Deeper Commentary
2Sa 24:1 Again-
I will suggest on :25 that there are similarities with the cursing of
the land at the time of 2 Sam. 21:14. So "again" may mean that this final
cameo of Davidic history is another example as that of 2 Sam. 21, of where
Yahweh's anger was against the land of Israel and He was then "entreated for
the land" by repentance and sacrifice. And in both cases, David was
at fault. The "again" further encourages us to view 2 Sam. 21-24 as
chronological, following on from 2 Sam. 19 and before the death of David in
1 Kings 1; although 1 Chron. 21-27 describing David's words to Solomon about
the temple appear to follow on from 2 Sam. 24. We see David forced to
penitence in 2 Sam. 23 for his arrogant end of life speech in 2 Sam. 22; now
he sins again in wanting to establish the Kingdom here and now, repents
again, but slips back in his words to Solomon and his final deathbed scene
in 1 Kings 1.
The anger of Yahweh was kindled against Israel-
This common phrase is typically used of God's anger with Israel for
idolatry, which was clearly a problem amongst them even at David's time.
He didn't want to punish them. The census gave them the opportunity to pay
a half shekel each for "atonement money" (Ex. 30:12-15), lest they be
struck with plague. It seems God worked through David's fear of an
invasion or forthcoming battle with a 'satan'' / adversary, so that he
took a census and the people had the chance to pay that atonement money in
loyalty to Yahweh. But they didn't- and so they were struck with plague.
David's feeling of guilt over the matter is understandable, but I will
argue on :10 that it was more a case of false guilt.
The anger of Yahweh being again kindled reminds us of the Balaam narrative. And there are so many other similarities- an Angel, called a 'satan' (as in 1 Chron. 21:1), sword in hand, trying to rebuke a man who is pursuing a wrong path (Num. 22:31). I discussed on 2 Sam. 23:2 how the way God put a prophetic word in David's mouth is replete with allusions to Balaam. So it seems the parallel between Balaam and David continues. We naturally enquire, What was David's wrong path? Seeing it was not a sin to take a census. It was something pretty big, given the amount of judgment for it and his deep contrition. I suggest the wrong path was his desire to gather an army in order to establish his promised kingdom there and then by foreign conquests, and numbering Israel in the wider context of establishing a physical temple system and a workforce for Solomon to use in forcibly establishing some kind of Kingdom of God on earth. Unlike Balaam, David does repent. But it seems not for long, because he goes on to set up Solomon for building the temple and murdering his contenders.
And He
moved David against them saying, Go, number Israel and Judah-
This is an example of God's Spirit moving people to do things,
operating on their heart through circumstances- in this case, the 'satan'
of some opposition which provoked David to take a census of his fighters.
Or we can deduce that David's 'satan' (1 Chron. 21:1) was his
obsessive desire to see the promises of 2 Sam. 7 fulfilled in himself, his
immediate family and a physical temple designed by himself. This was
confirmed by God in that He does lead into temptation by confirming man in
the way he himself freely chooses. But in the bigger picture, God used
this failure of David's to punish Israel for their sinfulness.
But comparing with the Chronicles account, this incident is followed by David's numbering the Levites and assigning certain numbers of Israelites to the various tasks of labour required for building the temple. So his numbering of Israel could be because of his old 'satan'- his internal desire to push ahead with glorifying his own family through his son building a physical house for God. When God had specifically stated that He didn't want that. Perhaps this is why David feels he has sinned, when taking a census was not of itself a sin. He so often is convinced of his sins, as he does as noted on 2 Sam. 23 and as he did after his conviction by Nathan... but slips back from these peaks of contrition and humility. But seeing David was so set upon this, God confirmed David in his misplaced desires and moved him to number Israel in this context. The numbering was therefore possibly not because of a military threat, but from David's desire to arrange the labour required to build and sustain the temple complex he envisaged his son building. This would fit chronologically- so that 2 Sam. 21-24 are not in fact random incidents put together at the end of 2 Samuel, but are strictly chronological. David's numbering of the Levites and making plans for numbers of workers were done in the fortieth year of his reign, i.e. right at the end of his life (1 Chron. 26:31 "In the fortieth year of the reign of David they were sought for, and there were found / numbered among them mighty men of valour at Jazer of Gilead. His brothers, men of valour, were two thousand seven hundred..."). This numbering was "for every matter pertaining to God, and for the affairs of the king".
