinceȱ Davidȱ canȱ ofȱ courseȱ dependȱ onȱ everyȱ
oneȱinȱhisȱkingdom.ȱSubsequentȱtoȱhisȱrhetoricalȱquestion,ȱJoabȱformuȬ
latesȱ twoȱ sharpȱ andȱ concreteȱ questionsȱ –ȱ ‘Whyȱ thenȱ shouldȱ myȱ lordȱ
requireȱ this?ȱ Whyȱ shouldȱ heȱ bringȱ guiltȱ onȱ Israel?’.ȱ Theȱ notionȱ ‘guilt’ȱ
(hm#))ȱisȱaȱlate,ȱpostȬexilicȱHebrewȱwordȱ(Levȱ4:3;ȱ5:24,ȱ26;ȱ22:16;ȱEsraȱ
9:6,ȱ7,ȱ13,ȱ15;ȱ10:10,ȱ19)ȱwhichȱinȱtheȱBookȱofȱChroniclesȱwithoutȱexcepȬ
tionȱ occursȱ onlyȱ inȱ theȱ soȬcalledȱ ‘Sondergut’ȱ passagesȱ (1Chrȱ 21:3;ȱ 2Chrȱ
24:18;ȱ28:10,ȱ133;ȱ33:23).7ȱȱ
Theȱ notionȱ hm#)ȱ refersȱ toȱ guiltȱ whichȱ canȱ onlyȱ beȱ annulledȱ byȱ
atonement.ȱJoabȱthereforeȱisȱfacingȱDavidȱwithȱtheȱconsequencesȱofȱhisȱ
plan:ȱ theȱ decisionȱ ofȱ oneȱ person,ȱ viz.ȱ Kingȱ David,ȱ willȱ boundȱ toȱ haveȱ
repercussionsȱonȱtheȱpeopleȱofȱIsraelȱasȱaȱwhole,ȱasȱinȱLevȱ4:3.ȱDavid,ȱ
however,ȱwantsȱtoȱpressȱhome.ȱSoȱJoabȱdepartedȱandȱwentȱthroughoutȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
5ȱȱ Unlessȱ otherwiseȱ stated,ȱ biblicalȱ quotationsȱ areȱ fromȱ Newȱ Revisedȱ Standardȱ VerȬ
sion,ȱOxfordȱ1995.ȱInsteadȱofȱ‘theȱLORD’,ȱhowever,ȱweȱhaveȱrenderedȱ‘YHWH’.ȱ
6ȱȱ SeeȱFlaviusȱJosephus,ȱAntiquitatesȱJudaicae,ȱVII,ȱ318.ȱ
7ȱȱ SeeȱKellerman,ȱhm#)ȱ429Ȭ437.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
142ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

allȱIsraelȱ(1Chrȱ21:4).ȱTheȱrouteȱdescriptionȱofȱJoab’sȱinspectionȱcontainsȱ
theȱcollocationȱ‘fromȱBeerȬShebaȱtoȱDan’ȱ(1Chrȱ21:2)ȱwhichȱisȱanȱinverȬ
sionȱofȱtheȱcurrentȱbiblicalȱformulaȱ‘fromȱDanȱtoȱBeerȬSheba’ȱ(Judgȱ21:1;ȱ
1Samȱ 3:20;ȱ 2Samȱ 3:10;ȱ 17:11;ȱ 24:2,ȱ 15;ȱ 1Kgsȱ 5:5).ȱ Thisȱ latterȱ collocationȱ
doesȱgoȱbackȱnotȱearlierȱasȱtheȱexilicȱperiodȱandȱisȱtoȱbeȱconsideredȱanȱ
idealizedȱ descriptionȱ ofȱ Israel’sȱ territory.8ȱ Theȱ factȱ thatȱ theȱ Chroniclerȱ
hasȱ reversedȱ theȱ classicalȱ orderȱ willȱ haveȱ toȱ doȱ withȱ theȱ geographicalȱ
andȱ politicalȱ situationȱ ofȱ hisȱ days.ȱ Inȱ thatȱ timeȱ onlyȱ BeerȬShebaȱ wasȱ
partȱofȱtheȱPersianȱprovinceȱJehud;ȱDanȱinȱfactȱwasȱobservedȱasȱaȱsortȱofȱ
preȬhistoricȱentity.ȱThatȱisȱtheȱreasonȱwhyȱinȱ2Chrȱ19:4ȱitȱisȱsaid:ȱ‘fromȱ
BeerȬShebaȱ toȱ theȱ hillȱ countryȱ ofȱ Ephraim’,ȱ sinceȱ thatȱ wasȱ theȱ factualȱ
borderȱofȱJudahȱinȱtheȱChronicler’sȱtime.ȱ
OnȱhisȱreturnȱinȱJerusalem,ȱJoabȱgaveȱtheȱtotalȱcountȱofȱtheȱpeopleȱ
toȱ David.ȱ Onȱ theȱ narrativeȱ levelȱ itȱ isȱ reportedȱ thatȱ Joabȱ hadȱ notȱ inȬ
cludedȱ Leviȱ andȱ Benjaminȱ inȱ theȱ numbering,ȱ forȱ theȱ king’sȱ commandȱ
wasȱ abhorrentȱ toȱ himȱ (1Chrȱ 21:6).ȱ Joab’sȱ decisionȱ notȱ toȱ numberȱ theȱ
tribeȱofȱLeviȱcanȱbeȱelucidatedȱfromȱtheȱBookȱofȱNumbers:ȱ
‘Theȱ Levites,ȱ however,ȱ wereȱ notȱ numberedȱ byȱ theirȱ ancestralȱ tribeȱ alongȱ
withȱthem.ȱYHWHȱhadȱsaidȱtoȱMoses:ȱOnlyȱtheȱtribeȱofȱLeviȱyouȱshallȱnotȱ
enrol,ȱ andȱ youȱ shallȱ notȱ takeȱ aȱ censusȱ ofȱ themȱ withȱ theȱ otherȱ Israelites’ȱ
(Numȱ1:47Ȭ49).ȱ
‘Justȱ asȱ YHWHȱ hadȱ commandedȱ Moses,ȱ theȱ Levitesȱ wereȱ notȱ enrolledȱ
amongȱtheȱotherȱIsraelites’ȱ(Numȱ2:33).ȱ
However,ȱitȱisȱhardȱtoȱunderstandȱwhyȱtheȱChroniclerȱmakesȱJoabȱnotȱ
toȱnumberȱtheȱtribeȱofȱBenjamin.ȱTheȱmostȱobviousȱexplanationȱwouldȱ
beȱ thatȱ thisȱ nonȬnumberingȱ shouldȱ beȱ relatedȱ toȱ theȱ holyȱ statusȱ ofȱ
GibeonȱwhichȱinȱthisȱnarrativeȱisȱstillȱtheȱculticȱcentreȱofȱIsrael:ȱ
‘Theȱ tabernacleȱ ofȱ YHWHȱ whichȱ Mosesȱ hadȱ madeȱ inȱ theȱ wilderness,ȱ andȱ
theȱaltarȱofȱburntȬofferingȱwereȱthereȱatȱthatȱtime’ȱ(1Chrȱ21:29).ȱ
Anotherȱplausibleȱinferenceȱwhichȱinȱnoȱwayȱconflictsȱwithȱtheȱformerȱ
one,ȱ wouldȱ beȱ thatȱ Joab’sȱ nonȬnumberingȱ ofȱ theȱ tribeȱ Benjaminȱ preȬ
ventsȱ Jerusalem,ȱ whichȱ isȱ aȱ cityȱ onȱ theȱ boundaryȱ ofȱ Benjaminȱ andȱ
Judah,ȱfromȱbeingȱ‘contaminated’.ȱForȱatȱtheȱveryȱendȱofȱthisȱnarrativeȱ
(1Chrȱ22:1)ȱitȱisȱpreciselyȱJerusalemȱthatȱwillȱbeȱpushedȱforwardȱasȱtheȱ
futureȱsiteȱofȱtheȱcult.ȱInȱthisȱrespectȱitȱisȱabsolutelyȱnoȱcoincidenceȱthatȱ
theȱChroniclerȱinȱhisȱgenealogyȱofȱBenjaminȱearlierȱinȱhisȱbookȱ(ChroniȬ
clesȱ 8Ȭ9)ȱ hasȱ explicitlyȱ paidȱ attentionȱ toȱ bothȱ Gibeonȱ (8:29;ȱ 9:35)ȱ andȱ
Jerusalemȱ(9:3Ȭ34).ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
8ȱȱ Schoors,ȱBersebaȱ119Ȭ129.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
ȱ Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ 143ȱ

