الكتاب المقدس

Expositor's Bible Commentary 1 Chronicles 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel. SATAN "And again the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Israel, and He moved David against them saying, Go, number Israel and Judah." 2 Samuel 24:1 "And Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel."- 1 Chronicles 21:1 "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God for God cannot be tempted with evil, and He Himself tempteth no man: but each man is tempted when he is drawn away by his own lust and enticed."- Jam 1:13-14 THE census of David is found both in the book of Samuel and in Chronicles, in very much the same form; but the chronicler has made a number of small but important alterations and additions. Taken together, these changes involve a new interpretation of the history, and bring out lessons that cannot so easily be deduced from the narrative in the book of Samuel. Hence it is necessary to give a separate exposition of the narrative in Chronicles. As before, we will first review the alterations made by the chronicler and then expound the narrative in the form in which it left his hand, or rather in the form in which it stands in the Masoretic text. Any attempt to deal with the peculiarly complicated problem of the textual criticism of Chronicles would be out of place here. Probably there are no corruptions of the text that would appreciably affect the general exposition of this chapter. At the very outset the chronicler substitutes Satan for Jehovah, and thus changes the whole significance of the narrative. This point is too important to be dealt with casually, and must be reserved for special consideration later on. In 1 Chronicles 21:2 there is a slight change that marks the different points of the views of the Chronicler and the author of the narrative in the book of Samuel. The latter had written that Joab numbered the people from Dan to Beersheba, a merely conventional phrase indicating the extent of the census. It might possibly, however, have been taken to denote that the census began in the north and was concluded in the south. To the chronicler, whose interests all centered in Judah, such an arrangement seemed absurd; and he carefully guarded against any mistake by altering "Dan to Beersheba" into "Beersheba to Dan." In 1 Chronicles 21:3 the substance of Joab’s words is not altered, but various slight touches are added to bring out more clearly and forcibly what is implied in the book of Samuel. Joab had spoken of the census as being the king’s pleasure. It was scarcely appropriate to speak of David "taking pleasure in" a suggestion of Satan. In Chronicles Joab’s words are less forcible. "Why doth my lord require this thing?" Again, in the book of Samuel Joab protests against the census without assigning any reason. The context, it is true, readily supplies one; but in Chronicles all is made clear by the addition, "Why will he" (David) "be a cause of guilt unto Israel?" Further on the chronicler’s special interest in Judah again betrays itself. The book of Samuel described, with some detail, the progress of the enumerators through Eastern and Northern Palestine by way of Beersheba to Jerusalem. Chronicles having already made them start from Beersheba, omits these details. In 1 Chronicles 21:5 the numbers in Chronicles differ not only from those of the older narrative, but also from the chronicler’s own statistics in chapter 27. In this last account the men of war are divided into twelve courses of twenty-four thousand each, making a total of two hundred and eighty-eight thousand; in the book of Samuel Israel numbers eight hundred thousand, and Judah five hundred thousand; but in our passage Israel is increased to eleven hundred thousand, and Judah is reduced to four hundred and seventy thousand. Possibly the statistics in chapter 27 are not intended to include all the fighting men, otherwise the figures cannot be harmonized. The discrepancy between our passage and the book of Samuel is perhaps partly explained by the following verse, which is an addition of the chronicler. In the book of Samuel the census is completed, but our additional verse states that Levi and Benjamin were not included in the census. The chronicler understood that the five hundred thousand assigned to Judah in the older narrative were the joint total of Judah and Benjamin; he accordingly reduced the total by thirty thousand, because, according to his view, Benjamin was omitted from the census. The increase in the number of the Israelites is unexpected. The chronicler does not usually overrate the northern tribes. Later on Jeroboam, eighteen years after the disruption, takes the field against Abijah with "eight hundred thousand chosen men," a phrase that implies a still larger number of fighting men, if all had been mustered. Obviously the rebel king would not be expected to be able to bring into the field as large a force as the entire strength of Israel in the most flourishing days of David. The chronicler’s figures in these two passages are consistent, but the comparison is not an adequate reason for the alteration in the present chapter. Textual corruption is always a possibility in the case of numbers, but on the whole this particular change does not admit of a satisfactory explanation. In 1 Chronicles 21:7 we have a very striking alteration. According to the book of Samuel, David’s repentance was entirely spontaneous: "David’s heart smote him after that he had numbered the people"; but here God smites Israel, and then David’s conscience awakes. In 1 Chronicles 21:12 the chronicler makes a slight addition, apparently to gratify his literary taste. In the original narrative the third alternative offered to David had been described simply as "the pestilence," but in Chronicles the words "the sword of Jehovah" are added in antithesis to "the sword of Thine enemies" in the previous verse. 1 Chronicles 21:16 , which describes David’s vision of the angel with the drawn sword, is an expansion of the simple statement of the book of Samuel that David saw the angel. In 1 Chronicles 21:18 we are not merely told that Gad spake to David, but that he spake by the command of the angel of Jehovah. 