1 Chronicles 21:1–22:1

TABLE 3.5: Comparison of 1 Chronicles 21:1 and 2 Samuel 24:1

The contrast is obvious, but how is it to be understood? The name “Satan” is a transliteration of a common Hebrew word (satan) meaning “(be an) adversary,” both military and accusatory (Num. 22:22, 32; 1 Sam. 29:4; 2 Sam. 19:22; 1 Kings 5:4; 11:14, 23, 25; Pss. 38:20; 71:13; 109:4, 6, 20, 29). The noun occurs with the definite article only in Job 1–2 and Zechariah 3:1, 2, in both places referring to a heavenly being (“the Adversary, Satan”).¹ As satan in Chronicles has no article (and Hebrew script has no separate capital letters), some commentators argue for a human adversary.² While that is possible, nothing in the passage or its context suggests military opposition apart from “men who drew the sword” in the census summary (1 Chron. 21:5).

In favor of understanding this as a heavenly adversary is how these actions are similar to those in Zechariah 3:1, where the heavenly adversary “stood against,” and Job 2:3, where he “incited.” More significant may be the several literary parallels with Numbers 22:22–35, where God’s “anger” against Balaam resulted in “the angel of the Lord” appearing as Balaam’s “adversary” (satan, without the definite article). This passage may be behind the Chronicler’s substitution of satan for Samuel’s “the Lord.” In the rest of 1 Chronicles 21 an increased prominence is given to “the angel of the Lord” (vv. 12, 15–20, 27, 30; cf. 2 Sam. 24:16–17). This “angel” is clearly separate from God, who “sends” him with the drawn sword; as a “messenger” (the meaning of malʼak and the equivalent Gk. angelos) he also communicates God’s word to the seer, Gad. As in Numbers 22 and elsewhere, the weight of evidence supports the long tradition that here satan without the article is used as a name of a heavenly being, Satan, who acts against the interest of humans.³

Whereas God is the subject of all verbs in 2 Samuel 24:1, including his telling David to “Go, number,” in Chronicles Satan becomes the subject and God is not mentioned until after the census, where the Chronicler adds, “God was displeased with this thing” (1 Chron. 21:7). Thus the punishment that follows is God’s response to the census and not, as in Samuel, a result of God’s “anger” for some unspecified reason. (The clause “the anger of the Lord was kindled” occurs also in 2 Sam. 6:7//1 Chron. 13:10, there after an infringement of Mosaic law: Uzzah’s taking hold of the ark.) As in Job and Zechariah, Satan is a troublemaker, but with a limited role; here he plays no further part in the narrative, the subsequent intermediary being a different “angel of the Lord” who carries out God’s judgment (21:12–30; 2 Sam. 24:16–17). The change is not a contradiction of Samuel but a development in describing the complexity of how God carries out his purposes for his creation in a world in which evil is a reality; it is a forerunner of the many subsequent passages in intertestamental literature and the NT that include the activity of Satan and evil spiritual forces within the sovereignty of the one God (and paralleled by increasing involvement of angels as intermediaries). In this passage, although Satan is antagonistic toward Israel, his actions lead ultimately to David’s establishing the temple site designated by God as “the place.” (Cf. Response section below.)

21:2–4 David’s ordering of the census and Joab’s strong opposition are told with the Chronicler adding to Joab’s questions, “Are they not, my lord the king, all of them my lord’s servants?” and “Why should it be a cause of guilt for Israel?” Joab’s warning points to David’s accountability: Satan may incite, but David is responsible for his decision.

Some have interpreted the census as an instance of David’s hubris or failure to trust God, relying instead on human strength (contrast 17:8, 10; 18:6, 13). It is also argued, however, that censuses elsewhere are associated with a God-directed purpose (e.g., Ex. 30:11–15; Num. 1:2–54; 26:1–65; 2 Chron. 2:17–18). Joab’s referring to the people as David’s “servants” might suggest that David is seeking unnecessarily to assert his rule over Israel; the Chronicler has already told how “all Israel” welcomed David’s rule, with a numbering of each tribe (1 Chron. 11:1–3; 12:23–38), and has listed foreign peoples who have become his “servants” (18:2, 6, 13). While these factors may play a part, the Chronicler’s narration points to a more precise reason for “guilt” (that would indeed involve “Israel”). Various elements can be related to the Mosaic law concerning a census and the tabernacle/temple.

The Chronicler tells the story as part of the broad movement toward the temple construction. Thus, while in chapter 17 God denies David authority to build a temple, he promises that David’s son will do so, and so we are told how David begins to set aside resources (18:7–11), and after this chapter the narrative moves immediately to David’s detailed planning (22:2–5). Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, writes that “King David . . . forgot the injunctions of Moses, who had prescribed, that when the populace was numbered, half a shekel should be paid to God for every person” (Antiquities 7.318). The reference is to Exodus 30:11–16, where the payment is “a ransom [koper] for [each person’s] life . . . that there be no plague among them,” with the specified half a shekel per person being “the Lord’s offering to make atonement [kapper] for your lives”; the “atonement money” [kesep hakkippurim] is to be used “for the service of the tent of meeting.”