1.2ȱGod’sȱreactionȱ(1Chrȱ21:7Ȭ14)ȱ

Thisȱ middleȱ sectionȱ ofȱ theȱ narrativeȱ isȱ ofȱ aȱ highlyȱ dramaticȱ calibre.ȱ Itȱ
startsȱwithȱaȱnegativeȱtone:ȱ‘Godȱwasȱdispleasedȱaboutȱthisȱthing’ȱ(v.7).ȱ
Inȱtheory,ȱ‘thisȱthing’ȱcouldȱreferȱtoȱJoab’sȱdecisionȱnotȱtoȱnumberȱLeviȱ
andȱBenjaminȱ(v.6),ȱasȱisȱfavouredȱbyȱsomeȱscholars.9ȱTheȱsequelȱofȱtheȱ
narrative,ȱhowever,ȱprovesȱbeyondȱanyȱdoubtȱthatȱtheȱcollocationȱ‘thisȱ
thing’ȱinȱv.7ȱmustȱreferȱtoȱDavid’sȱcommandȱtoȱnumberȱIsrael,ȱwhichȱinȱ
factȱisȱconfirmedȱbyȱDavid’sȱconfession:ȱ‘IȱhaveȱsinnedȱgreatlyȱinȱthatȱIȱ
haveȱdoneȱthisȱthing’ȱ(v.8).ȱ
WhereasȱtheȱreaderȱofȱtheȱBookȱofȱChroniclesȱmeanwhileȱisȱaccusȬ
tomedȱthatȱDavidȱattacksȱ(hkn)ȱpeoplesȱandȱkingsȱnearbyȱ(1Chrȱ18:1Ȭ12;ȱ
20:1Ȭ7),ȱnowȱitȱisȱGodȱwhoȱstrikesȱ(hkn)ȱIsraelȱ(1Chrȱ21:7;ȱcf.ȱ13:10).ȱQuiteȱ
aȱ fewȱ commentatorsȱ holdȱ theȱ viewȱ thatȱ theȱ phraseȱ ‘heȱ [God]ȱ struckȱ
Israel’ȱanticipatesȱtheȱpestilenceȱasȱrecordedȱinȱ21:14ȱandȱshouldȱthereȬ
foreȱ beȱ characterizedȱ asȱ aȱ ‘prolepticȱ summary’.10ȱ Apartȱ fromȱ theȱ factȱ
thatȱtheȱnarrativeȱinȱthatȱcaseȱwouldȱdisplayȱaȱratherȱcomplicatedȱflashȱ
backȱ layer,ȱ itȱ shouldȱ furthermoreȱ beȱ emphasizedȱ thatȱ ifȱ itȱ wouldȱ beȱ
consideredȱ aȱ prolepticȱ summaryȱ indeed,ȱ verseȱ 7ȱ isȱ unlinkedȱ fromȱ theȱ
previousȱepisodeȱ(21:1Ȭ6).ȱAtȱtheȱsameȱtimeȱtheȱquestionȱcanȱbeȱraisedȱ
whatȱmightȱstillȱbeȱtheȱfunctionȱofȱverseȱ17ȱasȱrelatedȱtoȱverseȱ8.ȱ
TheȱactionȱofȱGadȱ(21:9Ȭ13)ȱspeaksȱagainstȱsuchȱaȱprolepticȱfunction,ȱ
too.ȱAccordingȱtoȱtheȱcommonȱpatternȱofȱpropheticȱspeech,ȱinȱthatȱcaseȱ
Gadȱ shouldȱ firstȱ haveȱ putȱ forwardȱ anȱ accusationȱ (‘Sinceȱ youȱ didȱ thisȱ
andȱthatȱ…’),ȱfollowedȱbyȱanȱannouncementȱofȱjudgmentȱ/ȱpunishmentȱ
(‘Thereforeȱ…’).ȱInȱ1Chrȱ21:7Ȭ13,ȱhowever,ȱthereȱisȱnoȱaccusation,ȱsinceȱ
thisȱaspectȱhasȱalreadyȱbeenȱsetȱinȱmotionȱbyȱDavidȱinȱhisȱconfessionȱofȱ
guiltȱ(21:8).ȱAndȱitȱisȱnotȱbyȱaccidentȱthatȱtheȱking’sȱexclamationȱhasȱgotȱ
aȱ specialȱ layȬoutȱ inȱ theȱ Masoreticȱ text.ȱ Theȱ verseȱ isȱencompassedȱ byȱ aȱ
petucha,ȱ byȱ meansȱ ofȱ whichȱ theseȱ dramaticȱ wordsȱ ofȱ Davidȱ areȱ preȬ
sentedȱasȱaȱseparateȱparagraphȱandȱgetȱaȱspecialȱstatusȱwithinȱtheȱnarȬ
rative.ȱ
TheȱseerȱwhoȱisȱsentȱtoȱDavidȱbyȱYHWHȱisȱcalledȱGad,ȱaȱnameȱthatȱ
ironicallyȱ meansȱ ‘luck’.ȱ Heȱ isȱ alsoȱ metȱ inȱ 1Chrȱ 29:29ȱ andȱ 2Chrȱ 29:25,ȱ
alwaysȱaccompaniedȱbyȱtheȱtitleȱhzxȱ(‘seer’)ȱwhichȱisȱoneȱofȱtheȱChroniȬ
cler’sȱ favouriteȱ nouns.11ȱ God’sȱ orderȱ atȱ Gad’sȱ addressȱ isȱ characterizedȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
9ȱȱ E.g.ȱWright,ȱInnocenceȱ98Ȭ99.ȱ
10ȱȱ E.g.ȱDeȱVries,ȱChroniclesȱ171;ȱWilliamson,ȱChroniclesȱ145;ȱMcKenzie,ȱChroniclesȱ173;ȱ
Dirksen,ȱChroniclesȱ259;ȱKlein,ȱChroniclesȱ422.ȱ
11ȱȱ FromȱtheȱseventeenȱtimesȱtheȱnounȱoccursȱinȱtheȱHebrewȱBible,ȱitȱisȱfoundȱtenȱtimesȱ
(=ȱ60%)ȱinȱtheȱBookȱofȱChronicles.ȱThisȱisȱdueȱtoȱtheȱfactȱthatȱinȱenumerationsȱofȱproȬ
pheticȱactivitiesȱtheȱChroniclerȱavoidsȱtoȱsimultaneouslyȱapplyȱtheȱsameȱtitleȱtoȱtwoȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
144ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

byȱ aȱ deliberateȱ retarding.ȱ Theȱ seerȱ presentsȱ threeȱ optionsȱ toȱ theȱ king,ȱ
oneȱofȱwhichȱheȱhasȱtoȱchooseȱ(v.9).ȱHowever,ȱitȱisȱjustȱinȱaȱlaterȱstageȱ
(v.12)ȱ thatȱ Davidȱ isȱ toldȱ whatȱ thoseȱ threeȱ optionsȱ reallyȱ are.ȱ Theyȱ areȱ
submittedȱ toȱ himȱ inȱ aȱ ratherȱ schematicȱ form;ȱ thisȱ concernsȱ bothȱ theȱ
temporalȱchainȱ(threeȱyearsȱ–ȱthreeȱmonthsȱ–ȱthreeȱdays)ȱandȱtheȱclassiȬ
calȱtripletȱ(famineȱ–ȱdevastationȱ–ȱpestilence).ȱWhereasȱtheȱfirstȱoptionȱ
isȱexpressedȱveryȱshortlyȱ(fourȱwords),ȱtheȱsecondȱoneȱhasȱnineȱwords,ȱ
theȱthirdȱevenȱthirteen.ȱFromȱtheȱperspectiveȱofȱtheȱnarrativeȱtechniqueȱ
thisȱisȱnoȱsurprise,ȱsinceȱtheȱthirdȱoptionȱwillȱ–ȱbeȱitȱinȱanȱindirectȱwayȱ–ȱ
actuallyȱbeȱchosenȱbyȱDavid.ȱ
Theȱ secondȱ andȱ thirdȱ optionsȱ haveȱ beenȱ linkedȱ togetherȱ withȱ theȱ
helpȱ ofȱ theȱ nounȱ ‘sword’:ȱ ‘theȱ swordȱ ofȱ yourȱ enemiesȱ /ȱ theȱ swordȱ ofȱ
YHWH’.ȱHereȱweȱmeetȱtheȱonlyȱoccurrenceȱinȱtheȱentireȱHebrewȱBibleȱ
inȱ whichȱ pestilenceȱ isȱ calledȱ ‘theȱ swordȱ ofȱ YHWH’.ȱ Itȱ isȱ alsoȱ strikingȱ
thatȱ theȱ pestilenceȱ isȱ personifiedȱ asȱ ‘theȱ angelȱ ofȱ YHWHȱ destroyingȱ
throughoutȱ allȱ theȱ territoryȱ ofȱ Israel’ȱ (v.12).ȱ Theȱ verbalȱ formȱ ‘destroyȬ
ing’ȱ(mašh̜ît)ȱisȱidenticalȱtoȱExodȱ12:13.ȱ23,ȱwhereȱitȱhasȱaȱbearingȱonȱtheȱ
finalȱplagueȱofȱEgypt.12ȱ
David’sȱ answerȱ onȱ God’sȱ choiceȱ betweenȱ ‘theȱ swordȱ ofȱ theȱ eneȬ
mies’ȱandȱ‘theȱswordȱofȱYHWH’ȱisȱarticulatedȱinȱaȱparticularȱshape:ȱ
‘LetȱmeȱfallȱintoȱtheȱhandsȱofȱYHWH,ȱ
forȱhisȱmercyȱisȱveryȱgreat;ȱ
butȱletȱmeȱnotȱfallȱintoȱhumanȱhands’.13ȱ
Inȱ thisȱ chiastiallycȱ structuredȱ answerȱ (toȱ fallȱ –ȱ handȱ /ȱ handsȱ –ȱ toȱ fall)ȱ
Davidȱ expresslyȱaskedȱ toȱ excludeȱ theȱ secondȱ option,ȱ whereasȱ heȱ doesȱ
notȱmakeȱaȱchoiceȱbetweenȱtheȱfirstȱandȱtheȱthirdȱoption.ȱThusȱYHWHȱ
sentȱaȱpestilenceȱonȱIsraelȱtoȱtheȱeffectȱthatȱseventyȱthousandȱpersonsȱ–ȱ
noȱdoubtȱaȱsymbolicȱnumberȱ–ȱwereȱkilledȱ(v.14).ȱ
Inȱfact,ȱtheȱnarrativeȱthusȱfarȱisȱstructuredȱasȱaȱkindȱofȱgeographicalȱ
inclusion.ȱ Itȱ startedȱ withȱ David’sȱ commandȱ toȱ numberȱ Israelȱ (v.1)ȱ andȱ
theȱfinalȱeffectȱofȱitȱisȱthatȱYHWHȱsentȱaȱpestilenceȱonȱIsraelȱ(v.14).ȱȱ
ȱ
ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
orȱthreeȱpersons.ȱTherefore,ȱinȱ1Chrȱ29:29ȱSamuelȱisȱcalledȱ h)rȱ(‘seer’),ȱNathanȱ )ybnȱ
(‘prophet’),ȱandȱGadȱ hzxȱ(‘seer’).ȱInȱ2Chrȱ9:29,ȱIddoȱisȱcalledȱ hzx,ȱsinceȱheȱoccursȱinȱ
anȱenumerationȱwithȱNathanȱ()ybn),ȱwhereasȱtheȱsameȱIddoȱinȱ2Chrȱ13:22ȱisȱentitledȱ
)ybn,ȱasȱheȱisȱtheȱonlyȱoneȱmentionedȱthere.ȱSeeȱSchniedewind,ȱWordȱ31Ȭ54.ȱ
12ȱȱ InȱtheȱBookȱofȱChroniclesȱtheȱverbȱ tx#ȱ(‘toȱdestroy’)ȱoccursȱsixteenȱtimes,ȱbyȱfarȱtheȱ
mostȱ(thirteenȱtimes)ȱinȱtheȱChronicler’sȱownȱmaterialȱ(Sondergut).ȱ
13ȱȱ AnȱechoȱofȱthisȱpassageȱisȱfoundȱinȱSir.ȱ2:18.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
ȱ Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ 145ȱ

