null
...
TL;DR the satan is not in the old testament. modern satan was invented later. the bible has a surprise scripture.
also:
Debate: God VS S*tan [DarkMatter 2525 Video]
- Thread starter null
- Start date
TL;DR the satan is not in the old testament. modern satan was invented later. the bible has a surprise scripture.
also:
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
"the anger of the Lord" is the key here. And yet it wasn't highlighted. Plus I don't know what version of the Bible you or they are getting this from. That's also important.
null
...
it's not.
take your pick.
Bible Hub: Search, Read, Study the Bible in Many Languages
Online Bible Study Suite. Topical, Greek and Hebrew study tools, plus concordances, commentaries, sermons and devotionals.
biblehub.com
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
it is because that's what the two verses are referencing.
null
...
the two verses refer to the same person by different names, maybe?
Difficult Passages: 2 Samuel 24 vs 1 Chronicles 21.
So, first question:
Who incited David?
Short answer: Satan did. Today in theology we often talk about the “active” and “passive” or more frequently “active” and “permissive” will of God. To say God allows something to take place, we recognize, is not the same thing as saying God is the one who directly causes it to occur. God actively redeems his people because he permitted them to sin of their own volition. The Ancient Hebrew mindset, it seems, did not account for such a strong distinction. It seems they would have been able to recognize the difference if they talked about it (hence the distinction that was made by the (later) writer of Chronicles), but nothing in their language could directly account for this. In either case, it remains that the two passages in juxtaposition make clear that Satan directly tempted David, David freely chose to give into this temptation, and that God allowed it all to come about because he was sovereign over the entire situation. The difference in the two passages, though, brings out a different emphasis in both. While in the Chronicles passage the idea is that David had gone so low as to succumb to the temptation of the devil, in the Samuel passage, the main idea is that God did not abandon Israel nor was God’s sovereignty ever in question. Given the themes of both books this makes sense. Chronicles seems heavily “David focused” and Samuel seems heavily focused on the relationship of God to the rulers of Israel (and how their rule is paralleled or not by God’s rule).
So, first question:
Who incited David?
Short answer: Satan did. Today in theology we often talk about the “active” and “passive” or more frequently “active” and “permissive” will of God. To say God allows something to take place, we recognize, is not the same thing as saying God is the one who directly causes it to occur. God actively redeems his people because he permitted them to sin of their own volition. The Ancient Hebrew mindset, it seems, did not account for such a strong distinction. It seems they would have been able to recognize the difference if they talked about it (hence the distinction that was made by the (later) writer of Chronicles), but nothing in their language could directly account for this. In either case, it remains that the two passages in juxtaposition make clear that Satan directly tempted David, David freely chose to give into this temptation, and that God allowed it all to come about because he was sovereign over the entire situation. The difference in the two passages, though, brings out a different emphasis in both. While in the Chronicles passage the idea is that David had gone so low as to succumb to the temptation of the devil, in the Samuel passage, the main idea is that God did not abandon Israel nor was God’s sovereignty ever in question. Given the themes of both books this makes sense. Chronicles seems heavily “David focused” and Samuel seems heavily focused on the relationship of God to the rulers of Israel (and how their rule is paralleled or not by God’s rule).
You stated all of this, ignoring the first sentence in 2 Samuel 24. 2 Samuel 24 states clearly, "Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel and he incited David against them, saying "Go and take a census of Isreal and Judah." When Lord is capitalized in the middle of a sentence, it is refering to The Lord of all, not some lord. Satan would be considered a lowercase lord, but God would be considered the Lord.
So no, this is not a passive act of God according to 2 Samuel 24. This act was a direct action by the Lord, according to 2 Samuel 24. All of the apologetics after the fact does not change what the actual passage is saying. In fact, there should not be a need for apologetics to correct a divinely inspired holybook.
O³ (O cubed)
No more PAWGs, PLEASE??!!!??
What's up with all these atheism posts? You don't believe in a God? Ok.
They gotta do something knowing they might be wrong and go to hell when they dieWhat's up with all these atheism posts? You don't believe in a God? Ok.
EDIT:
WE TAKING OVERRRRRR **Akon voice**
010101
C L O N E*0690//////
SENSE VERSUS NONSENSE*
What about Vishnu? What if he is the one. How about The Buddha, what if that is the right path? You are so certain about your own path, you fail to realize that there are plenty of other people so certain about theirs.
I personally admit I do not believe in any of them on this planet, but I also do not know what the truth is. So I see no problem with anyone questioning the belief system they were more than likely born with.
None of them are the true god so idk why you bringing them up
Yea, a Hindus would say the samething about your chosen God. Same with all the other 4000 religions on this planet. You think you are right, but so do they.
Didn’t read