...Thank your for this interesting discussion. I discovered some time ago, from a book of parallel passages, that this whole passage is one of the few in Chronicles which is closely parallel to Samuel/Kings but not largely verbally identical. If the Chronicler did use the book of Samuel, or its predecessor, as a source, for some reason that is not clear he more or less rewrote the whole incident. The change from "God" to "Satan", or "an adversary", is only a very small part of this rewriting. It could well be that the Chronicler's source is actually a separate tradition or record of the same events. And the use of "Satan" or "an adversary" in the Chronicler's version might be come from this tradition or record, and so much older than the time of the Chronicler. This theory would also imply that this _locus classicus_ may actually be a rather untypical and misleading one.
Although 2 Samuel 24:1 vs. 1 Chronicles 21:1 is a _locus classicus_ in understanding the difference between the Chronicler's treatment of David and the Deuteronomistic Historian's treatment of David, ...
... Clearly, the Chronicler is altering his Deuteronomistic source text. But is he completely changing the referent, or just using a subtle circumlocution?
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.