1.3ȱTheȱsceneȱatȱtheȱthreshingȬfloorȱofȱOrnanȱ
(1Chrȱ21:15Ȭ22:1).ȱ

Inȱv.15,ȱtheȱnarrativeȱzoomsȱinȱonȱJerusalem,ȱspecificallyȱonȱtheȱthreshȬ
ingȬfloorȱofȱOrnan,ȱwhichȱisȱtheȱsceneȱwhereȱtheȱremainderȱofȱtheȱstoryȱ
willȱtakeȱplace.ȱAsȱsoonȱasȱYHWHȱsawȱtheȱangelȱstartingȱhisȱmissionȱofȱ
destruction,ȱheȱrepentedȱ(Genȱ6:6;ȱExodȱ32:14).ȱWhereasȱtheȱChroniclerȱ
immediatelyȱinformsȱhisȱreadersȱthatȱYHWHȱputsȱaȱstopȱtoȱtheȱangelȱofȱ
deathȱ(v.15),ȱisȱDavidȱstillȱinȱaȱstateȱofȱuncertainty.ȱHeȱseesȱ‘theȱangelȱofȱ
YHWHȱstandingȱbetweenȱearthȱandȱheaven,ȱandȱinȱhisȱhandȱaȱdrawnȱ
swordȱstretchedȱoutȱoverȱJerusalemȱ(v.16)14.ȱNoȱdoubtȱthisȱisȱaȱdeliberȬ
ateȱreferenceȱtoȱJoshȱ5:13Ȭ14,ȱwhichȱalsoȱpresentsȱaȱhierosȱlogos,ȱrelatingȱ
toȱtheȱerectionȱofȱaȱculticȱsite.15ȱNotȱuntilȱv.27ȱtheȱthreateningȱangelȱwillȱ
putȱhisȱswordȱintoȱitsȱsheathȱandȱheȱisȱfearedȱbyȱDavidȱtillȱtheȱendȱofȱ
theȱ narrativeȱ (v.30).ȱ Itȱ thereforeȱ isȱ theȱ angelȱ ofȱ YHWHȱ whoȱ asȱ anȱ imȬ
portantȱagentȱ–ȱtogetherȱwithȱtheȱgeographicalȱnotionȱofȱ‘theȱthreshingȬ
floorȱ ofȱ Ornan’ȱ –ȱ constitutesȱ anȱ inclusioȱ inȱ theȱ finalȱ partȱ ofȱ theȱ narraȬ
tive.16ȱ
Thatȱ Davidȱ isȱ accompaniedȱ byȱ theȱ eldersȱ isȱ anȱ indicationȱ thatȱ theȱ
situationȱ isȱ tense.ȱ Forȱ inȱ theȱ Bookȱ ofȱ Chroniclesȱ theȱ eldersȱ doȱ notȱ freȬ
quentlyȱ enterȱ onȱ theȱ scene.ȱ Itȱ canȱ hardlyȱ beȱ aȱ coincidence,ȱ however,ȱ
thatȱtheyȱareȱneverȱabsentȱatȱimportantȱpoliticalȱ(1Chrȱ11:3;ȱ2Chrȱ10:6,ȱ8,ȱ
13)ȱ andȱ culticȱ momentsȱ (1Chrȱ 15:25;ȱ 21:16;ȱ 2Chrȱ 5:2,ȱ 4;ȱ 34:29).ȱ Theȱ inȬ
formationȱ thatȱ Davidȱ andȱ theȱ eldersȱ areȱ clothedȱ inȱ sackclothȱ notȱ onlyȱ
highlightsȱtheȱdramaticȱeffectȱofȱtheȱnarrative,ȱbutȱisȱalsoȱemphasizingȱ
theȱseriousȱnatureȱofȱtheȱsituation.ȱ
Forȱ theȱ secondȱ timeȱ withinȱ theȱ narrativeȱ Davidȱ appealsȱ toȱ Godȱ
(v.17).ȱ Justȱasȱ theȱ firstȱ timeȱ (v.8),ȱitȱ isȱaȱ confessionȱ ofȱ guilt;ȱ butȱ nowȱ itȱ
turnsȱoutȱtoȱbeȱaȱsupplication.ȱTheȱrhetoricalȱquestionȱwhichȱopensȱhisȱ
plea,ȱ laysȱ theȱ emphasisȱ exactlyȱ whereȱ itȱ hasȱ toȱ be:ȱ ‘Wasȱ itȱ notȱ Iȱ [notȱ
Joab!]ȱwhoȱgaveȱtheȱcommandȱtoȱnumberȱtheȱpeople?’.ȱAndȱinȱtheȱnextȱ
statementȱtooȱheȱblamesȱhimself:ȱ‘ItȱisȱIȱwhoȱhaveȱsinnedȱandȱdoneȱveryȱ
wickedly’,ȱusingȱtheȱsameȱverbȱ)+xȱ(‘toȱsin’)ȱasȱinȱv.8.17ȱThenȱattentionȱ
shiftsȱ toȱ thoseȱ who,ȱ evenȱ thoughȱ innocent,ȱ haveȱ tremendouslyȱ beenȱ
struck.ȱ Thisȱ hasȱ beenȱ doneȱ withȱ theȱ helpȱ ofȱ aȱ metaphor:ȱ ‘theseȱ sheep,ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
14ȱȱ Theȱwordingȱ‘withȱhisȱdrawnȱswordȱinȱhisȱhand’ȱ(v.16)ȱundoubtedlyȱremindsȱofȱtheȱ
collocationȱ‘theȱmenȱwhoȱdrewȱtheȱsword’,ȱwhichȱoccursȱtwiceȱinȱv.5.ȱȱ
15ȱȱ Theȱphraseȱ‘withȱhisȱdrawnȱswordȱinȱhisȱhand’ȱisȱalsoȱfoundȱinȱNumȱ22:23,ȱ31.ȱ
16ȱȱ Theȱnounȱ‘angel’ȱisȱfoundȱinȱ21:15ȱ[3ȱx],ȱ16,ȱ18,ȱ20,ȱ27,ȱandȱ30;ȱtheȱnounȱ‘threshingȬ
floor’ȱoccursȱinȱ21:15,ȱ18,ȱ21,ȱ22,ȱandȱ28.ȱ
17ȱȱ Theȱ notionȱ ofȱ ‘Davidȱ asȱ repentantȱ sinner’ȱ hasȱ amplyȱ beenȱ describedȱ byȱ Knoppers,ȱ
Images.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
146ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