There is no sin in taking a census just as there is no sin in jotting down how much money you have in various bank accounts or investments, and working out your total net worth. It's the motive for doing so, and your attitude and feeling before and after which can be sinful. And so it was with David here. We recall Moses and Aaron taking the census without sin (Num. 1:4); indeed there were three censuses conducted in the wilderness, and David had numbered his men in 2 Sam. 18:1, as had Joshua (Josh. 8:10). Perhaps David's bad motives were the 'satan' in view, confirmed by God. We also must factor in that a census of Israel stands in direct contrast to the fact Abraham's seed would not be able to be counted for multitude (Gen. 13:16). The promises to David had spelt out how this would happen- after David's death, he would have a descendant who would be God's Son, who would have a house / family that would last eternally. And David would be resurrected to participate in that eternal age. By numbering Israel, David was ignoring that promise, with all the Divine grace implicit in it- and that was the essence of his sin here. The connections with Balaam continue, in that God also tried to teach Balaam the same in Num. 23:10: "Who can count the dust of Jacob, or number the fourth part of Israel?".
The books of Samuel and Chronicles are parallel accounts of the same
incidents, as the four gospels are records of the same events but using
different language. 2 Sam. 24:1 records: “Yahweh... moved David against
Israel” in order to make him take a census of Israel. The parallel account
in 1 Chron. 21:1 says that “Satan stood up against Israel, and moved
David” to take the census. In one passage God does the ‘moving’, in the
other Satan does it. The only conclusion is that God acted as or through a ‘Satan’ or
adversary to David. He did the same to Job by bringing trials into his
life, so that Job said about God: “With the strength of Your hand You
oppose me” (Job 30:21); ‘You are acting as a Satan against me’, was what
Job was basically saying. Or again, speaking of God: “I must appeal for
mercy to my accuser (Satan)” (Job 9:15 NRSV). The idea is sometimes used
to describe our greatest adversary, i.e. our own sin, and at times for
whole systems or empires which stand opposed to the people of God and
personify sinfulness and evil. But it seems obvious that it is a bizarre
approach to Bible reading to insist that whenever we meet these words
'Satan' and 'Devil', we are to understand them as references to a
personal, supernatural being.
Perhaps the satan which moved David to number Israel was a Satan-Angel,
as in the case of the righteous Angel involved with Balaam, acting as a
satan / adversary, and with Job. The parallel with Balaam is that God sent
a Satan-Angel against him because His anger was kindled against Balaam
(Num. 22:22, the same phrase as in :1). The Angel may have acted directly on David's heart to bring about a trial for
both David and Israel. This is one of the many indications that the
numbering of the people was not David's sin.
See on :10. But the adversaries to David and Israel were at that
point the surrounding nations. Even if an Angel was involved, the
immediate 'satan' would have been an approaching enemy army; and David
wanted to know how many men he had to fight off that invasion. Or it could
have been an extension of the gathering of troops made at the time of 2
Sam. 20:4, when David wanted to know how many soldiers he could really
count on after Absalom's rebellion. See on :2.
2Sa 24:2 The king said to Joab the captain of the army, who was with him,
Now go back and forth through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to
Beersheba, and number the people, that I may know the sum of the people-
The list of David's mighty men just given in 2 Sam. 23 included men
literally from Dan to Beersheba. I suggested on :1 that the occasion of
this census may have been when David wanted to know how many soldiers he
could really count on after Absalom's rebellion. It's possible that
although out of chronological sequence, the catalogue of mighty men in 2
Sam. 23 was the result of this census. This would explain Joab's comment
in 1 Chron. 21:3 "Are they not all my Lord's servants?", as if to say
'Loyalty to you is not in question, taking a census won't prove loyalty to
you'.
2Sa 24:3 Joab said to the king, Now may Yahweh your God add to the people,
however many they may be, one hundred times-
Joab is alluding to Dt. 1:11. For all his unspirituality, he did also
have a spiritual side. He was not unaware of the scriptures, and seemed to
want to do what was genuinely best for Israel. Men with deeply mixed
motives is quite a theme of the Bible's historical records; and that is
because they are true to life. For that is how people are.
And may the eyes of my lord
the king see it. But why does my lord the king delight in this thing?-
"May the eyes..." implies 'May it happen in the king’s
life-time', an allusion to the promises to David that his eyes would see
his seed and house established. But that was to happen after David slept
with his father's in death. Joab is surely repeating David's wrong
interpretation of the promises to him.
