REFORMED PERSPECTIVES ON 2 SAMUEL 24:1 AND 1 CHRONICLES 21:1

When reading the historical accounts of King David’s reign, we often stumble upon what appears to be a glaring contradiction in Scripture. In 2 Samuel 24:1, we read “the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, ‘Go, number Israel and Judah.’” Yet, when we turn to the parallel account in 1 Chronicles 21:1, we read: “Satan stood against Israel and incited David to number Israel.”

The apparent discrepancy raises profound theological questions: Who tempted David to sin? Was it God or Satan? Far from being a contradiction, the parallel texts open a window into the Reformed view on God’s sovereignty and secondary causes. The texts reveal how God works in and through all things—even the sinful actions of men and the rebellious schemes of Satan—to accomplish His perfect will.

 

WHO TEMPTED DAVID TO SIN? THE CONTEXT

To understand these passages better, we must consider their historical context. David’s census was sinful not because counting the people was inherently wrong (God Himself had commanded censuses in Numbers 1:2 and 26:2), but because of David’s underlying motivation. Rather than trusting in God’s promise to multiply Israel “as the stars of heaven” (Genesis 22:17), David sought security in the visible strength of his military forces. His pride led him to measure his kingdom’s might in human terms rather than resting in God’s covenant promises.

The two historical books also have different emphases. Samuel  focuses on God’s sovereign actions in Israel’s history, highlighting divine causality. Chronicles, written after the exile, often emphasises human responsibility and the spiritual dimension of historical events. These complementary perspectives give us a fuller picture of God’s workings in history.

 

UNDERSTANDING DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY

Central to Reformed theology is the absolute sovereignty of God over all events. As Scripture declares, “I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the LORD, who does all these things” (Isaiah 45:7). Similarly, Amos 3:6 asks rhetorically, “Does disaster come to a city, unless the LORD has done it?”

The Reformed tradition maintains God sovereignly ordains whatsoever comes to pass, yet without being the author of sin. This requires careful theological distinctions. God’s relationship to good and evil is asymmetrical: He actively works righteousness but only permits evil while directing it to His wise and holy ends.

Reformed theology distinguishes between God’s decretive will (what He has ordained to happen) and His preceptive will (what He commands as moral duty). While God decreed that David would number the people, He did not approve of David’s sinful motivations in doing so, which violated His preceptive will.

God’s sovereignty extends even over the actions of Satan and evil spirits. As the ultimate primary cause, God works through secondary causes—including human and angelic free agents—to accomplish His purposes without violating their nature as voluntary actors.

 

WHO TEMPTED DAVID TO SIN? INSIGHTS FROM THEOLOGIANS

The apparent tension between these passages has been addressed by many Reformed theologians throughout church history, providing valuable insights for our understanding.

• Matthew Henry, in his commentary on 2 Samuel 24, provides a harmonisation of these passages: “God, as a righteous Judge, permitted Satan, as a roaring lion, to provoke David to number the people. He withdrew His grace, which was necessary to prevent it, and so gave him (David) up to his own heart’s lusts… Both were true; Satan suggested it, and God permitted it for wise and holy ends.” Henry’s explanation preserves both divine sovereignty and the reality of secondary causes. God’s withdrawal of restraining grace allowed Satan’s temptation to take effect, making both statements true in different respects.
• Jonathan Edwards, in his work Concerning the Divine Decrees, expands on how God can decree sin without being its author: “God may hate a thing as it is in itself, and considered simply as evil, and yet it may be his will it should come to pass, considering all consequences… God wills to permit sin, not as he wills holiness, but for wise ends, and because he knows how to order it to good.” For Edwards, God’s permission of sin always serves a greater purpose that ultimately glorifies His name and benefits His elect.
• Thomas Watson, in his influential work A Body of Divinity, addresses how God can decree what He forbids without being the author of sin: “God permits sin, but does not approve it… He has a hand in the action where sin is, but not in the sin of the action… God does not infuse evil into men, but withholds that grace that would hinder it, when his justice requires.” Watson’s distinction between God’s relationship to the action and the sinfulness of the action helps resolve the apparent contradiction. God sovereignly ordained that Satan would tempt David and that David would yield to the temptation, but He neither approved of Satan’s malice nor David’s pride.

 

CONCLUSION: WHO TEMPTED DAVID TO SIN?