whatȱhaveȱtheyȱdone?’.ȱAtȱthatȱveryȱmoment,ȱtheȱnarratorȱforȱtheȱfirstȱ
timeȱ putsȱ theȱ Holyȱ Nameȱ (‘YHWH’)ȱ intoȱ David’sȱ mouth,ȱ whichȱ isȱ noȱ
coincidenceȱofȱcourse,ȱsinceȱitȱoccursȱatȱaȱveryȱstrategicȱmomentȱofȱtheȱ
storyȱandȱisȱalsoȱaccompaniedȱbyȱtheȱpersonalȱaddressȱ‘myȱGod’.ȱ
Asȱ farȱ asȱ Hebrewȱ syntaxȱ isȱ concerned,ȱ itȱ strikesȱ theȱ eyeȱ thatȱ theȱ
Chroniclerȱ appliesȱ aȱ grammaticalȱ constructȱ h¬r¾‘aȱ har¾‘çtÎȱ (infinitiveȱ
absoluteȱ +ȱ finiteȱ verbalȱ form)ȱ whichȱ heȱ usuallyȱ triesȱ toȱ avoidȱ inȱ hisȱ
work,ȱ evenȱ ifȱ itȱ isȱ foundȱ inȱ hisȱ Vorlage.ȱ Theȱ questionȱ presentsȱ itselfȱ
whetherȱtheȱinfinitiveȱabsoluteȱh¬r¾‘aȱshouldȱnotȱbeȱconsideredȱanȱerrorȱ
inȱ writingȱ ofȱ h¬rç‘èȱ (‘theȱ shepherd’).ȱ Forȱ inȱ thatȱ case,ȱ theȱ Chronicler’sȱ
textȱnotȱonlyȱwouldȱpresentȱaȱmuchȱmoreȱbalancedȱdoubleȱparallelism,ȱ
butȱalsoȱofferȱaȱperfectȱmetaphorȱinȱtheȱsecondȱhalf:ȱ
Iȱcommandedȱtoȱnumberȱtheȱpeopleȱ//ȱIȱhaveȱsinned,ȱ
I,ȱtheȱshepherd,ȱhaveȱdoneȱwickedlyȱ//ȱbutȱtheseȱsheep,ȱwhatȱhaveȱȱ
theyȱdone?18ȱ
Andȱ indeed,ȱ theȱ variantȱ readingȱ h¬rç‘èȱ (‘theȱ shepherd’)ȱ hasȱ beenȱ
documentedȱinȱtheȱfirstȱSamuelȱScrollȱfromȱQumranȱ(4QSama),ȱandȱhasȱ
alsoȱbeenȱhandedȱdownȱbyȱtheȱGreekȱtranslationȱofȱ2Samȱ24:17,ȱwhichȱ
isȱratherȱdissimilarȱfromȱtheȱMasoreticȱtext.ȱ
David’sȱsupplicationȱ–ȱ‘Letȱyourȱhand,ȱIȱpray,ȱYHWHȱmyȱGod,ȱbeȱ
againstȱmeȱandȱagainstȱmyȱfather’sȱhouse,ȱbutȱdoȱnotȱletȱyourȱpeopleȱbeȱ
plagued!’ȱ(v.17b)ȱ–ȱharksȱbackȱtoȱv.13,ȱwhereȱtheȱmotifȱofȱ‘God’sȱhand’ȱ
dominatedȱDavid’sȱchoice:ȱ‘LetȱmeȱfallȱintoȱtheȱhandsȱofȱYHWH,ȱforȱhisȱ
mercyȱisȱveryȱgreat’.ȱOneȱshouldȱalsoȱnoticeȱtheȱrhetoricalȱdeviceȱ‘yourȱ
people’,ȱwhichȱoftenȱinȱtheȱHebrewȱBibleȱisȱspecificallyȱusedȱtoȱputȱGodȱ
onȱtheȱspot.ȱ
Theȱ reactionȱ toȱ David’sȱ confessionȱ ofȱ guiltȱ andȱ hisȱ supplicationȱ isȱ
quiteȱremarkable.ȱForȱaȱnewȱpatternȱofȱcommunicationȱshowsȱup,ȱsinceȱ
itȱisȱtheȱangelȱofȱYHWHȱwhomȱisȱgivenȱtheȱtaskȱofȱinstructingȱGad,ȱwhoȱ
inȱhisȱpartȱhasȱtoȱdeliverȱtheȱmessageȱtoȱDavidȱthatȱheȱshouldȱerectȱanȱ
altarȱtoȱYHWHȱonȱtheȱthreshingȬfloorȱofȱOrnanȱtheȱJebusiteȱ(v.18).ȱWithȱ
theȱphraseȱ‘DavidȱwentȱupȱfollowingȱGad’sȱinstructions,ȱwhichȱheȱhadȱ
spokenȱ inȱ YHWH’sȱ name’ȱ (v.19),ȱ theȱ authorȱ createsȱ theȱ opportunityȱ
meanwhileȱ toȱ informȱ hisȱ readersȱ whatȱ isȱ enactingȱ onȱ theȱ threshingȬ
floor:ȱ‘Ornanȱturnedȱandȱsawȱtheȱangel’ȱ(v.20a).ȱȱ
Theȱ lapidaryȱ phraseȱ ‘Ornanȱ continuedȱ toȱ threshȱ wheat’ȱ (v.20b)ȱ isȱ
notȱasȱharmlessȱasȱitȱlooks,ȱbecauseȱitȱcallsȱtoȱmindȱtheȱstoryȱofȱGideonȱ
inȱJudgȱ6:11,ȱwhichȱ–ȱjustȱasȱJoshȱ5:13Ȭ14ȱ–ȱisȱpartȱofȱaȱhierosȱlogosȱtoo.ȱ
Andȱ theȱ collocationȱ ‘atȱ itsȱ fullȱ price’ȱ ()lm Pskb)ȱ inȱ 1Chrȱ 21:22,ȱ 24ȱ Ȭȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
18ȱȱ AsȱtoȱtheȱquiteȱcomplicatedȱtextualȱhistoryȱofȱtheȱChronicler’sȱVorlageȱinȱSamuel,ȱseeȱ
Klein,ȱ Chroniclesȱ 28Ȭ30;ȱ Knoppers,ȱ Chroniclesȱ 1Ȭ9,ȱ 55Ȭ71;ȱ Pisano,ȱ Additionsȱ 61Ȭ66;ȱ
Rofé,ȱ4QSama;ȱUlrich,ȱQumranȱTextȱ86Ȭ93;ȱ156Ȭ159.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
ȱ Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ 147ȱ

whichȱ isȱ foundȱ onlyȱ oneȱ moreȱ timeȱ inȱ theȱ Hebrewȱ Bibleȱ (Genȱ 23:9)ȱ –ȱ
refersȱtoȱaȱholyȱsite,ȱtoo.ȱItȱisȱtheȱstoryȱthatȱAbrahamȱbuysȱtheȱcaveȱofȱ
MachpelaȱtoȱburyȱhisȱwifeȱSarah.ȱ
Inȱfact,ȱallȱkindȱofȱthingsȱappearȱtoȱhappenȱsimultaneously,ȱsinceȱallȱ
agentsȱhaveȱbeenȱsituatedȱinȱtheȱneighbourhoodȱofȱtheȱthreshingȬfloor.ȱ
Theȱ angelȱ ofȱ YHWHȱ isȱ thereȱ allȱ theȱ time,ȱ sinceȱ hisȱ appearanceȱ isȱ alȬ
readyȱmentionedȱinȱv.15.ȱOrnanȱisȱatȱworkȱthere;ȱDavidȱwhoȱaccordingȱ
toȱv.16ȱmustȱhaveȱbeenȱnearbyȱisȱonȱhisȱway.ȱ
Finally,ȱ Davidȱ builtȱ anȱ altarȱ toȱ YHWHȱ onȱ theȱ threshingȬfloorȱ andȱ
hasȱ thereforeȱ carriedȱ outȱ God’sȱ orderȱ (v.18).ȱ Then,ȱ forȱ theȱ veryȱ firstȱ
timeȱ inȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21,ȱ YHWHȱ himselfȱ respondsȱ inȱ aȱ directȱ way:ȱ ‘Heȱ
answeredȱhimȱ[David]ȱwithȱfireȱfromȱheavenȱonȱtheȱaltar’ȱ(v.26).19ȱOnlyȱ
nowȱYHWHȱcommandsȱtheȱangelȱtoȱputȱhisȱswordȱbackȱintoȱhisȱsheathȱ
(v.27).ȱButȱevenȱthenȱDavidȱcontinuesȱtoȱbeȱafraidȱofȱtheȱangel’sȱswordȱ
(v.30).ȱ