1 Chronicles 21:20 , which tells us how Ornan saw the angel, is an addition of the chronicler’s. All these changes lay stress upon the intervention of the angel, and illustrate the interest taken by Judaism in the ministry of angels. Zechariah, the prophet of the Restoration, received his messages by the dispensation of angels; and the title of the last canonical prophet, Malachi, probably means "the Angel." The change from Araunah to Ornan is a mere question of spelling. Possibly Ornan is a somewhat Hebraized form of the older Jebusite name Araunah. In 1 Chronicles 21:22 the reference to "a full price" and other changes in the form of David’s Words are probably due to the influence of Genesis 23:9 . In 1 Chronicles 21:23 the chronicler’s familiarity with the ritual of sacrifice has led him to insert a reference to a meal offering, to accompany the burnt offering. Later on the chronicler omits the somewhat ambiguous words which seem to speak of Araunah as a king. He would naturally avoid anything like a recognition of the royal status of a Jebusite prince. In 1 Chronicles 21:25 David pays much more dearly for Ornan’s threshing-floor than in the book of Samuel. In the latter the price is fifty shekels of silver, in the former six hundred shekels of gold. Most ingenious attempts have been made to harmonize the two statements. It has been suggested that fifty shekels of silver means silver to the value of fifty shekels of gold and paid in gold, and that six hundred shekels of gold means the value of six hundred shekels of silver paid in gold. A more lucid but equally impossible explanation is that David paid fifty shekels forevery tribe, six hundred in all. The real reason for the change is that when the Temple became supremely important to the Jews the small price of fifty shekels for the site seemed derogatory to the dignity of the sanctuary; six hundred shekels of gold was a more appropriate sum. Abraham had paid four hundred shekels for a burying-place; and a site for the Temple, where Jehovah had chosen to put His name, must surely have cost more. The chronicler followed the tradition which had grown up under the influence of this feeling. 1 Chronicles 21:27-30 ; 1 Chronicles 22:1 are an addition. According to the Levitical law, David was falling into grievous sin in sacrificing anywhere except before the Mosaic altar of burnt offering. The chronicler therefore states the special circumstances that palliated this offence against the exclusive privileges of the one sanctuary of Jehovah. He also reminds us that this threshing-floor became the site of the altar of burnt offering for Solomon’s temple. Here he probably follows an ancient and historical tradition; the prominence given to the threshing-floor in the book of Samuel indicates the special sanctity of the site. The Temple is the only sanctuary whose site could be thus connected with the last days of David. When the book of Samuel was written, the facts were too familiar to need any explanation; every one knew that the Temple stood on the site of Araunah’s threshing-floor. The chronicler, writing centuries later, felt it necessary to make an explicit statement on the subject. Having thus attempted to understand how our narrative assumed its present form, we will now tell the chronicler’s story of these incidents. The long reign of David was drawing to a close. Hitherto he had been blessed with uninterrupted prosperity and success. His armies had been victorious over all the enemies of Israel, the borders of the land of Jehovah had been extended, David himself was lodged with princely splendor, and the services of the Ark were conducted with imposing ritual by a numerous array of priests and Levites. King and people alike were at the zenith of their glory. In worldly prosperity and careful attention to religious observances David and his people were not surpassed by Job himself. Apparently their prosperity provoked the envious malice of an evil and mysterious being, who appears only here in Chronicles: Satan, the persecutor of Job. The trial to which he subjected the loyalty of David was more subtle and suggestive than his assault upon Job. He harassed Job as the wind dealt with the traveler in the fable, and Job only wrapped the cloak of his faith closer about him; Satan allowed David to remain in the full sunshine of prosperity, and seduced him into sin by fostering his pride in being the powerful and victorious prince of a mighty people. He suggested a census. David’s pride would be gratified by obtaining accurate information as to the myriads of his subjects. Such statistics would be useful for the civil organization of Israel; the king would learn where and how to recruit his army or to find an opportunity to impose additional taxation. The temptation appealed alike to the king, the soldier, and the statesman, and did not appeal in vain. David at once instructed Joab and the princes to proceed with the enumeration; Joab demurred and protested: the census would be a cause of guilt unto Israel. But not even the great influence of the commander-in-chief could turn the king from his purpose. His word prevailed against Joab, wherefore Joab departed, and went throughout all Israel, and came to Jerusalem. This brief general statement indicates a long and laborious task, simplified and facilitated in some measure by the primitive organization of society and by rough and ready methods adopted to secure the very moderate degree of accuracy with which an ancient Eastern sovereign would be contented. When Xerxes wished to ascertain the number of the vast army with which he set out to invade Greece, his officers packed ten thousand men into as small a space as possible and built a wall round them; then they turned them out, and packed the space again and again; and so in time they ascertained how many tens of thousands of men there were in the army. Joab’s methods would be different, but perhaps not much more exact. He would probably learn from the "heads of fathers’ houses" the number of fighting men in each family. Where the hereditary chiefs of a district were indifferent, he might make some rough estimate of his own. We may be sure that both Joab and the local authorities would be careful to err on the safe side. The king was anxious to learn that he possessed a large number of subjects. Probably as the officers of Xerxes went on with their counting they omitted to pack the measured area as closely as they did at first; they might allow eight or nine thousand to pass for ten thousand. Similarly David’s servants would, to say the least, be anxious not to underestimate the number of his subjects. The work apparently went on smoothly; nothing is said that indicates any popular objection or resistance to the census; the process of enumeration was not interrupted by any token of Divine displeasure against the "cause of guilt unto Israel." Nevertheless Joab’s misgivings were not set at rest; he did what he could to limit the range of the census and to withdraw at least two of the tribes from the impending outbreak of Divine wrath. The tribe of Levi would be exempt from taxation and the obligation of military service; Joab could omit them without rendering his statistics less useful for military and