The numbering of Israel was another weak moment for David (note 2 Sam. 24:3,4,10), leading to suffering for others. Yet this same David had written that “there is no king saved by the multitude of an host” (Ps. 33:16). Perhaps this was an expression of repentance after this incident; or, if written before it, an example of David being over confident of his faith. “Why will he be a cause of trespass to Israel?” (1 Chron. 21:3) suggests Joab suspected the people would not pay the half shekel required when a census was taken, and so would be led into sin. Although it was their fault, the situation was provoked by God Himself provoking David to take the census, because His anger was kindled against Israel (:1). This would then be an example of God confirming a sinful people in the way they wished to go.
2Sa 24:4 Notwithstanding, the king’s word prevailed against Joab, and
against the captains of the army. Joab and the captains of the army went
out from the presence of the king, to number the people of Israel-
The army captains likewise agreed with Joab that the census was not a
good idea. This incident is at a time when David's word prevails against
Joab and the generals, and we get the impression that this would not have
happened after his sin with Bathsheba, after which Joab speaks and acts
towards David in a belligerent manner. So the incident may be not in
chronological order; indeed many argue that none of the cameos of Davidic history at the
end of 2 Samuel are in chronological order. But see my arguments
to the contrary on :1.
2Sa 24:5 They passed over the Jordan, and encamped in Aroer, on the right
side of the city that is in the middle of the valley of Gad, and to Jazer-
The list of cities given in this section is detailed, and if they
just describe the itinerary and maximum extent of the route taken by the
generals in making the census, we wonder why such detail is given. I
suggest that the areas named were those where they found significant
numbers of men loyal to David and willing to fight for him. For that was
the purpose of the census. Jazer was a priestly city (Josh. 21:39). Yet it
was on the very borders of Hebrew territory, suggesting that Israel gave
the Levites the remotest and very poorest of their cities, rather than the
best. Yet we also see the theme discussed on 2 Sam. 23:20 continued- that
the Levites, although exempted from military service by the Law (Num.
1:47), were often to be found amongst David's most loyal soldiers.
2Sa 24:6 then they came to Gilead, and to the land of Tahtim Hodshi; and
they came to Dan Jaan, and around to Sidon-
"Tahtim Hodshi" is unknown, so we can go with LXX "to the land of the
Hittites to Kedesh". Sidon likewise was never really inhabited by the
Hebrews (Jud. 1:31) but rather by the Phoenicians, who are therefore
called the Zidonians. But the idea may be that in these Gentile areas,
David had soldiers he could count on. Because it is a theme of the list of
commanders in 2 Sam. 23 that David's most loyal supporters were often
Gentiles or from distant, isolated areas. This is often the case with the
Lord's supporters in this life.
2Sa 24:7 and came to the stronghold of Tyre, and to all the cities of the
Hivites, and of the Canaanites; and they went out to the south of Judah,
at Beersheba-
This could be simply defining the borders of the areas covered. But
there is also the possibility that just as the mighty men of David were
from various odd places, there were pockets of loyalty to David in various
unusual places such as the city of Tyre- which was never generally
inhabited by the Israelites. And likewise, the list of the mighty men in 2
Sam. 23 include Gentiles who had previously been David's enemies. And so
it is possible that amongst the Canaanites, there were groups of men loyal
to David who could be counted as his loyal soldiers.
2Sa 24:8 So when they had gone back and forth through all the land, they
came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and twenty days-
The maximum human gestation period may have been thus understood at
the time. We can understand the concern of Joab and the generals; they
were going to be scattered throughout Israel and this would leave the
nation very weak and open to attack. We see the contradiction, the fear
was of some 'Satan', some external group of attackers, and yet by the
military leadership scattering amongst Israel to take the census, they
were left even weaker before the threat. We wonder at what stage David was
ever able to allow his army generals nine months to take a census. We get
the impression that he was under constant military threat, especially
after the sin with Bathsheba. So this incident may have occurred well
before that.
2Sa 24:9 Joab delivered the sum of the numbering of the people to the
king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew
the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men-
According to 1 Chron. 21:5, there were 1,100,000 “men
that drew sword” in Israel. According to 2 Sam. 24:9, there were 800,000
“valiant men” in Israel, according to the same census. One way to
reconcile this is to focus on this distinction between "valiant men" and
standard soldiers. The Samuel record is perceiving that there was a
higher level of commitment amongst some who were numbered. There were the enthusiasts, and those who
merely could draw a sword. They were all living on different levels.