PartȱII:ȱ2Samuelȱ24ȱ

2.1ȱTheȱcontextȱ

Thereȱ isȱ aȱ hugeȱ contrastȱ withȱ respectȱ ofȱ theȱ contextȱ ofȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21ȱ
andȱ 2Samuelȱ 24.ȱ Theȱ openingȱ ofȱ 2Samuelȱ 24ȱ –ȱ ‘Againȱ theȱ angerȱ ofȱ
YHWHȱ…’ȱ–ȱhasȱaȱbearingȱonȱanȱearlierȱnarrative,ȱinȱwhichȱGod’sȱanȬ
gerȱwasȱatȱissueȱtooȱ(2Samuelȱ21).ȱAsȱaȱresultȱofȱthisȱveryȱreferral,ȱtheȱ
literalȱ andȱ theologicalȱ functionȱ ofȱ 2Samuelȱ 24ȱ isȱ completelyȱ differentȱ
fromȱtheȱoneȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21.ȱȱ
Whereasȱ2Samuelȱ24ȱinȱ factȱ isȱ aȱkindȱ ofȱ anȱ appendix,ȱtheȱ narrativeȱofȱ
1Chroniclesȱ 21ȱ onȱ theȱ contraryȱ isȱ ofȱ outmostȱ importance,ȱ sinceȱ itȱ isȱ theȱ
introductionȱtoȱaȱsubstantialȱsectionȱofȱtheȱBookȱofȱChroniclesȱrelatingȱtoȱ
variousȱ aspectsȱ ofȱ theȱ futureȱ Temple.ȱ Theȱ narrativeȱ ofȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21,ȱ
therefore,ȱhasȱanȱimportantȱprogrammaticȱfunction.ȱForȱthisȱnarrativeȱexplicȬ
itlyȱ linksȱ theȱ threshingȬfloorȱ ofȱ Ornanȱ toȱ theȱ siteȱ ofȱ theȱ futureȱ Templeȱ
(21:28Ȭ22:1),ȱaȱmotifȱthatȱisȱexplicitlyȱresumedȱinȱ2Chrȱ3:1.ȱInȱ2Samuelȱ24,ȱ
however,ȱ suchȱ aȱ connectionȱ isȱ nowhereȱ toȱ beȱ found;ȱ itsȱ focusȱ isȱ ratherȱ
constitutedȱ byȱ theȱ relationshipȱ betweenȱ theȱ purchaseȱ ofȱ theȱ threshingȱ
floor,ȱtheȱerectionȱofȱanȱaltar,ȱandȱtheȱendȱofȱtheȱplagueȱ(2Samȱ24:21,ȱ25).ȱ
Thereȱisȱnoȱreference,ȱnotȱevenȱanȱallusion,ȱtoȱtheȱfutureȱTemple.ȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
19ȱȱ Aȱparallelȱtoȱ2Chrȱ7:1ȱurgesȱitselfȱuponȱtheȱreaders.ȱSeeȱalsoȱLevȱ9:24ȱandȱ1Kgsȱ18:38.ȱ
Itȱ isȱ noȱ accidentȱ thatȱ inȱ 2Chrȱ 3:1ȱ theȱ siteȱ ofȱ theȱ Templeȱ isȱ notȱ onlyȱ identifiedȱ asȱ
MountȱMoriah,ȱbutȱalsoȱasȱtheȱthreshingȬfloorȱofȱOrnanȱtheȱJebusite.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
148ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

2.2ȱTextualȱdifferencesȱ

Itȱ isȱ notȱ onlyȱ theȱ contextȱ ofȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21ȱ whichȱ considerablyȱ differsȱ
fromȱtheȱparallelȱnarrativeȱinȱ2Samuelȱ24,ȱalsoȱtheȱtextȱofȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ
inȱ manyȱ detailsȱ variesȱ fromȱ theȱ parallelȱ narrative.20ȱ Everȱ sinceȱ threeȱ
collectionsȱ ofȱ fragmentsȱ ofȱ theȱ Bookȱ ofȱ Samuelȱ wereȱ discoveredȱ atȱ
Qumran,ȱ thereȱ isȱ aȱ scholarlyȱ discussionȱ whetherȱ theȱ Chronicler’sȱ HeȬ
brewȱVorlageȱofȱSamuelȱwasȱbasedȱonȱtheȱMasoreticȱtextȱtypeȱweȱknowȱ
orȱonȱaȱHebrewȱtextȱtypeȱofȱaȱdifferentȱkind.21ȱTheȱlacunalȱfragmentȱofȱ
2Samȱ 24:16Ȭ20ȱ inȱ 4QSama,ȱ forȱ instance,ȱ hasȱ someȱ similaritiesȱ withȱ theȱ
Hebrewȱ textȱ ofȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21,ȱ whichȱ areȱ notȱ handedȱ downȱ inȱ theȱ
Masoreticȱ textȱ ofȱ 2Samȱ 24:16Ȭ20.ȱ Asȱ anȱexampleȱ weȱreferȱ toȱ ‘theȱ angelȱ
withȱhisȱdrawnȱswordȱinȱhisȱhand’ȱinȱ1Chrȱ21:16.ȱTheȱmatter,ȱhowever,ȱ
isȱ evenȱ moreȱ complicated,ȱ sinceȱ theȱ Greekȱ translationȱ ofȱ Samuelȱ inȱ
manyȱinstancesȱagreesȱ withȱ theȱ Hebrewȱ textȱ ofȱ Chroniclesȱagainstȱ theȱ
MasoreticȱtextȱofȱSamuel.22ȱȱ
Onȱ theȱ basisȱ ofȱ thisȱ complexȱ setȱ ofȱ data,ȱ weȱ canȱ atȱ leastȱ reachȱ theȱ
cautiousȱconclusionȱthatȱtheȱChroniclerȱutilizedȱaȱVorlageȱofȱSamuelȱthatȱ
wasȱnotȱidenticalȱtoȱtheȱextantȱMasoreticȱtext.ȱAtȱtheȱotherȱhand,ȱIȱthinkȱ
itȱunprovableȱthatȱtheȱChronicler’sȱHebrewȱtextȱofȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱasȱweȱ
haveȱ itȱ nowȱ wouldȱ beȱ aȱ mereȱ copyȱ ofȱ theȱ Samuelȱ textȱ typeȱ heȱ hadȱ inȱ
frontȱofȱhim.ȱThereȱareȱtooȱmayȱinstancesȱinȱhisȱnarrativeȱwhereȱweȱcanȱ
detectȱhisȱsignature.ȱSomeȱofȱtheseȱweȱwillȱbrieflyȱdiscussȱnow.ȱ
1.ȱTheȱphraseȱ‘Whyȱshouldȱheȱ[David]ȱbringȱguiltȱonȱIsrael?’ȱ(1Chrȱ
21:4b)ȱcanȱwithȱcertaintyȱbeȱascribedȱtoȱ theȱChronicler.ȱFirst,ȱsinceȱtheȱ
notionȱ‘guilt’ȱ(hm#))ȱisȱaȱlate,ȱpostȬexilicȱHebrewȱnounȱthatȱinȱtheȱBookȱ
ofȱ Samuelȱ doesȱ notȱ occurȱ atȱ all.ȱ Andȱ second,ȱ becauseȱ inȱ theȱ Bookȱ ofȱ
ChroniclesȱitȱisȱonlyȱfoundȱinȱtheȱsoȬcalledȱ‘Sondergut’ȱpassages.23ȱ
2.ȱ Inȱ myȱ view,ȱ theȱ Chronicler’sȱ signatureȱ canȱalsoȱbeȱ seenȱinȱ1Chrȱ
21:7ȱ –ȱ ‘Heȱ [God]ȱ struckȱ Israel’.ȱ Itȱ canȱ hardlyȱ beȱ coincidenceȱ thatȱ theȱ
verbȱ hknȱisȱusedȱhereȱinȱrespectȱofȱGod,ȱwhereasȱinȱtheȱsameȱepisodeȱofȱ
theȱSamuelȱnarrativeȱitȱhasȱaȱbearingȱonȱDavid:ȱ‘Davidȱwasȱstrickenȱtoȱ
theȱheart’ȱ(2Samȱ24:10).ȱ
3.ȱ Sinceȱ theȱ focusȱ ofȱ theȱ Chronicler’sȱ narrativeȱ isȱ toȱ safeguardȱ theȱ
futureȱ Templeȱ site,ȱ twoȱ timesȱ theȱ nounȱ Mwqmȱ isȱ expresslyȱ usedȱ (1Chrȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
20ȱȱ Mostȱ usefulȱ overviewsȱ ofȱ textualȱ differencesȱ areȱ offeredȱ byȱ Braun,ȱ Chroniclesȱ 213Ȭ
215;ȱKlein,ȱChroniclesȱ414Ȭ417;ȱKnoppers,ȱChroniclesȱ10Ȭ29,ȱ743Ȭ750.ȱTheȱsynopsisȱofȱ
Bendavid,ȱParallelsȱ63Ȭ65,ȱisȱofȱgreatȱhelpȱtoo.ȱ
21ȱȱ TheȱSamuelȱmaterialȱfromȱQumranȱhasȱbeenȱpublishedȱbyȱCross,ȱQumran.ȱ
22ȱȱ Lemke,ȱ Problem;ȱ Ulrich,ȱ Qumran;ȱ McKenzie,ȱ Chronicler’sȱ Use,ȱ 41Ȭ81;ȱ McCarter,ȱ Iȱ
Samuel;ȱMcCarter,ȱIIȱSamuel;ȱBrunet,ȱChroniste.ȱȱ
23ȱȱ 1Chrȱ21:3;ȱ2Chrȱ24:18;ȱ28:10,ȱ13ȱ[3x];ȱ33:23.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
ȱ Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ 149ȱ