financial purposes. In not including the Levites in the general census of Israel, Joab was following the precedent set by the numbering in the wilderness. Benjamin was probably omitted in order to protect the Holy City, the chronicler following that form of the ancient tradition which assigned Jerusalem to Benjamin. Later on, { 1 Chronicles 27:23-24 } however, the chronicler seems to imply that these two tribes left to the last were not numbered because of the growing dissatisfaction of Joab with his task: "Joab the son of Zeruiah began to number, but finished not." But these different reasons for the omission of Levi and Benjamin do not mutually exclude each other. Another limitation is also stated in the later reference: "David took not the number of them twenty years old and under, because Jehovah had said that He would increase Israel like to the stars of heaven." This statement and explanation seems a little superfluous: the census was specially concerned with the fighting men, and in the book of Numbers only those over twenty are numbered. But we have seen elsewhere that the chronicler has no great confidence in the intelligence of his readers, and feels bound to state definitely matters that have only been implied and might be overlooked. Here, therefore, he calls our attention to the fact that the numbers previously given do not comprise the whole male population, but only the adults. At last the census, so far as it was carried out at all, was finished, and the results were presented to the king. They are meager and bald compared to the volumes of tables which form the report of a modern census. Only two divisions of the country are recognized: "Judah" and "Israel," or the ten tribes. The total is given for each: eleven hundred thousand for Israel, four hundred and seventy thousand for Judah, in all fifteen hundred and seventy thousand. Whatever details may have been given to the king, he would be chiefly interested in the grand total. Its figures would be the most striking symbol of the extent of his authority and the glory of his kingdom. Perhaps during the months occupied in taking the census David had forgotten the ineffectual protests of Joab, and was able to receive his report without any presentiment of coming evil. Even if his mind were not altogether at ease, all misgivings would for the time be forgotten, He probably made or had made for him some rough calculation as to the total of men, women, and children that would correspond to the vast array of fighting men. His servants would not reckon the entire population at less than nine or ten millions. His heart would be uplifted with pride as he contemplated the statement of the multitudes that were the subjects of his crown and prepared to fight at his bidding. The numbers are moderate compared with the vast populations and enormous armies of the great powers of modern Europe; they were far surpassed by the Roman Empire and the teeming populations of the valleys of the Nile, the Euphrates, and the Tigris; but during the Middle Ages it was not often possible to find in Western Europe so large a population under one government or so numerous an army under one banner. The resources of Cyrus may not have been greater when he started on his career of conquest; and when Xerxes gathered into one motley horde the warriors of half the known world, their total was only about double the number of David’s robust and warlike Israelites. There was no enterprise that was likely to present itself to his imagination that he might not have undertaken with a reasonable probability of success. He must have regretted that his days of warfare were past, and that the unwarlike Solomon, occupied with more peaceful tasks, would allow this magnificent instrument of possible conquests to rust unused. But the king was not long left in undisturbed enjoyment of his greatness. In the very moment of his exaltation, some sense of the Divine displeasure fell upon him. Mankind has learnt by a long and sad experience to distrust its own happiness. The brightest hours have come to possess a suggestion of possible catastrophe, and classic story loved to tell of the unavailing efforts of fortunate princes to avoid their inevitable downfall. Polycrates and Croesus, however, had not tempted the Divine anger by ostentatious pride; David’s power and glory had made him neglectful of the reverent homage due to Jehovah, and he had sinned in spite of the express warnings of his most trusted minister. When the revulsion of feeling came, it was complete. The king at once humbled himself under the mighty hand of God, and made full acknowledgment of his sin and folly: "I have sinned greatly in that I have done this thing: but now put away, I beseech Thee, the iniquity of Thy servant, for I have done very foolishly." The narrative continues as in the book of Samuel. Repentance could not avert punishment, and the punishment struck directly at David’s pride of power and glory. The great population was to be decimated either by famine, war, or pestilence. The king chose to suffer from the pestilence, "the sword of Jehovah"; "Let me fall now into the hand of Jehovah, for very great are His mercies: and let me not fall into the hand of man. So Jehovah sent a pestilence upon Israel, and there felt of Israel seventy thousand men." Not three days since Joab handed in his report, and already a deduction of seventy thousand would have to be made from its total; and still, the pestilence was not checked, for "God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it." If, as we have supposed, Joab had withheld Jerusalem from the census, his pious caution was now rewarded: "Jehovah repented Him of the evil, and said to the destroying angel, It is enough; now stay thine hand." At the very last moment the crowning catastrophe was averted. In the Divine counsels Jerusalem was already delivered, but to human eyes its fate still trembled in the balance: "And David lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of Jehovah stand between the earth and the heaven, having a drawn sword in his hand stretched out over Jerusalem." So another great Israelite soldier lifted up his eyes beside Jericho and beheld the captain of the host of Jehovah standing over against him with his sword drawn in his hand. { Joshua 5:13 } Then the sword was drawn to smite the enemies of Israel, but now it was turned to smite Israel itself. David and his elders fell upon their faces as Joshua had done before them: "And David said unto God, Is it not I that commanded the people to be numbered? even I it is that have sinned and done very wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done? Let Thine hand, I pray Thee, O Jehovah my God, be against me