In the account of Josiah’s later restoration of the temple, the Chronicler inserts reference to this Mosaic law (2 Chron. 24:4–11; cf. 2 Kings 12:4–10) and, although not mentioned here, it explains features of the account. Thus Satan’s “inciting” diverts David from focusing on temple building, as it is a census with no collection for the tabernacle; Joab speaks of “cause of guilt,” using a word seen elsewhere commonly in cultic settings (e.g., Lev. 4:3; 6:7; 22:16; 2 Chron. 24:18); and a census without each person’s paying the tax would indeed be “cause of guilt for Israel,” not just for David. The result is that God “struck Israel” (1 Chron. 21:7), with this striking described as a “pestilence” (vv. 12, 14). At the end of the narrative, mention of the “tabernacle of the Lord” at Gibeon is extended with a description of it as that “which Moses had made in the wilderness” (v. 29). David’s awareness of Mosaic regulations has already been a feature of the Chronicler’s account of the return of the ark (15:15) and is prominent as David begins the charge to Solomon (22:13). Relevant may be David’s payment of “600 shekels of gold” for the temple site as a representative purchase on behalf of all the people (21:25). The warning has been given, and rejected; a Mosaic law is about to be broken; but what will be the consequences?

21:5–6 The actual census taking is condensed to one verse (contrast 2 Sam. 24:4–8), and the reporting of total numbers differs (possibly different sources). The phrase “men who drew the sword” is not common in the OT, occurring elsewhere only in Judges 8:10; 2 Kings 3:26; and six times in Judges 20 (war between Benjamin and the other tribes); in this chapter it provides a contrast with “the angel of the Lord” who holds “a drawn sword” (1 Chron. 21:16; cf. Num. 22:23, 31; Josh. 5:13).

Joab’s excluding “Levi and Benjamin” is commonly interpreted as being due to their association with the worship at both Gibeon and Jerusalem (1 Chron. 21:29; 16:37–42), Gibeon being a Benjaminite center (6:60; 8:29). The Chronicler may, however, be focusing solely on Jerusalem: his Benjaminite genealogy details first those who lived in Jerusalem (8:28), and, unlike Samuel–Kings, he often speaks of “Judah and Benjamin” in connection with the king and city (ten times; 2 Chron. 11:1, 3, 12, 23; etc.; cf. Ezra 1:5; 4:1; 10:9). Elsewhere Jerusalem is sometimes included in the territory allocated to Benjamin (Josh. 18:28; cf. Deut. 33:12). Joab’s holding back in this way on the “abhorrent” census could be an effort to mitigate the guilt, seeking to exonerate Jerusalem. Significantly, the “pestilence” is sent “on Israel,” but “the angel of the Lord” is held back from destroying Jerusalem (1 Chron. 21:7, 14–15).⁴

21:7–14 When the ark was earlier being moved, “The Lord struck [Uzzah] down” (13:10) due to the breaking of a Mosaic regulation (15:12–15), and now the result of the census, another act contrary to Mosaic requirement, is that “God . . . struck Israel” (21:7, same Hb. word). Verse 7 serves as a summary introducing the details of punishment of verses 8–14 (v. 15a similarly introduces vv. 15b–27).⁵

David confesses his sin, the depth of his piety expressed by the repeated Hebrew meʼod: “I have sinned greatly . . . acted very foolishly” (v. 8), followed by his later “I am in great distress” (v. 13), which then heightens his placing himself “into the hand of the Lord, for his mercy is very great.” The verb “act foolishly” (a form of sakal) is not common; its only other instance in Chronicles refers to Asa’s use of temple resources to seek military aid (2 Chron. 16:9). Thus this verb is used of the king’s seeing his own decisions as correct but failing to rely solely on the Lord and to anticipate his actions’ consequences.⁶

The Lord responds to David’s repentance with a word through “Gad, David’s seer.” (Throughout Chronicles most kings have a “prophet” [e.g., Nathan; 1 Chron. 17:1]; if another person is associated he is termed a “seer,” who like Gad also brings what God “spoke.”) There is no word of forgiveness but rather a choice of three punishments. In the time sequence of “three years . . . three months . . . three days,” Chronicles presents the third punishment as explicitly divine, “the sword of the Lord, pestilence” (cf. 2 Sam. 24:13: simply “pestilence”).