21:22,ȱ 25),ȱ whichȱ doesȱ notȱ occurȱ inȱ theȱ sourceȱ textȱ (2Samuelȱ 24).ȱ Theȱ
sameȱ nounȱ willȱ showȱ upȱ againȱ inȱ 2Chrȱ 3:1,ȱ whereȱ theȱ Chroniclerȱ notȱ
onlyȱrefersȱtoȱtheȱthreshingȬfloor,ȱbutȱalsoȱtoȱMountȱMoriahȱasȱtheȱsiteȱ
ofȱtheȱSolomonicȱTemple.ȱ
4.ȱOneȱcanȱunderstandȱwhyȱtheȱChroniclerȱmakesȱDavidȱpayȱsuchȱaȱ
hugeȱ amountȱ ofȱ moneyȱ toȱ Ornan:ȱ ‘sixȱhundredȱ shekelsȱ ofȱ gold’ȱ(1Chrȱ
21:25),ȱ whereasȱ inȱ 2Samȱ 24:24ȱ theȱ siteȱ isȱ soldȱ forȱ ‘fiftyȱ shekelsȱ ofȱ silȬ
ver’.24ȱ Theȱ futureȱ Templeȱ siteȱ isȱ invaluableȱ andȱ theȱ priceȱ forȱ itȱ shouldȱ
byȱanyȱmeansȱexceedȱtheȱamountȱofȱmoneyȱthatȱhasȱbeenȱpaidȱforȱotherȱ
culticȱsites,ȱsuchȱasȱtheȱ‘fourȱhundredȱshekelsȱofȱsilver’ȱwhichȱAbrahamȱ
paidȱforȱtheȱcaveȱofȱMachpelaȱ(Genȱ23:15).25ȱȱ
5.ȱDavid’sȱofferingsȱandȱcallȱtoȱYHWHȱareȱansweredȱwithȱ‘fireȱfromȱ
heavenȱonȱtheȱaltar’ȱthatȱDavidȱhadȱjustȱerectedȱ(1Chrȱ21:26).ȱHereȱweȱ
undoubtedlyȱ comeȱ acrossȱ theȱ Chronicler’sȱ signature,ȱ sinceȱ theȱ sameȱ
conceptȱ isȱ alsoȱ foundȱ inȱ 2Chrȱ 7:1,ȱ atȱ theȱ veryȱ momentȱ Solomonȱ hasȱ
endedȱhisȱprayerȱatȱtheȱoccasionȱofȱtheȱTemple’sȱdedication.ȱ
6.ȱItȱisȱbeyondȱanyȱdoubtȱthatȱtheȱemphasisȱonȱGibeonȱasȱtheȱculticȱ
placeȱ duringȱ David’sȱ (andȱ Solomon’sȱ )ȱ reignȱ isȱ aȱ specialȱ topicȱ ofȱ theȱ
Bookȱ ofȱ Chronicles,ȱ whichȱ byȱ theȱ wayȱ isȱ constantlyȱ foundȱ inȱ theȱ
Chronicler’sȱSondergutȱ(1Chrȱ16:39Ȭ42;ȱ21:29Ȭ30;ȱ2Chrȱ1:3Ȭ6).ȱ

PartȱIII:ȱAngelsȱinȱtheȱBookȱofȱChroniclesȱ

3.1ȱTheȱChronicler’sȱattentionȱtoȱangelsȱ

InȱtheȱBookȱofȱChronicles,ȱangelsȱappearȱonȱtheȱsceneȱonlyȱtwice,ȱbothȱ
timesȱ inȱ theȱ Chronicler’sȱ sourceȱ materialȱ (1Chroniclesȱ 21;ȱ 2Chroniclesȱ
32).26ȱ Sinceȱ dueȱ toȱ textȱ criticalȱ questionsȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21ȱ inȱ factȱ isȱ theȱ
mostȱcomplicatedȱtext,ȱfirstȱattentionȱwillȱbeȱpaidȱtoȱ2Chrȱ32:21.ȱ
WhereasȱtheȱBookȱofȱKings,ȱasȱwellȱasȱtheȱBookȱofȱIsaiah,ȱofferȱanȱ
ampleȱreportȱofȱtheȱsiegeȱofȱJerusalemȱbyȱtheȱAssyrianȱarmy,ȱtheȱillnessȱ
ofȱ Kingȱ Hezekiah,ȱ andȱ theȱ arrivalȱ ofȱ theȱ Babylonianȱ embassyȱ (2Kgsȱȱ
ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
24ȱȱ Theȱ medievalȱ Jewishȱ commentatorȱ Rashiȱ interpretedȱ theȱ differenceȱ betweenȱ ‘fiftyȱ
shekels’ȱ(2Samȱ24:24)ȱandȱ‘sixȱhundredȱshekels’ȱ(1Chrȱ21:25),ȱsayingȱthatȱDavidȱpaidȱ
fiftyȱshekelsȱforȱeachȱofȱtheȱtwelveȱtribesȱofȱIsrael.ȱ
25ȱȱ Asȱ weȱ haveȱ noticed,ȱ thereȱ isȱ aȱ deliberateȱ referenceȱ toȱ thisȱ narrativeȱ byȱ theȱ uniqueȱ
expressionȱ‘asȱitsȱfullȱprice’ȱ(1Chrȱ21:24;ȱGenȱ23:9).ȱ
26ȱȱ ‘Undȱ esȱ istȱ keineȱ Frage,ȱ daßȱ derȱ Chronistȱ außerȱ diesenȱ Engelnȱ nochȱ macheȱ andereȱ
gekanntȱ hat’;ȱ Rothsteinȱ /ȱ Hänel,ȱ Kommentarȱ xiv.ȱ Aȱ purelyȱ psychologicalȱ remarkȱ
withoutȱconsequences!ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
150ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

ȱ
18:9Ȭ20:19ȱ/ȱIsaȱ36:1Ȭ39:8),ȱhasȱtheȱChroniclerȱaȱtotallyȱdifferentȱnarrativeȱ
pattern.ȱOutȱofȱaȱtotalȱofȱfourȱchaptersȱthatȱheȱhasȱdevotedȱtoȱHezekiah,ȱ
noȱ lessȱ thanȱ threeȱ chaptersȱ dealȱ withȱ religiousȱ andȱ culticȱ reformsȱ thisȱ
kingȱ hasȱ carriedȱ outȱ (2Chroniclesȱ 29Ȭ31).ȱ Hisȱ confrontationȱ withȱ theȱ
Assyrianȱarmy,ȱtherefore,ȱhasȱbeenȱgivenȱmuchȱlessȱlinesȱ(2Chrȱ32:1Ȭ23)ȱ
thanȱwasȱtheȱcaseȱinȱhisȱsource.ȱȱ
FocussingȱnowȱonȱtheȱroleȱtheȱangelȱplaysȱinȱbothȱnarrativesȱdealȬ
ingȱwithȱtheȱsiegeȱofȱJerusalem,ȱoneȱcanȱobserveȱaȱchangeȱwhichȱfromȱaȱ
theologicalȱpointȱofȱviewȱisȱquiteȱinteresting:ȱ
ȱ

2Kgsȱ19:35ȱ/ȱIsaȱ37:35ȱ 2Chrȱ32:21ȱ
ȱ ȱ
Thatȱveryȱnightȱtheȱangelȱofȱ AndȱYHWHȱsentȱanȱangelȱ
YHWHȱsetȱoutȱȱ
andȱstruckȱdownȱȱ whoȱcutȱoff27ȱ
oneȱhundredȱandȱeightyȬfiveȱ allȱtheȱmightyȱwarriorsȱandȱ
thousand commanders
ȱ andȱofficersȱ
inȱtheȱcampȱofȱtheȱAssyrians.ȱ inȱtheȱcampȱofȱtheȱkingȱofȱAssyria.ȱ
ȱ
TheȱChroniclerȱhadȱadaptedȱhisȱsourceȱtextȱinȱsuchȱaȱwayȱthatȱtheȱrealȱ
agentȱofȱtheȱAssyrianȱdefeatȱwasȱnotȱtheȱangel,ȱbutȱYHWHȱhimself.ȱInȱ
otherȱ words,ȱ theȱ Chroniclerȱ hasȱ adjustedȱ hisȱ Vorlageȱ forȱ theologicalȱ
reasons:ȱtheȱangelȱindeedȱactsȱasȱGod’sȱmessenger.ȱ
Thisȱaspectȱalsoȱcomesȱtoȱlightȱwhenȱtheȱnarrativeȱofȱ2Samuelȱ24ȱisȱ
comparedȱ withȱ theȱ oneȱ inȱ Chroniclesȱ 21.ȱ Thereȱ areȱ twoȱ specificȱ moȬ
mentsȱwhereȱoneȱcanȱascertainȱthatȱtextsȱhaveȱbeenȱalteredȱinȱrespectȱofȱ
angel’sȱactivities:ȱ
ȱ