When we harmonise 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 through the lens of Reformed theology, we find no contradiction but rather complementary truths about God’s sovereign governance of all things. God, in His perfect wisdom, ordained David to number Israel as a means of manifesting His righteous judgment against the nation’s sin. Satan, acting as a secondary cause within the boundaries of God’s sovereign permission, was the direct agent who tempted David. And David, as a morally responsible agent, freely chose to yield to this temptation out of the pride of his heart.

This understanding highlights the multi-layered nature of God’s providence. Far from undermining God’s sovereignty, the inclusion of Satan as an intermediate agent in 1 Chronicles 21:1 reinforces the Bible’s teaching that even the devil’s most malicious schemes ultimately serve God’s perfect purposes. As Joseph declared to his brothers, “You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” (Genesis 50:20).

 

WHO TEMPTED DAVID TO SIN? RELATED FAQs

What is the difference between direct and indirect causation in God’s providence? In Reformed theology, God may directly cause good things to happen, but He only indirectly causes evil through secondary agents. When Scripture states God “incited David,” it refers to His indirect causation through the withdrawal of restraining grace and the permission of Satan’s activity, not that God directly implanted evil desires in David’s heart. This distinction preserves both God’s sovereignty and His moral perfection.

• How does Reformed theology understand God’s sovereign permission versus His active causation? God’s active causation refers to when He directly brings about an event or action through His positive decree. His sovereign permission, however, refers to when He allows evil to occur by withholding restraining grace while still directing events toward His predetermined ends. In the case of David’s census, God sovereignly permitted Satan to tempt David and sovereignly permitted David to yield to that temptation, all while remaining entirely holy.
• How do Reformed theologians explain the relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility? Reformed theology affirms both God’s absolute sovereignty and human moral responsibility without diminishing either. God’s decree establishes the certainty of all events, including human choices, yet humans make these choices freely according to their own desires without external coercion. David was fully responsible for his sinful choice to number Israel, even though this event occurred within God’s sovereign plan, because David acted according to his own uncoerced desires.

How does Job 1-2 help us understand how Satan acts only within boundaries God permits? In Job 1-2, Satan could only afflict Job after receiving explicit divine permission and within clearly defined boundaries set by God. Similarly, Satan’s temptation of David occurred only within the parameters of God’s sovereign decree. Satan functions as God’s reluctant servant, never able to act beyond the limits God establishes, which demonstrates that even the devil’s most malicious activities ultimately serve to fulfil God’s perfect purposes.

• How does a Reformed understanding of divine sovereignty shape our view of evil and suffering? Understanding divine sovereignty assures believers evil and suffering are never outside God’s control but always serve His perfect purposes. Even the most painful experiences are not random or meaningless but are ordained by a loving Father who works all things together for the good of those who love Him (Romans 8:28). This perspective provides profound comfort by affirming that even the darkest circumstances remain firmly within the grasp of God’s providential care.
• What comfort can we find in knowing God’s sovereignty extends even over Satan’s activities? Knowing that Satan operates only within divinely established boundaries means believers need never fear that evil will ultimately triumph. Satan’s most vicious attacks against God’s people can only accomplish what God permits and what ultimately serves His glory and our good. This understanding allows Christians to face spiritual warfare with confidence, knowing that “He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world” (1 John 4:4).
• How does this understanding of God’s sovereignty deepen our trust in His providence? Understanding that God sovereignly governs even the sinful actions of men and demons without Himself being tainted by sin deepens our trust in His perfect wisdom and power. When we grasp that nothing—not even evil—falls outside God’s providential control, we can rest in His promises with greater confidence. This Reformed perspective strengthens faith by revealing a God whose sovereignty is so comprehensive that He can use even evil to accomplish good without compromising His holiness.

What are the pastoral implications for counselling those struggling with the problem of evil? When counselling those struggling with evil and suffering, the Reformed perspective offers the assurance that their pain is not meaningless but has been ordained by a loving God for wise purposes. Rather than offering superficial answers, pastors can point to the cross of Christ, where we see the ultimate example of God using the greatest evil (the crucifixion of His Son) to accomplish the greatest good (the redemption of His people). This approach provides genuine comfort by directing sufferers to trust in God’s character rather than demanding complete understanding of His purposes.

 

WHO TEMPTED DAVID TO SIN? OUR RELATED POSTS

• Bible ‘Contradictions’: Not Quite Hurdles to Faith
• Genesis 1 and 2 Accounts: Reconciling Apparent Contradictions
• Papyri and Dead Sea Scrolls: Archaeology Endorses Scripture
• Historical Reliability of the Bible: Astonishing Archaeological Finds