Gad’s opening and closing words (“Thus says the Lord” and “what answer I shall return to him who sent me”) affirm his role as simply God’s messenger, with David’s answer placing himself at the hands of a God whose “mercy is very great.” David relies on the character of God, made known at the time of the golden calf incident as “the Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ex. 34:6). What will happen this time? As at Sinai (Ex. 32:35), for many in “Israel” the unspecified “pestilence” means death, but again, as at Sinai, the story does not end there—God’s mercy leads to a positive way ahead.⁷

21:15–17 The focus narrows to Jerusalem and “the angel” who has been “sent . . . to destroy” the city. The Chronicler makes clear that the “angel” is an intermediary, “standing between earth and heaven” (v. 16), performing God’s will.⁸ As in other situations of judgment, we are told that God “relented” (usually because of repentance, Jer. 18:8, 10; 26:3; Jonah 3:10; or a plea, Amos 7:3, 6). The command “Stay your hand” comes as the angel is at a place that will prove to be highly significant, the “threshing floor of Ornan⁹ the Jebusite.” This was a flat place on top of the hill above the city (so good for winnowing), owned by one of the original inhabitants.

David is unaware of the Lord’s command as he sees the angel with a “drawn sword,” a threatening stance (and an example of how punishment and crime match; cf. 1 Chron. 21:5). The same danger is seen in the angel’s appearance to Balaam (Num. 22:22–35). The Chronicler expands David’s plea, enhancing both his taking on himself full culpability and his plea that “your people” (pointedly, not “my people”) be not harmed further. Unexpectedly, the Chronicler includes the “elders,” their only mention in the chapter (1 Chron. 21:16; cf. 11:3; 15:25). They too are “clothed in sackcloth,” evidence of both mourning and petition (Gen. 37:34; Neh. 9:1; Matt. 11:21). Again the postexilic community is given an example of involvement of all leaders, not just a king, in coming to God in submission. The story functions for hearers as a call to repentance that leads to worship, along with hope because God hears.¹⁰

21:18–27 David had prayed, “Let your hand be against me and against my father’s house” (2 Sam. 24:17). Instead he receives a command to build an altar. Gad’s previous message had been of judgment; now it is a path to mercy not only for David but for all Israel. In what follows the Chronicler continues to include the role of “the angel of the Lord” as God’s intermediary and communicator to Gad (1 Chron. 21:18, 20, 27; cf. 2 Sam. 24:18–19). The Lord’s commanding of the altar and its location is affirmed; David obeys what Gad told him from the angel, a word that has the Lord’s authority.

The narrative flows as David finally buys the threshing floor, paying the full price even though Ornan wants to freely give him not only the ground but also all that would be needed for a sacrifice (the Chronicler includes a “grain offering” as laid down in Ex. 29:38–41). Whereas 2 Samuel 24:24 says David pays “fifty shekels of silver,” the Chronicler has “600 shekels of gold by weight.” Parallels are seen in the description of these negotiations with the account of the first purchase of part of the Promised Land, Abraham’s paying “full price”¹¹ for a burial site and the field, “four hundred shekels of silver, according to the weights current among the merchants” (Genesis 23). Land and temple site both mark new beginnings with promise for the future. The much larger payment in Chronicles has been variously interpreted: it is to be larger than Abraham’s; it is cover the whole property, not just the threshing floor; it is gold because of the place of gold in the temple; or, as suggested as early as the medieval Jewish commentator Rashi, it is fifty shekels for each of the twelve tribes, so affirming that the temple is for all Israel. Irrespective, this large amount demonstrates David’s commitment; his words “I will not take for the Lord what is yours, nor offer burnt offerings that cost me nothing” (1 Chron. 21:24) are backed by generous action.

The section comes to its conclusion as David is now able to obey the Lord’s command (v. 18). He builds an “altar to the Lord” and, as when the ark was brought to rest (16:1), offers “burnt offerings and peace offerings.” The Chronicler describes the result in his own words: David “called on the Lord, and the Lord answered him”—but the answer is first “with fire from heaven upon the altar,” a sign of the Lord’s acceptance (cf. 2 Chron. 7:1; Lev. 9:24), and then with the order to the “angel” and the sword’s being put back “into its sheath.”

21:28–22:1 Not only is “the plague . . . averted from Israel” (2 Sam. 24:25), but, more importantly for the Chronicler’s hearers, the Lord has clearly chosen this place and accepted sacrifices offered on the altar. So David is simply the first of all succeeding generations who “sacrificed there.” There remains the matter that the “tabernacle of the Lord” and “altar of burnt offering” are still at Gibeon (1 Chron. 16:39–42), yet the experience of the “sword of the Lord” and the Lord’s command to “raise an altar to the Lord on the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite” (21:18) means that the temple now must be “here.” David does not dare risk a return of judgment. He is a faithful observer of Mosaic law, but he also introduces new cultic arrangements in response to the Lord’s action.¹² So it is that the rest of David’s reign is given over to preparations for temple building.

The final phrase, “the altar of burnt offering for Israel,” serves as an answer to the opening “then Satan stood against Israel” (21:1). Spiritual forces may seek to bring harm to Israel, and Israel may succumb and suffer, but God has provided an answer in the provision of the atoning sacrifices on the altar at his chosen place.