2Samȱ24:16ȱ 1Chrȱ21:15ȱ
ȱ ȱ
Butȱwhenȱtheȱangelȱ AndȱGodȱsentȱanȱangelȱ
stretchedȱoutȱhisȱhandsȱ ȱ
towardsȱJerusalemȱtoȱdestroyȱitȱ…ȱ toȱJerusalemȱtoȱdestroyȱitȱ…ȱ
ȱ
Inȱ 2Samȱ 24:16ȱ theȱ angelȱ isȱ putȱ onȱ theȱ sceneȱ allȱ ofȱ aȱ suddenȱ andȱ actsȱ
autonomously,ȱwhereasȱinȱ1Chrȱ21:15ȱheȱarrivesȱonȱtheȱsceneȱasȱaȱmesȬ
sengerȱofȱGodȱactingȱaccordingȱtoȱGod’sȱcommand.ȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
27ȱȱ Insteadȱofȱtheȱverbȱ hkn,ȱwhichȱisȱoneȱofȱhisȱfavouriteȱverbs,ȱtheȱChroniclerȱhasȱchoȬ
senȱtheȱverbȱdxk,ȱwhichȱmustȱbeȱanȱintentionalȱreferenceȱtoȱEx.ȱ23:23.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
ȱ Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ 151ȱ

Someȱ linesȱ later,ȱ theȱ sameȱ patternȱ canȱ beȱ detected.ȱ Hereȱ theȱ
Chroniclerȱ hasȱ evenȱ sacrifiedȱ theȱ vehicleȱ ofȱ directȱ speechȱ toȱ makeȱ hisȱ
theologicalȱviewȱperfectlyȱclear:ȱ
ȱ

2Samȱ24:18ȱ 1Chrȱ21:18ȱ
ȱ ȱ
Thatȱdayȱȱ ThenȱtheȱangelȱofȱYHWHȱ
commanded
GadȱcameȱtoȱDavidȱandȱsaidȱtoȱ GadȱtoȱtellȱDavidȱ
him,ȱ
‘Goȱupȱȱ thatȱheȱshouldȱgoȱupȱȱ
andȱerectȱanȱaltarȱtoȱYHWHȱ…’ȱ andȱerectȱanȱaltarȱtoȱYHWHȱ…ȱ
ȱ

3.2ȱHowȱmanyȱangelsȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21?ȱ

Theȱfactȱthatȱinȱ1Chrȱ21ȱtheȱnounȱ‘angel’ȱoccursȱnineȱtimes,ȱwhereasȱitȱisȱ
foundȱonlyȱfourȱtimesȱinȱhisȱsourceȱtext,ȱposesȱtheȱquestionȱhowȱmanyȱ
angelsȱareȱactuallyȱactingȱinȱtheȱChronicler’sȱnarrative.28ȱTherefore,ȱweȱ
needȱaȱquickȱoutlineȱofȱhowȱtheyȱareȱcalledȱinȱtheȱnarrative.ȱAsȱaȱmatterȱ
ofȱfact,ȱthisȱisȱdoneȱinȱquiteȱdifferentȱways:ȱ‘theȱdestroyingȱangel’ȱ(v.12,ȱ
152),ȱ ‘theȱ angelȱ ofȱ YHWH’ȱ (v.15),ȱ ‘theȱ angelȱ ofȱ YHWHȱ withȱ aȱ drawnȱ
swordȱinȱhisȱhand’ȱ(v.16),ȱ‘theȱangelȱofȱYHWH’ȱ(v.18),ȱ‘theȱangel’ȱ(v.20),ȱ
‘theȱangelȱputtingȱhisȱswordȱbackȱinȱitsȱsheath’ȱ(v.27),ȱ‘theȱswordȱofȱtheȱ
angelȱofȱYHWH’ȱ(v.30).ȱȱ
Atȱaȱfirstȱglance,ȱthereȱseemȱtoȱbeȱtwoȱofȱthem:ȱ‘theȱdestroyingȱanȬ
gel’,ȱ andȱ ‘theȱ angelȱ ofȱ YHWH’.ȱ Inȱ myȱ view,ȱ theȱ keyȱ toȱ thisȱ riddleȱ
shouldȱbeȱfoundȱinȱverseȱ12,ȱwhereȱtheȱChroniclerȱ(orȱhisȱVorlage)ȱhasȱ
substantiallyȱexpandedȱtheȱsourceȱtext.ȱ
ȱ

2Samȱ24:13ȱ 1Chrȱ21:12ȱ
ȱ ȱ
Orȱshallȱthereȱbeȱthreeȱdays’ȱ Orȱthreeȱdaysȱ
ȱ ofȱtheȱswordȱofȱYHWH,ȱ
pestilenceȱinȱyourȱland?ȱ pestilenceȱonȱtheȱland,ȱ
ȱ theȱangelȱofȱYHWHȱȱ
ȱ destroyingȱthroughoutȱallȱtheȱ
territoryȱofȱIsrael.
ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
28ȱȱ 1Chrȱ21:12,ȱ15ȱ[3x],ȱ16,ȱ18,ȱ20,ȱ27,ȱ30;ȱ2Samȱ24:16ȱ[3x],ȱ17.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
152ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

Inȱ2Samȱ24:13,ȱtheȱthirdȱchoiceȱofferedȱtoȱDavidȱconsistsȱofȱoneȱsingleȱ
itemȱ(‘pestilence’).ȱInȱ1Chrȱ21:12,ȱhowever,ȱitȱhasȱbeenȱexpandedȱintoȱaȱ
setȱofȱthreeȱcoordinateȱitems,ȱofȱwhichȱ‘pestilence’ȱisȱtheȱmiddleȱone.ȱThisȱ
literaryȱfeatureȱisȱsolidȱproofȱthatȱtheȱ‘destroyingȱangel’ȱandȱtheȱ‘swordȱ
ofȱYHWH’,ȱwhichȱfurtherȱonȱinȱtheȱnarrativeȱisȱpersonifiedȱasȱ‘theȱangelȱ
withȱtheȱdrawnȱsword’ȱareȱtoȱbeȱconceivedȱasȱoneȱandȱtheȱsameȱagent.ȱ
Theȱ factȱ thatȱ startingȱ fromȱ verseȱ 15ȱ onwardsȱ theȱ Chronicler’sȱ versionȱ
getsȱaȱhighȱdegreeȱofȱsimultaneousnessȱmayȱserveȱasȱanȱadditionalȱarȬ
gumentȱtoȱtheȱviewȱthatȱthereȱisȱonlyȱoneȱangelȱdoingȱtheȱjob.ȱ

Abstractȱ

TheȱChronicler’sȱversionȱofȱDavid’sȱcensusȱ(1Chroniclesȱ21)ȱbothȱfromȱaȱ
textȱcriticalȱandȱfromȱaȱtheologicalȱpointȱofȱviewȱisȱquiteȱdifferentȱfromȱ
itsȱparentȱtextȱ(2Samuelȱ24).ȱItȱappearsȱthatȱtheȱChronicler’sȱtextȱatȱsevȬ
eralȱ instancesȱ hasȱ adoptedȱ allusionsȱ toȱ biblicalȱ materialȱ thatȱ referȱ toȱ
culticȱsites.ȱSoȱdoing,ȱtheȱChroniclerȱwantȱtoȱemphasizeȱthatȱtheȱnarraȬ
tiveȱisȱaboutȱtheȱfutureȱTempleȱsite.ȱ
Theȱauthorȱofȱthisȱcontributionȱreachesȱtheȱconclusionȱthatȱseveralȱ
featuresȱinȱtheȱnarrativeȱmakeȱaȱreasonableȱcaseȱthatȱitȱwasȱtheȱChroniȬ
clerȱwhoȱreworkedȱtheȱSamuelȱnarrativeȱinsteadȱofȱjustȱhandingȱdownȱ
anȱexistingȱVorlage.ȱ
AlthoughȱangelsȱareȱmentionedȱratherȱoftenȱinȱtheȱChronicler’sȱnarȬ
rative,ȱatȱaȱcloserȱlookȱitȱappearsȱtoȱbeȱoneȱandȱtheȱsameȱagentȱallȱtheȱ
time.ȱ

Bibliographyȱ

Bailey,ȱN.,ȱDavidȇsȱInnocence:ȱAȱResponseȱtoȱJ.ȱWright:ȱJSOTȱ64ȱ(1994)ȱ83Ȭ90.ȱ
Bailey,ȱ N.,ȱ Davidȱ andȱ Godȱ inȱ 1Chroniclesȱ 21:ȱ Edgedȱ withȱ Mist,ȱ in:ȱ Graham,ȱ
M.P.ȱ/ȱMcKenzie,ȱS.L.ȱ(eds.),ȱTheȱChroniclerȱasȱAuthor:ȱStudiesȱinȱTextȱandȱ
Textureȱ(JSOT.SSȱ263),ȱSheffieldȱ1999,ȱ337Ȭ359.ȱ
Bendavid,ȱA.,ȱParallelsȱinȱtheȱBibleȱ()rqmb twlybqm)ȱ,ȱJerusalemȱ1972.ȱ
Braun,ȱR.,ȱ1Chroniclesȱ(WBC),ȱWacoȱ1986.ȱ
Breytenbach,ȱC.ȱ/ȱDay,ȱP.L.,ȱSatan,ȱin:ȱDDD,ȱ1369Ȭ1380.ȱ
Brunet,ȱ A.ȬM.,ȱ Leȱ Chonisteȱ etȱ sesȱ sources:ȱ RBȱ 60ȱ (1953)ȱ 481Ȭ508;ȱ RBȱ 61ȱ (1954)ȱ
349Ȭ386.ȱ
Cross,ȱF.M.ȱetȱal.,ȱQumranȱCaveȱ4ȱXII:ȱ1Ȭ2ȱSamuelȱ(DJDȱXVII),ȱOxfordȱ2005.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
ȱ Satan,ȱGod,ȱandȱtheȱAngel(s)ȱinȱ1Chroniclesȱ21ȱ 153ȱ