and against my father’s house, but not against Thy people, that they should be plagued." The awful presence returned no answer to the guilty king, but addressed itself to the prophet Gad, and commanded him to bid David go up and build an altar to Jehovah in the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite. The command was a message of mercy. Jehovah permitted David to build Him an altar; He was prepared to accept an offering at his hands. The king’s prayers were heard, and Jerusalem was saved from the pestilence. But still the angel stretched out his drawn sword over Jerusalem; he waited till the reconciliation of Jehovah with His people should have been duly ratified by solemn sacrifices. At the bidding of the prophet, David went up to the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite. Sorrow and reassurance, hope and fear, contended for the mastery. No sacrifice could call back to life the seventy thousand victims whom the pestilence had already destroyed, and yet the horror of its ravages was almost forgotten in relief at the deliverance of Jerusalem from the calamity that had all but overtaken it. Even now the uplifted sword might be only held back for a time; Satan might yet bring about some heedless and sinful act, and the respite might end not in pardon, but in the execution of God’s purpose of vengeance. Saul had been condemned because he sacrificed too soon; now perhaps delay would be fatal. Uzzah had been smitten because he touched the Ark; till the sacrifice was actually offered who could tell whether some thoughtless blunder would not again provoke the wrath of Jehovah? Under ordinary circumstances David would not have dared to sacrifice anywhere except upon the altar of burnt offering before the tabernacle at Gibeon; he would have used the ministry of priests and Levites. But ritual is helpless in great emergencies. The angel of Jehovah with the drawn sword seemed to bar the way to Gibeon, as once before he had barred Balaam’s progress when he came to curse Israel. In his supreme need David builds his own altar and offers his own sacrifices; he receives the Divine answer without the intervention this time of either priest or prophet. By God’s most merciful and mysterious grace, David’s guilt and punishment, his repentance and pardon, broke down all barriers between himself and God. But, as he went up to the threshing-floor, he was still troubled and anxious. The burden was partly lifted from his heart, but he still craved full assurance of pardon. The menacing attitude of the destroying angel seemed to hold out little promise of mercy and forgiveness, and yet the command to sacrifice would be cruel mockery if Jehovah did not intend to be gracious to His people and His anointed. At the threshing-floor Ornan and his four sons were threshing wheat, apparently unmoved by the prospect of the threatened pestilence. In Egypt the Israelites were protected from the plagues with which their oppressors were punished. Possibly now the situation was reversed, and the remnant of the Canaanites in Palestine were not afflicted by the pestilence that fell upon Israel. But Ornan turned back and saw the angel; he may not have known the grim mission with which the Lord’s messenger had been entrusted, but the aspect of the destroyer, his threatening attitude, and the lurid radiance of his unsheathed and outstretched sword must have seemed unmistakable tokens of coming calamity. Whatever might be threatened for the future, the actual appearance of this supernatural visitant was enough to unnerve the stoutest heart; and Ornan’s four sons hid themselves. Before long, however, Ornan’s terrors were somewhat relieved by the approach of less formidable visitors. The king and his followers had ventured to show themselves openly, in spite of the destroying angel: and they had ventured with impunity. Ornan went forth and bowed himself to David with his face to the ground. In ancient days the father of the faithful, oppressed by the burden of his bereavement, went to the Hittites to purchase a burying-place for his wife. Now the last of the Patriarchs, mourning for the sufferings of his people, came by Divine command to the Jebusite to purchase the ground on which to offer sacrifices, that the plague might be stayed from the people. The form of bargaining was somewhat similar in both cases. We are told that bargains are concluded in much the same fashion today. Abraham had paid four hundred shekels of silver for the field of Ephron in Machpelah, "with the cave which was therein, and all the trees that were in the field." The price of Ornan’s threshing-floor was m proportion to the dignity and wealth of the royal purchaser and the sacred purpose for which it was designed. The fortunate Jebusite received no less than six hundred shekels of gold. David built his altar, and offered up his sacrifices and prayers to Jehovah. Then, in answer to David’s prayers, as later in answer to Solomon’s, fire fell from heaven upon the altar of burnt offering, and all this while the sword of Jehovah flamed across the heavens above Jerusalem, and the destroying angel remained passive, but to all appearances unappeased. But as the fire of God fell from heaven, Jehovah gave yet another final and convincing token that He would no longer execute judgment against His people. In spite of all that had happened, to reassure them, the spectators must have been thrilled with alarm when they saw that the angel of Jehovah no longer remained stationary, and that his flaming sword was moving through the heavens. Their renewed terror was only for a moment: "the angel put up his sword again into the sheath thereof," and the people breathed more freely when they saw the instrument of Jehovah’s wrath vanish out of their sight. The use of Machpelah as a patriarchal burying-place led to the establishment of a sanctuary at Hebron, which continued to be the seat of a debased and degenerate worship even after the coming of Christ. It is even now a Mohammedan holy place. But On the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite there was to arise a more worthy memorial of the mercy and judgment of Jehovah. Without the aid of priestly oracle or prophetic utterance, David was led by the Spirit of the Lord to discern the significance of the command to perform an irregular sacrifice in a hitherto unconsecrated place. When the sword of the destroying angel interposed between David and the Mosaic tabernacle and altar of Gibeon, the way was not merely barred against the king and his court on one exceptional occasion. The incidents of this crisis symbolized the cutting off forever of the worship of Israel from its ancient shrine and the transference of the Divinely appointed