2Sa 24:10 David’s heart struck him after that he had numbered the people-
This phrase is used three times of David; his heart struck him
concerning cutting off Saul's skirt (1 Sam. 24:5- false guilt), about
Bathsheba (Ps. 102:4- true guilt) and now about numbering the people (2
Sam. 24:10), which I suggest was a mixture of true and false guilt.
Unlike with his sin with Bathsheba, David offers repentance before
the judgment for his sin has been given. The grade of his repentance here
does appear to be higher, but he still slips back from it in that he goes
on to command Solomon to build the temple, prepares for it, and sets
Solomon up to slay all potential rivals.
David said to Yahweh, I have sinned greatly in that which I have
done-
The response is similar to that to the sin with Bathsheba, again
before a prophet. Balaam also said the same words (Num. 22:34), and again
we find an Angel 'standing'. Although David did take false guilt, it seems
there was some element of real failure.
But now, Yahweh, put away, I beg you, the iniquity of Your servant;
for I have done very foolishly-
We are not told specifically what "iniquity" David had in
view. For to take a census was not of itself a sin. Possibly David in mind
his great iniquity, the specific iniquity, with Bathsheba and Uriah. He
had not adequately repented of it, and now he realizes that. Or perhaps
"the iniquity" was his general desire to see the promises of 2 Sam. 7
fulfilled in himself and his family immediately, with a physical temple
instead of a house of believers in his future Messianic descendant. And I
have suggested that it was this fundamental desire which may have been
behind his desire to take Bathsheba. And all this is so typical of our
experience. Incidents may trigger false guilt over something, but we are
led by them to recognize our real guilt over another matter.
The allusion is to the foolishness of Saul (1 Sam. 13:13). He feels
he is no better than Saul for his trust in human strength; see on :14.
1 Chron. 21:6,7 says that David's "word" of command of the census was
"abominable" to Joab, and also God was "displeased" with "this thing", the
same Hebrew translated "word". Unless this refers to His displeasure with
Joab for despising David's word. Yahweh had likewise been "displeased"
with David in the matter of Uriah (2 Sam. 11:27 s.w.). But although
David's lack of faith wasn't good, it seems to me on balance that he was
largely taking false guilt. Perhaps we are to read that God was displeased
with Israel's lack of response to the word of command about the census,
seeing Israel didn't pay the half shekel required at the time. Indeed
David's trust in human numbers would not have been pleasing to God, it was
a slip backwards. But we wonder whether he took false guilt in this
matter. For it was allowable to take a census of Israel, although there
was to be a half shekel tax paid at the time, which if not paid would
result in plague (Ex. 30:12-15). Joab perhaps guessed that those numbered
would not pay this and therefore the census would lead Israel into sin.
This is why God chose the punishment of plague; not upon David, but upon
Israel. Yet David perhaps realized all that, but knew that his lack of
faith in wanting a census, his lack of consideration for the weakness of
others, would lead them into sin and punishment. And therefore he felt
guilty. It could be argued that his sacrifice atoned for himself and for
the people, but they still suffered for not having paid the required
"atonement money". But then we must balance against this the comment that
"David had done that which was right in the eyes of Yahweh, and didn’t
turn aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life,
except only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite" (1 Kings 15:5). No mention
is made of the matter of the census. There is true guilt, the guilt we
should take for our actual sins; and false guilt, the guilt put on us by
others and the malfunctioning of the human conscience. In this matter of
David's guilt about the census, we may have an example of a man taking
false guilt. The fact Israel and not David were punished with plague would
rather confirm this. It may be impossible for us to sort out within us
what is true guilt or false guilt, at least not be any intellectual
process. But we can rest assured that all our guilt, of whatever kind, is
met in the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus, the ultimate guilt offering.
2Sa 24:11 When David rose up in the morning, the word of Yahweh came to
the prophet Gad, David’s seer, saying-
Gad was to write his record of these things (1 Chron. 29:29), so
maybe his record has been incorporated here into 2 Samuel.
2Sa 24:12 Go and speak to David, ‘Thus says Yahweh, I offer you three
things. Choose one of them, that I may do it to you’-
When given a choice, Ahaz declined to choose, and was condemned for
it (Is. 7:11). David declines to choose, because he preferred to fall into
God's hands of grace than decide himself; and is not condemned. The same
actions can be committed with different motives, and therefore only God
can judge. But the invitation to "choose one of them" was for David's
education, to elicit his reflection as to whether it was appropriate that
he were punished, or the people; or he be punished along with the people.
God's choice of plague was in accordance with the teaching of Ex.
30:12-15, that if Israel didn't pay the atonement money at the time of a
census, they would be punished with plague.