Daȱ Silva,ȱ A.A.,ȱ Aȱ Comparisonȱ betweenȱ theȱ Avengingȱ Angelȱ ofȱ 1ȱ Chrȱ 21ȱ andȱ
analogousȱ ‘AngelȬlike’ȱ Figuresȱ inȱ theȱ Ugariticȱ Ba’alȬcycle:ȱ Journalȱ forȱ SeȬ
miticsȱ6ȱ(1994)ȱ154Ȭ169.ȱȱ
Day,ȱ P.L.,ȱ Anȱ Adversaryȱ inȱ heaven:ȱ ï¬t̜¬nȱ inȱ theȱ Hebrewȱ Bibleȱ (HSMȱ 43),ȱ AtȬ
lantaȱ1988,ȱ127Ȭ145.ȱ
Dion,ȱP.E.,ȱTheȱAngelȱwithȱtheȱDrawnȱSwordȱ(IIȱ[sic]ȱChrȱ21,16):ȱAnȱExerciseȱinȱ
RestoringȱtheȱBalanceȱofȱTextȱCriticismȱandȱAttentionȱtoȱContext:ȱZAWȱ97ȱ
(1985)ȱ114Ȭ117.ȱ
Dirksen,ȱ P.B.,ȱ 1ȱ Chroniclesȱ (Historicalȱ Commentaryȱ onȱ theȱ Oldȱ Testament),ȱ
Louvainȱ2005.ȱ
Evans,ȱP.,ȱ Divineȱ Intermediariesȱ inȱ 1ȱ Chroniclesȱ 21:ȱ Anȱ Overlookedȱ Aspectȱ ofȱ
theȱChronicler’sȱTheology:ȱBib.ȱ85ȱ(2004)ȱ545Ȭ558.ȱ
Hamilton,ȱV.P.,ȱSatan,ȱin:ȱAncBDȱV,ȱ985Ȭ989.ȱ
Hilbrands,ȱW.,ȱDasȱVerhältnisȱderȱEngelȱzuȱJahweȱimȱAltenȱTestament,ȱinsbesonȬ
dereȱ imȱ Buchȱ Exodus,ȱ in:ȱ Roukema,ȱ R.ȱ (ed.),ȱ Theȱ Interpretationȱ ofȱ Exodus.ȱ
StudiesȱinȱHonourȱofȱCornelisȱHoutmanȱ(CBETȱ44),ȱLouvainȱ2006,ȱ81Ȭ96.ȱȱ
Im,ȱ T.S.,ȱ Dasȱ Davidbildȱ inȱ denȱ Chronikbüchernȱ (EHSȱ XXIII,ȱ 263),ȱ Frankfurtȱ
a.M.ȱ1985,ȱ145Ȭ153.ȱ
Kellerman,ȱD.,ȱ hm#),ȱin:ȱBotterweck,ȱG.J.ȱ/ȱRinggren,ȱH.,ȱin:ȱTDOT,ȱGrandȱRapidsȱ
1977,ȱI,ȱ429Ȭ437.ȱ
Klein,ȱR.W.,ȱ1ȱChroniclesȱ(Hermeneia),ȱMinneapolisȱ2006.ȱ
Knoppers,ȱG.N.,ȱIȱChroniclesȱ1Ȭ9ȱ(AncBȱ12),ȱNewȱYorkȱ2004.ȱ
Knoppers,ȱG.N.,ȱIȱChroniclesȱ10Ȭ29ȱ(AncBȱ12A),ȱNewȱYorkȱ2004.ȱ
Knoppers,ȱG.N.,ȱImagesȱofȱDavidȱinȱEarlyȱJudaism:ȱDavidȱasȱRepentantȱSinnerȱ
inȱChronicles:ȱBib.ȱ76ȱ(1995)ȱ449Ȭ470.ȱ
Kreutzer,ȱF.,ȱDerȱAntagonist:ȱDerȱSatanȱinȱderȱHebräischenȱBibelȱ–ȱeineȱbekannȬ
teȱGröße?:ȱBib.ȱ86ȱ(2005)ȱ536Ȭ544.ȱ
Lemke,ȱW.E.,ȱTheȱSynopticȱProblemȱinȱtheȱChronicler’sȱHistory:ȱHTRȱ58ȱ(1965)ȱ
349Ȭ363.ȱ
McCarter,ȱP.ȱKyle,ȱIȱSamuelȱ(AncBȱ8),ȱGardenȱCityȱ1980.ȱ
McCarter,ȱP.ȱKyle,ȱIIȱSamuelȱ(AncBȱ9),ȱGardenȱCityȱ1984.ȱ
McKenzie,ȱS.L.,ȱTheȱChronicler’sȱUseȱofȱtheȱDeuteronomisticȱHistoryȱ(HSMȱ33),ȱ
Atlantaȱ1984.ȱ
McKenzie,ȱ S.L.,ȱ 1Ȭ2ȱ Chroniclesȱ (Abingdonȱ Oldȱ Testamentȱ Commentaries),ȱ
Nashvilleȱ2004.ȱ
Mosis,ȱR.,ȱUntersuchungenȱzurȱTheologieȱdesȱchronistischenȱGeschichtswerkesȱ
(FThStȱ92),ȱFreiburgȱ1973,ȱ108Ȭ120.ȱ
Pisano,ȱ S.,ȱ Additionsȱ orȱ Omissionsȱ inȱ theȱ Booksȱ ofȱ Samuel.ȱ Theȱ Significantȱ
Plusesȱ andȱ Minusesȱ inȱ theȱ Massoretic,ȱ LXXȱ andȱ Qumranȱ Textsȱ (OBOȱ 57),ȱ
Fribourgȱ1984.ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM
154ȱ PancratiusȱC.ȱBeentjesȱ

Rofé,ȱA.,ȱ4QSamaȱinȱtheȱLightȱofȱHistoricoȬLiteraryȱCriticism:ȱ2Samȱ24ȱȬȱ1ȱChr.ȱ21,ȱ
in:ȱVivian,ȱA.ȱ(ed.),ȱBiblischeȱundȱJudaistischeȱStudien,ȱFSȱP.ȱSacchiȱ(JudenȬ
tumȱundȱUmweltȱ29),ȱFrankfurtȱa.ȱM.ȱ1990,ȱ109Ȭ119.ȱ
Rothstein,ȱ J.W.ȱ /ȱ J.ȱ Hänel,ȱ Kommentarȱ zumȱ erstenȱ Buchȱ derȱ Chronikȱ (KATȱ
XVIII/2),ȱLeipzigȱ1927.ȱ
Schniedewind,ȱW.M.,ȱTheȱWordȱofȱGodȱinȱTransition:ȱFromȱProphetȱtoȱExegeteȱ
inȱtheȱSecondȱTempleȱPeriodȱ(JSOT.SSȱ197),ȱSheffieldȱ1995.ȱ
Schoors,ȱA.,ȱBersebaȱ–ȱDeȱopgravingȱvanȱeenȱbijbelseȱstadȱ(PalaestinaȱAntiquaȱV),ȱ
Kampenȱ1986.ȱ
Ulrich,ȱE.C.,ȱTheȱQumranȱTextȱofȱSamuelȱandȱJosephusȱ(HSMȱ19),ȱMissoulaȱ1978.ȱ
Vries,ȱS.J.ȱde,ȱ1ȱandȱ2ȱChroniclesȱ(FOTLȱXI),ȱGrandȱRapidsȱ1989.ȱ
Williamson,ȱH.G.M.,ȱ1ȱandȱ2ȱChroniclesȱ(NCBC),ȱLondonȱ1982.ȱ
Williamson,ȱ H.G.M.,ȱ Theȱ Templeȱ inȱ theȱ Bookȱ ofȱ Chronicles,ȱ in:ȱ Horbury,ȱ W.ȱ
(ed.),ȱTemplumȱAmicitiae:ȱEssaysȱonȱtheȱSecondȱTempleȱPresentedȱtoȱErnstȱ
Bammelȱ(JSNT.SSȱ48),ȱSheffieldȱ1991,ȱ15Ȭ31.ȱ
Wright,ȱJ.W.,ȱTheȱInnocenceȱofȱDavidȱinȱ1ȱChroniclesȱ21:ȱJSOTȱ60ȱ(1993)ȱ87Ȭ105.ȱ
ȱ
ȱ

Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/8/15 11:24 PM