center of the worship of Jehovah to the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite, that is to say to Jerusalem, the city of David and the capital of Judah. The lessons of this incident, so far as the chronicler has simply borrowed from his authority, belong to the exposition of the book of Samuel. The main features peculiar to Chronicles are the introduction of the evil angel Satan, together with the greater prominence given to the angel of Jehovah, and the express statement that the scene of David’s sacrifice became the site of Solomon’s altar of burnt offering. The stress laid upon angelic agency is characteristic of later Jewish literature, and is especially marked in Zechariah and Daniel. It was no doubt partly due to the influence of the Persian religion, but it was also a development from the primitive faith of Israel, and the development was favored by the course of Jewish history. The Captivity and the Restoration, with the events that preceded and accompanied these revolutions, enlarged the Jewish experience of nature and man. The captives in Babylon and the fugitives in Egypt saw that the world was larger than they had imagined. In Josiah’s reign the Scythians from the far North swept over Western Asia, and the Medes and Persians broke in upon Assyria and Chaldaea from the remote East. The prophets claimed Scythians, Medes, and Persians as the instruments of Jehovah. The Jewish appreciation of the majesty of Jehovah, the Maker and Ruler of the world, increased as they learnt more of the world He had made and ruled; but the invasion of a remote and unknown people impressed them with the idea of infinite dominion and unlimited resources, beyond all knowledge and experience. The course of Israelite history between David and Ezra involved as great a widening of man’s ideas of the universe as the discovery of America or the establishment of Copernican astronomy. A Scythian invasion was scarcely less portentous to the Jews than the descent of an irresistible army from the planet Jupiter would be to the civilized nations of the nineteenth century. The Jew began to shrink from intimate and familiar fellowship with so mighty and mysterious a Deity. He felt the need of a mediator, some less exalted being, to stand between himself and God. For the ordinary purposes of everyday life the Temple, with its ritual and priesthood, provided a mediation; but for unforeseen contingencies and exceptional crises the Jews welcomed the belief that a ministry of angels provided a safe means of intercourse between himself and the Almighty. Many men have come to feel today that the discoveries of science have made the universe so infinite and marvelous that its Maker and Governor is exalted beyond human approach. The infinite spaces of the constellations seem to intervene between the earth and the presence-chamber of God; its doors are guarded against prayer and faith by inexorable laws; the awful Being, who dwells within, has become "unmeasured in height, undistinguished into form." Intellect and imagination alike fail to combine the manifold and terrible attributes of the Author of nature into the picture of a loving Father. It is no new experience, and the present century faces the situation very much as did the chronicler’s contemporaries. Some are happy enough to rest in the mediation of ritual priests; others are content to recognize, as of old, powers and forces, not now, however, personal messengers of Jehovah, but the physical agencies of "that which makes for righteousness." Christ came to supersede the Mosaic ritual and the ministry of angels; He will come again to bring those who are far off into renewed fellowship with His Father and theirs. On the other hand, the recognition of Satan, the evil angel, marks an equally great change from the theology of the book of Samuel. The primitive Israelite religion had not yet reached the stage at which the origin and existence of moral evil became an urgent problem of religious thought; men had not yet realized the logical consequences of the doctrine of Divine unity and omnipotence. Not only was material evil traced to Jehovah as the expression of His just wrath against sin, but "morally pernicious acts were quite frankly ascribed to the direct agency of God." God hardens the heart of Pharaoh and the Canaanites; Saul is instigated by an evil spirit from Jehovah to make an attempt upon the life of David; Jehovah moves David to number Israel; He sends forth a lying spirit that Ahab’s prophets may prophesy falsely and entice him to his ruin. { Exodus 4:21 , 1 Samuel 19:9-10 , 2 Samuel 24:1 , 1 Kings 22:20-23 } The Divine origin of moral evil implied in these passages is definitely stated in the book of Proverbs: "Jehovah hath made everything for its own end, yea even the wicked for the day of evil"; in Lamentations, "Out of the mouth of the Most High cometh there not evil and good?" and in the book of Isaiah, "I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things." { Proverbs 16:4 , Lamentations 3:38 , Isaiah 45:7 } The ultra-Calvinism, so to speak, of earlier Israelite religion was only possible so long as its full significance was not understood. An emphatic assertion of the absolute sovereignty, of the one God was necessary as a protest against polytheism, and later on against dualism as well. For practical purposes men’s faith needed to be protected by the assurance that God worked out His purposes in and through human wickedness. The earlier attitude of the Old Testament towards moral evil had a distinct practical and theological value. But the conscience of Israel could not always rest in this view of the origin of evil. As the standard of morality was raised, and its obligations were more fully insisted on, as men