2Sa 24:13 So Gad came to David, and told him, and said to him, Shall seven
years of famine come to you in your land?-
LXX "three years", in line with 1 Chron. 21:12. As king, this would
not have hurt David personally. He was asked to consider whether this was
appropriate.
Or will you flee three months before your foes while they pursue
you? Or shall there be three days of plague in your land? Now answer, and
consider what answer I shall return to Him who sent me-
Fleeing before his enemies would have declared David not to
be the king of Israel. For Israel had demanded a king to lead them to
victory against their enemies. This option was tantamount to David
accepting that he was not fit to be Israel's king; and indeed it seems to
me that he should have resigned the kingship after the Bathsheba affair.
We note that David nearly died in a battle and had to be rescued by his
men (2 Sam. 21:15-17) and his men had asked him not accompany them into
battle with Absalom lest he be slain (2 Sam. 18:3)- all hardly the picture
of the invincible warrior leader. We may well ponder why we have in such
detail the lists of David's warriors and their heroic deeds in 2 Sam.
21:15-22; 23:8-23. One answer is that the contemporary records of the end
of a king's life list solely his heroic deeds; but the Divine record seems
to give the honour to David’s warriors, as if to say that it was their
heroic military deeds which saved Israel more than David's.
Famine and plague were punishments for disobedience to the covenant; and David as a supposed man of God and self appointed priest of his people was supposed to be able to intercede with God to end them. All the options reflected his spiritual impotence. And yet God does in fact allow David to intercede and shorten the plague, :15 LXX “from morning until dinner time”. It's as if once again, God's heart is touched by David's genuine heart for Him. Even though that was not His initial intention.
Famine, war and plague are the three Divine judgments listed in Ez. 14:21 as coming upon Jerusalem at the time of the exile. David had already experienced war and famine (because of the Gibeonites, 2 Sam. 21). Now he was to experience plague. The lesson to the exiles was that these judgments had indeed come because of sin, but the experience of them could be cut short by intense prayer and repentance after the pattern of David. For Yahweh "relented" of the three days plague because of David's prayer and sacrifice. See on :15. We see here the open ended nature of His purpose.
2Sa 24:14 David said to Gad, I am in distress-
The phrase "sore distressed" in 1 Chron. 21:13 is that used of Saul's
great distress on the night of his final condemnation (1 Sam. 28:15).
David felt he had been foolish as Saul had been (2 Sam. 24:10 = 1 Sam.
13:13). David had replaced Saul because of Saul's apostacy, but he was
being made to realize through this experience (even if it was all false
guilt), that he too was a sinner and saved by his acceptance of grace, and
not because he was intrinsically better than Saul.
Let us fall now into the
hand of Yahweh; for His mercies are great. Let me not fall into the hand
of man-
"His mercies are great" is the language of Ps. 51:1 about God's
mercy to David at the time of his sin with Bathsheba. This confirms the
suggestion that "the iniquity" brought to David's mind was the nexus of
sins surrounding the Bathsheba incident and not merely taking a census.
David appealed to God's mercy in the matter of Bathsheba (Ps. 51:1).
Perhaps he learned from that, and chose to throw himself upon that same
mercy. But the exact timing of this incident isn't clear. Perhaps it was
because of learning about God's grace through this incident that he later
learned to throw himself upon God's great mercy when he sinned with
Bathsheba and against Uriah.
David’s experience of God’s grace stayed with him when he
faced up to the results of his errors in the future. From experience,
he can ask to fall into the Lord’s hand rather than man’s, because “His mercies are great” (2 Sam. 24:14)- using the
same two Hebrew words he had used when Nathan came to him in Ps. 51:1: “Have
mercy upon me… according unto the multitude [Heb. ‘greatness’] of
thy tender mercies”. And so the experience of God’s gracious mercy
over one sin fortifies us to believe in His grace when, sadly, we fall
again; although, in passing, I think that in 2 Sam. 24, David himself didn’t
really do so much wrong. Yet he perceived himself to have sinned, so the
point is still established.
God is kinder than men. It's better to be punished by Him than by men.
This puts paid to the Catholic conception of God as a merciless torturer
of wicked men. Clearly the doctrine of eternal torments was invented by
men, not God.