And Satan stood up against Israel and provoked David to number Israel. 1 Chronicles 21 Under a spell W. Birch. (Compare 2 Peter 1:21 ): — I. ALL THE WORLD SEEMS TO BE UNDER A SPELL OR CHARM; inward influences move men as steam moves a ship. There am three spells. 1. One is that of parentage. The spell of a virtuous parentage influences its children's children, like a good charm, for thousands of generations; but, on the other hand, the wickedness of a parent generally ceases to influence his offspring at, as the Second Commandment says, "the third and fourth generation." 2. Another spell is the outward influence of our surroundings. Faithful parents, wise teachers, inspiring books, virtuous companions, healthy atmosphere, and suitable food will train up a child in the way God and men would have him go; but many a bright apprentice lad has been cursed by bad example. 3. The third spell is that of inward influences. One of these is said in the Bible to be the movement of the devil, and the other that of the holy God. 4. What can be greater than the spell which moves the human appetite to intoxicating drink? To obtain drink people will sometimes descend to the lowest degradation of meanness. Yes; the evil spell of the appetite for drink upon its victims is great and overpowering. Drink may be no temptation to you and me, but many people find it a spell which moves them as the tide and wind sometimes drives a feeble ship on the rocks. And what stronger spell can there be than the inclination to war between men, and churches, and nations? 5. Again, is there a stronger spell than the desire for money, the greed of gold? See how men under the spell of an insane ambition for wealth sometimes forget honour, and become actual thieves! II. Now, let us consider THE GOOD SPELL OVER MANKIND. One of these is the heaven-born spell of true love; it is a most powerful influence for good. Thus love will reform the prodigal life. There is no stronger spell than true love; God is love. It is by the wisdom of love that He converts mankind. God's object in winning men to love Him is that they may be prompted to self-denial in themselves and to do good works to others. ( W. Birch. ) David's sin and repentance Clergyman's Magazine. I. DAVID'S SIN. 1. Its occasion: pride and vainglory — "that I may know it." 2. Its unseen but real source: Satan ( 1 Samuel 24:1 ). II. THE LORD'S DISPLEASURE because of his sin (vers. 1 Chronicles 21:9-17). III. THE ATONEMENT for his sin, made on the site of the Lord's house (chap. 1 Chronicles 22:1-2; 1 Kings 6-8 ); as the foundation of the spiritual house ( 2 Corinthians 6:16-17 ; 1 Peter 2:4-5 ; Ephesians 2:21-22 ). The temple therefore rests as it were on — 1. An atonement for sin ( Romans 5:11 ). 2. Sin put away, ver. 17 ( Daniel 9:24 ). 3. Wrath averted by sacrifice (ver. 16:26-27; 2 Samuel 24:16 ; Isaiah 42:21 ; 1 Peter 1:18-19 ; 1 Peter 2:24 ; Colossians 1:20 ; Colossians 2:14-15 ). ( Clergyman's Magazine. ) David's self-confidence R. D. B. Rawnsley. I. The sin of David in numbering the people was SELF-CONFIDENCE, pride in his own strength, and forgetfulness of the source of all his strength, even of God. It was the greater sin in him because he had had such marvellous, such visible, witnesses of God's love, and care, and guidance. Past experience might and should have taught him that his strength was not in himself, but in his God. II. The sins of pride, and self-confidence, and forgetfulness of God are only too COMMON AMONGST OURSELVES. When men dwell securely, in full peace and health, they grow careless in religion. God is not much present with them; they seem sufficient of themselves to keep themselves and to make themselves happy. ( R. D. B. Rawnsley. ) David numbering Israel Homilist. I. MAN, THROUGH THE DEVIL, BRINGING TREMENDOUS EVILS ON THE WORLD. "Satan stood up," etc. The existence and influence of this grand chief of evil agencies are here, and everywhere through the Bible, stated as facts too well authenticated to require argument. He tempted the progenitor of the race; he assailed the Redeemer of the world; and he leads humanity captive by his will. He now had access, by means not stated, to the mind of the monarch of Israel. One might have thought that age, which had cooled in him the fires of life, would also have extinguished all the fires of worldly ambition; but Satan can rekindle the smouldering embers of evil within us: he did so now. The ambitious feeling awakened was not one of those passing waves of emotion that rise from the depths of the soul and break upon the shore and are no more; it took the form of an obstinate purpose. 1. That Satan's influence on man, however successful, interferes not with man's personal responsibility. David was held responsible for the crime which the devil suggested to his mind. Great is the might of Satan, and great are the influences which he can bring to bear upon us; albeit he has no power to break down our wills by force, no power to coerce us into the wrong. We feel we are not mere engines in what we do, that our actions, good or bad, are our own. 2. That one man's sins may entail misery on thousands. It was so now: David's sin brought death on thousands and agony into the heart of the nation. 3. That the Eternal has agents ever at hand to execute His judgments. ( Homilist. ) Sinful counting J. Parker, D. D. It is easy for us to rise in petulant indignation against David, and to declare that he ought not to have counted his men; but let us beware, lest in so doing we provoke the spirit of David to retort that it is possible for us to count our money so as to disclose the very motive and intention which in him we condemn as vicious. Yes there is an atheistical way of counting money. A man may go over coin by coin of his property, and look at it in a way which, being interpreted, signifies, this is my strength, this is my confidence; so long as I have all these coins it is impossible that I can get far wrong, or know much trouble, these will be my answer and defence in the day of accusation and adversity! ( J. Parker, D. D. ) The impotence of numbers Harry Jones. Palestine fills a large place in history, but a very insignificant one on the map. David's enemies were on every side, and they were all mighty in war. He had the sea to his west but did not command the coast. That. (with its harbours of Tyre and Sidon) belonged to the Phoenicians, who overlapped him also on the north. To the east were the barriers of Moab; to the south the plains, cities, and hosts of the Philistines. We do not wonder that he wished to know upon what swords he had to depend. And yet we are told that it was an ungodly thing for him to number Israel. I. WHAT MADE THIS DEED UNGODLY? The answer is that it was a departure from the place he held in the kingdom of God. He was losing the heart which could make him say, "I am small and of no reputation, yet do I not forget Thy commandments." Such a mood, such a ranging of himself with neighbouring powers, was a grievous departure from David's position as king of a chosen race. Think for a moment how unique that race was. Nothing is so wonderful in history as the survival of the Jews. They were set in the midst of mighty nations which far outnumbered them, but which all lost their place and power in the world while the Jews remained. And yet in the early days of this race they were in danger of being spoilt, and really degraded, by an attempt to set themselves on the level of the nations around. David's act was a forgetfulness of, a departure from, God's purpose. In seeking to realise his material resources, and count the swords which he could draw, he so far gave up that unseen vital force, which distinguished his people the most, and descended to the meaner level on which those around him took their stand. II. WHAT IS THE LESSON TO BE LEARNT FROM THIS INCIDENT? That in the conduct of society and of our lives, dependence on mere numbers may prove disastrous. 1. In national economy. The consent and unanimity of a thousand fools does not render the folly of one man harmless; it may arm it with the power to do a thousand-fold more harm. We should be specially cautious in finding our course by that weathercock public opinion. 2. On a small as well as a large social scale. A prominent tendency to-day is to uphold the value of company and co-operation. In many respects this is well. Union is strength. But along with this may grow up a new tyranny. In passing from a selfish individualism to the recognition of a righteous socialism, we are in danger of having our personal convictions overridden. In presence of all the associations, societies, and committees in the world, we must not forget that some of the greatest things the world owns and cherishes, have taken their beginning and drawn their power from solitary source, some halfhidden spring which the crowd would pass by or trample down. The Bible would point to Noah, Daniel, and Job, and above all to the "lonely cross." 3. In the religious life. No persuasion may be taken as true because it is accepted even by all. There was a time when the whole world believed that the sun moved round the earth. The great convictions and changes in history are irrespective of numbers. They come like little seeds which spread until they cover the land. Faith in numbers is a slavery worse than Egyptian, which shows itself in the discharge of our business and the profession of our faith. It is the deadly hindrance to which David exposed himself and his people. It is the temptation which besets us in the formation of our opinions and the doing of our work. We are all tempted to number the people. It is of the first importance that we should be true to the voice of our Father in heaven, who never leaves His children to walk alone if they will only take His hand. ( Harry Jones. ) Census reflections W. Bramley Moore, M. A. I. References to and reflections on TWO OFFICIAL NUMBERINGS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL ( Numbers 1:26 .). II. SOME GENERAL REFLECTIONS ON OUR NATIONAL CENSUS. 1. The number of inhabitants of England and Wales at this moment is definite. 2. The number of the living inhabitants at this moment on the earth is definite. 3. The number of individuals who compose the whole human race is definite. 4. The number of the elect, or of those who shall ultimately be saved is definite.Application: I would address — 1. Those who were numbered at the last census. 2. I would call to your remembrance those who have appeared and again disappeared during this interval. 3. The object of numbering suggests consolation. "The very hairs of your head are all numbered," this is one of the sweetest pledges of our heavenly Father's personal care over us. 4. It also suggests warning. "Lord, let me know mine end and the number of my days." For what purpose? "That I may know how frail I am." ( W. Bramley Moore, M. A. ) Man, through God, arresting the great evils Homilist. 1. Profound contrition for sin. "And David said unto God, I have sinned greatly, because I have done this thing; but now, I beseech Thee, do away with the iniquity of Thy servant, for I have done very foolishly." In Samuel it is said, "David's heart smote him." His conscience was aroused to a sense of his crime and became his chastiser. It allowed him to make no excuse; it prevented him from charging the crime even on the devil who tempted him. "I have sinned greatly," "I have done this thing," "Is it not I that commanded the people to be numbered?" "Even I it is that have sinned and done evil indeed." Conscience, the deepest power within us, ever vindicates our personality, our freedom, our responsibility. An awakened conscience detaches us from the universe, from all, and places us as guilty personalities in conscious contact with Him who is the Eternal Judge of right and wrong. The first step to true prayer is this. 2. Unbounded trust in God. When Jehovah, through Gad, David's seer, proposed to the monarch the choice of one of three judgments — famine, war, or pestilence — what was David's reply? "I am in a great strait: let me fall into the hand of the Lord; for very great are His mercies: but let me not fall into the hand of man." His sin had consisted in some measure in placing trust in men; why else did he require a census? Was it not because he thought that numbers were power for defence and conquest? That confidence is gone now, and God appears to him as the only object of trust. Wonderful trust is this. When all things go well and fortune smiles, when providence showers its blessings upon our path, skirting our way with verdure and flowers, we may feel some trust in Him; but when all is dreary, dark, and tempestuous, when we see, as David saw, in the black heavens the destroying angel with a sword drawn in his hands about to smite us, then to trust Him is to have a trust of the highest sort. 3. An atoning self-sacrificing benevolence.(1) With a generosity rejoicing in sacrifice, he rears an altar. He was divinely commanded to rear an altar unto the Lord on the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite.(2) With a soul benevolently oblivious of all personal interest he pleads with heaven. 1. The solemnity of man's existence on this earth. Man here is the subject and organ of spiritual and invisible agents. The same man, as in the case of David, might be the organ of the devil and the organ of God. Under the influence of the devil, David became proud and rebellious, incurring the displeasure of his Maker and bringing ruin on his country; under the influence of God, he became profoundly contrite, trustful, and most benevolently prayerful; arresting the progress of evil and securing again for his country the mercy of Heaven. How terribly solemn is our life! 2. The ruinous and restorative dispositions in man. Selfish pride and self-sacrificing prayerfulness are the two grand dispositions which David displays in this portion of his history; the former was at once the product and instrument of the devil, bringing ruin upon his country; the latter was the product and instrument of God, counteracting the evils. ( Homilist. ) Thus saith the Lord, choose thee. 1 Chronicles 21:11-15 The awful judgments I. JUDGMENTS ENTAILED BY ONE MAN'S SIN. II. JUDGMENTS EASILY PREPARED FOR EXECUTION. III. JUDGMENTS SENT ACCORDING TO HUMAN PREFERENCE. IV. JUDGMENTS ARRESTED BY EARNEST PRAYER. David's choice J. Wolfendale. I. AS THE RESULT OF AN AWAKENED CONSCIENCE. II. AS THE REVELATION OF A PRINCIPLE OF CHRISTIAN LIFE. He left himself confidently with God. III. AS A PICTURE OF FUTURE DOOM TO ALL. ( J. Wolfendale. ) David's choice of chastisements J. Wolfendale. David's preference justified when we Consider — 1. The harsh judgments which men pronounce on each other. 