2Sa 24:15 So Yahweh sent a plague on Israel from the morning even to the
appointed time; and there died of the people from Dan even to Beersheba
seventy thousand men-
"The appointed time" could refer to the time of the evening
sacrifice, which David was to offer on Araunah's property and not at the
sanctuary [Cp. 1 Kings 18:29, 36; Dan. 9:21; Acts 3:1. This
is supported by the explanation given in the Targum: “from the time of the
slaying of the perpetual sacrifice until it is burned”]. Or the idea may be that there was an "appointed time" of
suffering but it was not defined, because it was open ended- the terminus
depended upon the intensity of David's prayers and sacrifice. The three
day period of plague (:13) was changed because "Yahweh relented" (:16)-
because of David's prayer shortening the stipulated time period. This is
why there can be no prescriptive chronology of events in the last days,
nor date set for the Lord's return. The appointed time is variable,
depending upon factors such as human prayer, repentance and taking the
Gospel to all the world.
LXX "So David chose for himself the mortality: and they were the days of wheat-harvest; and the Lord sent a pestilence upon Israel from morning till noon, and the plague began among the people". The death of 70,000 throughout Israel must have turned public opinion yet further against David, as the deaths would have been perceived to be David's fault- the people bearing the judgment for his sins. He died unloved and unlamented, contrary to other great leaders of Israel who were long lamented after their deaths.
2Sa 24:16 When the angel stretched out his hand towards Jerusalem to
destroy it-
1 Chron. 21:16 says that the Angel had a "drawn sword" in hand, the
same words used of the Angel before Balaam (Num. 22:23,31). His donkey
"turned aside", using the same word for "stretched out" here. The sin of
Balaam was connected with idolatry, and I suggested on :1 that this was
the reason for God's anger being kindled against Israel. The sin of Balaam
has connections with that of Israel, but not particularly with that of
David. Again we get the impression the judgments were for the sake of the
sins of the people, the anger of Yahweh was with them, rather than with
David for wanting to take a census.
Yahweh relented of the disaster, and said to the angel who
destroyed the people, It is enough. Now stay your hand. The angel of
Yahweh was by the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite-
This could imply that Araunah's area was about to be destroyed. But
it seems we have here an example of the summary being made, and then we
read how that came about.
Perhaps David was in Jerusalem, maybe praying at the sanctuary, and
saw the Angel standing over the nearby hill of Jebus or Moriah. His prayer
and obedient, urgent sacrifice then stopped the Angel right there. The
Angel "stood" by the threshing floor (1 Chron. 21:15), as if the Angel's
path of destruction was stopped right there by the sacrifice offered in
that place.
The encouragement for the later generation of Jews was that the evil planned upon Jerusalem could be relented from; if there was genuine repentance. God's hand here was "stayed", but the encouragement was that God would not "stay" His hand in His program of redemption; the same word is often translated "fail" in the assurance that God will not fail His people in ultimately restoring them.
This “destroying Angel” (1 Chron. 21:15 RV) is surely “the destroyer” who operated in the wilderness. We see here one Angel having the ability to formulate a purpose and another blindly carrying it out until told not to- a scenario which we see repeated elsewhere (e. g. at the Passover and in Ez. 9). It was only David's prayer which lead to “the destroyer” ceasing. Notice how the Angel repented and then encouraged David to offer a sacrifice so the Angel would be "entreated for the land" (:19,25). Similarly, the Angel repented of punishing Israel and wanted to restore them, and to enable this to happen He encouraged the people through Ezra to be spiritual. Thus Angelic repentance has to be confirmed by human action.
2Sa 24:17 David had spoken to Yahweh when he saw the angel who struck the
people, and had said-
1 Chron. 21:17 adds “David lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of
the Lord standing between the earth and the heaven, having a drawn sword
in his hand stretched out over Jerusalem. And David and the elders, who
were clothed in sackcloth, fell upon their faces”.
Behold, I have sinned, and I have done perversely;
but these sheep, what have they done? Please let Your hand be against me,
and against my father’s house-
This was effectively asking God to abrogate the promises about his
family of 2 Sam 7. I suggested above that David's "iniquity" was
not the census but his desire to force a fulfillment of the promises to him
in terms of an immediate physical house and the declaration of Solomon as
Messiah. Now, for a moment, he sees his failure; and says he recognizes
that God's hand ought to be against his "house". But God by grace doesn't
take up David's suggestion. Yet soon David has relapsed into his plans for
temple building and his machinations for Solomon to be king and slay all
possible other contenders for the throne. David takes all the blame
upon himself [although :1 is clear the people were also guilty], for his
offence had been the immediate cause of the plague, and it is
characteristic of true penitence to dwell exclusively on our own sin,
without mentioning the complicity of others. So the grade of David's
repentance does seem quite genuine, as it was regarding the Bathsheba
affair. But again, he slipped away from that intensity. "These sheep..."
may imply David saw himself as the shepherd or king, whose error has
caused all this suffering for the sheep. In which case, he is accepting
that he is a failure as a king.
Thanks to David building an altar at his own expense and asking God to
kill him and his family, God stopped the plague upon Israel (2 Sam.
24:16,17- the stretched out hand of God in destruction was what David
asked to be upon him and his family). Israel were suffering the effect of
their own sin, in not paying the temple tax (Ex. 30:11-16); but in
the spirit of Christ, David was willing to die for them. And his dominant
desire was counted as if it had been done, and thanks to his
self-sacrificial spirit, the people were saved when they personally were
unworthy. The wrath of God can be turned away by the actions of those He
is angry with (Num. 25:4; Dt. 13:15-17; Ezra 10:14; Jonah 3:7,10; 2 Chron.
12:7; Jer. 4:4; 21:12). And yet that wrath can also be turned away by the
prayers of a third party (Ps. 106:23; Jer. 18:20; Job 42:7). This means
that in some cases, our prayers for others can be counted as if they have
repented. We can gain our brother for God’s Kingdom (Mt. 18:15), as Noah
saved his own house by his faithful preparation (Heb. 11:7). Through
our personal dying to the flesh, the life of Christ is manifest not
only in us, but is made available to others: “Always bearing about in the
body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be
made manifest in our body. For we which live are always delivered unto
death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest
in our mortal flesh. So then death worketh in us, but life in you” (2 Cor.
4:10-12). The life that is even now made manifest in us is also
made available to work in others because death to the flesh has worked in
us personally.
2Sa 24:18 Gad came that day to David-
At the direction of the Angel (1 Chron. 21:18).
And said to him, Go up, build an
altar to Yahweh on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite-
2 Chron. 3:1 implies David assumed that the spot where the Angel
appeared to him in 2 Sam. 24:17,18 was where he should build the temple.
It is another example of David's tendency to wildly over interpret, which
led him to a mistaken obsession about building the temple and assuming
Solomon to be his Messianic seed.
2Sa 24:19 David went up according to the saying of Gad, as Yahweh
commanded-
1 Chron. 21:16 says that David went along with the elders of Israel,
clothed in sackcloth. David is always presented as totally obedient to the
prophets in his life (Samuel, Nathan and Gad), unlike Saul who was
consistently disobedient to God's word through Samuel.
2Sa 24:20 Araunah looked out-
From the place in the threshing area where he was threshing wheat,
where he and his four sons had hidden from the presence of the Angel (1
Chron. 21:20). The records in Chronicles and Samuel perfectly fit with
each other, although clearly focusing upon different elements of the
scene; just like the gospel records.
And saw the king and his servants coming on towards him. Then
Araunah went out, and bowed himself before the king with his face to the
ground-
Chronicles has "saw the Angel". 2 Sam. 24:20 "saw the king". This may
reflect the confusion between malak ["Angel"] and melek
["king"], especially as ancient Hebrew didn't add the vowel points and the
consonants of the two words are the same, m-l-k. Or it could be
that Araunah saw David and also at the same time saw the Angel behind him
in some form.
2Sa 24:21 Araunah said, Why has my lord the king come to his servant?
David said, To buy your threshing floor, to build an altar to Yahweh-
The urgent thing required was sacrifice to God represented by the Angel
hovering over the hill where both men were standing, about to slay the
people of Jerusalem. We wonder why David firstly asks to buy the threshing
floor, as this was a long process which Araunah may have needed to think
carefully about as it was his home. Maybe this is a hint that Araunah was
not a worshipper of Yahweh and therefore the land must be bought before an
offering to another God could be made upon it. There is more evidence for
that on :23. Or it may be that David wanted to offer the most genuine
sacrifice, which was thought to be offered upon one's own property. He
offered to buy the threshing floor "for the full price" (1 Chron. 21:22),
the same phrase used of Abraham's purchase of property from the Canaanites
in Gen. 23:9. This confirms the impression that Araunah was a Canaanite
and not an Israelite.
That the plague may be stopped from afflicting the people-
This is the very phrase of Num. 16:48,50 and Num. 25:8; Ps. 106:30,
where the people of Israel suffered from plague because of their idolatry,
and Aaron stopped it, standing between the living and the dead. David was
in an identical position to Aaron, again acting as the High Priest. And
again we have evidence that the essential sin being punished was not
David's taking of a census, but Israel's sin (see on :1).
2Sa 24:22 Araunah said to David, Let my lord the king take and offer up
what seems good to him. Behold, the cattle for the burnt offering, and the
threshing instruments and the yokes of the oxen for the wood-
Chronicles adds “and the wheat for the meat offering”. LXX "and the
wheels and furniture of the oxen for wood". "The threshing instruments"
may have referred to quite a major and expensive piece of equipment. But
Araunah totally senses the urgency of the situation and is willing to
offer even this as wood.
2Sa 24:23 all this, my king, does Araunah give to the king. Araunah said
to the king, May Yahweh your God accept you-
AV "All these things did Araunah, as a king, give unto the king".
This could mean that Araunah ['the scarlet one', maybe hinting at royalty]
was king of Jebus at the time; or had once been. The way Araunah speaks of
"Yahweh your God", whereas David speaks of "Yahweh my
God" (:24) could support the idea that he was a Gentile. But he was
genuinely willing to give freely toward the offering of sacrifice to
Yahweh. There are three different spellings of Araunah's name in the
record, and this might suggest his name was unusual and a Gentile name,
which could be legitimately be transcribed in different ways in Hebrew.
See on :21.
2Sa 24:24 The king said to Araunah, No; but I will most certainly buy it
from you for a price. I will not offer burnt offerings to Yahweh my God
which cost me nothing. So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen
for fifty shekels of silver-
I have suggested that the historical records were in places edited
and made relevant for the exiles; and given their mean attitude to
offerings in Mal. 1:10,13,14, David's example and principle would have
been pertinent. And this is an abiding principle; sacrifice is to be
costly, we are to be left "minus", rather than being without cost to us.
1 Chron. 21:25 speaks of 600 shekels for "the place", whilst 2 Sam. 24:24 mentions 50 shekels for the threshing floor and oxen. The entire area was later bought, in order to build the temple on that site (1 Chron. 22:1; 2 Chron. 3:1).
2Sa 24:25 David built an altar to Yahweh there, and offered burnt
offerings and peace offerings. So Yahweh heard the prayer for the land,
and the plague was stayed from Israel-
LXX "And the Lord hearkened to the land", as if His pity was stirred by
the tragedy seen there. The idea is the same as in 2 Sam. 21:14, that the
sin had affected the land, but sacrifice meant that the land's suffering
stopped once it had been repented of and atoned for. 1 Chron. 21:26 adds
that God "answered him from the sky by fire on the altar of burnt
offering". This is just the language of God justifying Himself over Baal
at the time of Elijah. I have suggested throughout that the plague was
essentially punishment for Israel's idolatry; see on :1. The Angel put the
sword back into its sheath (1 Chron. 21:27) at Yahweh's command. We have
here a visual representation of God's sensitivity to human prayer and
repentance. Burnt offerings always precede peace offerings (2 Sam. 24:25),
because sacrifice is the principle upon which we can have peace with God.
But David remained traumatized by the incident, fearing the sword he had
seen (1 Chron. 21:30). This was a similar reaction by him to how he feared
association with the ark for some period after the slaying of Uzzah (1
Chron. 13:12,13). The similarity in reaction is another indication that
the record is true and the character portrayals absolutely consistent, as
could only be true of a Divinely inspired record.
LXX adds "and Solomon made an addition to the altar afterwards, for it was little at first". The site was purchased for this; see on :24.
We reflect that God heard David's prayer and stopped the punishment. But if, as I have suggested, the sin was David's desire to accomplish the Kingdom by his own efforts... he returned to that sin. And God surely foreknew that. The quality of David's repentance was intense and sincere at the moment, as it was with the sin with Bathsheba. But it didn't remain at that level and he degraded from that level. But still God, at that moment, forgave. We conclude that God forgives, or deals with sin, in various ways. Sincere, lasting repentance is only one of them. He recognizes the sin exists, but can choose to overlook it or deal with it in various ways. As a Jewish writer puts it so well: "Remission can be accomplished in any number of ways: God can carry the sins away (compare the scapegoat ritual) so they are no longer connected to (and no longer have an effect on) the sinner; God can pay them no attention by passing them by; God can moderate God's anger, change God's mind, exercise compassion, and forgive or ameliorate punishment; God can wash away the sins, so they disappear like a laundered stain; God can throw them far away into the water, where they will have no impact. What a wonderful conflation of images for forgiveness, even when deserving of punishment".
Previous Chapter