2. The harsh treatment of the guilty who are in men's power. 3. The absence of sympathetic kindness in human warfare. 4. That when God punishes He does so in righteousness. 5. That in the treatment of the guilty God always shows mercy.Lessons: 1. Submission to God, 2. Hopeful trust. ( J. Wolfendale. ) God an emblem of the true minister Homilist. Let us look at God as representing every true minister of Jesus Christ. I. GOD'S MESSAGE WAS DIVINE. The gospel is a message from God. This is attested — 1. By the facts of history, 2. By its congruity with the spiritual constitution of men. 3. By the experience of thousands of every age who have felt it to be the power of God unto salvation. II. GOD'S MESSAGE WAS AN APPEAL TO CHOICE. "Advise thyself." Deliberate, choose for thyself. The gospel message is submitted to your choice. 1. You can accept it. 2. You can reject it. III. GOD'S MESSAGE WAS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR. 1. He was responsible for its delivery. So with every gospel minister, and woe be to him if he declares not the whole counsel of God. 2. David was responsible for its results. So are also the hearers of the gospel. ( Homilist. ) Religious lessons of pestilence R. Tuck, B. A. I. PESTILENCES ARE STRIKING WITNESSES TO THE MAJESTY OF GOD'S LAW. II. PESTILENCES ARE STRIKING ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE MORAL CONNECTION BETWEEN MEN. Epidemics run rapidly from one to another. No man can live alone to himself. Every one who comes near us is the better or the worse for our influence upon them. III. PESTILENCES MAY BE THE AGENCY FOR EXECUTING DIVINE JUDGMENTS. Nowadays men hesitate to believe that there can be any connection between a nation's sin and a nation's suffering. With eye fixed upon the natural and physical laws and conditions out of which disease comes, men fail to see Him who overrules all physical conditions, and controls all laws. What, then, is the attitude which Christians should take in relation to epidemic disease 7(1) We ought to cherish a reverent awe of God, the spirit that is becoming in times of storm and tempest, awe of Him who is "Lord of the great things."(2) We should seek by prayer, and in the spirit of penitence, for the removal of the chastening hand.(3) We should ask for grace that we may be brave, brotherly, and self-denying, should disease come actually into our spheres.(4) We should, with calm seriousness, inquire whether we are prepared to face the risks of disease, prepared to die, prepared to "meet our God." ( R. Tuck, B. A. ) Alternative judgments Dean Vaughan. The whole story is mysterious. We feel at each step that much is kept back from us. 1. The fault of the king is mysterious. It is not enough to say that there was pride and vainglory in his heart. If this were all, it might have made the act sinful in the sight of God, but it would not account for the view taken of the act either by the minister or by the historian. There are many things in Scripture, as there are many things in life, which we must leave in the hands of God. 2. The mode of his punishment is full of mystery. A choice of punishments is offered him; but the punishments are all national. "Rulers sin and peoples suffer" has passed into a proverb. Scripture and Providence are at one in this matter. On a king's edict of passion or foolishness may hang a nation's misery or a nation's dishonour. A king's caprice or a king's miscalculation may hand over a nation to a bloody and ruinous war of which it may be the occupation of a century to bear or repair the consequences. 3. The peculiarity of David's penalty is the choice offered him. The day of Divine alternatives is not ended. Every example of a sin brought face to face with its suffering presents an aspect of choice as well as of compulsion. The mere question of confession or denial, with the consequences of either, is such an alternative in the case of individual wrongdoing. The adoption of this expedient rather than that, in the way of avoidance or mitigation of consequences, is an alternative. The way of bearing punishment, the language of regret or of hardness, the tone of submission or of defiance, most of all the spirit of repentance or of impenitence, is an alternative for the individual transgressor. The question of stopping or continuing a hopeless struggle, of accepting a defeat, of submitting to abduction, of "desiring conditions of peace," or on the contrary, of persisting in warfare for the chance of a turn of fortune — the question of renewing a struggle, years or generations afterwards, on the plea of a hereditary title or a popular invitation — is an alternative, real or responsible, on the stage of kings and nations. 4. How shall we read the words, "Let me now fall into the hand of the Lord"? Is it a choice made? or is it a choice referred back to the offerer? Is it, I choose pestilence? or is it, Let God choose? "So the Lord sent the pestilence upon Israel" indicates perhaps on the part of our translators a preference of the former. I choose that punishment which has no human inflicter. But, whatever the application, the principle stands steadfast. In everything let me be in God's hands. Anything which God inflicts is preferable to any suffering which comes through man. But if this be the force of David's words considered as a choice, there is at least an equal interest in them regarded as a refusal to choose. Yes, let us love to live these lives absolutely under God's direction. War, famine, pestilence — if He sees any one necessary, leave Him to choose. Let us not fall into the hands of man — our own, or any other's. We are ill judges — worst of all for ourselves. Our mercies to ourselves are not God's mercies. We are self-sparers as well as self-excusers. If we had our choice, no nerve would ever throb, no hair would ever turn grey. We should grow up, we should go to the grave, we should wake from the dust of the earth spoilt children — with all the irregularities, and all the selfishness, and all the unhappiness, which cling to and cluster round that name. What are we to one another? How does selfishness warp our judgments — selfish love first, then selfish fear. ( Dean Vaughan. ) The choice of troubles William Clarkson, B. A. Who is there that has not wished that God would give him the choice of the evils which he had to suffer; and who is there that would not have been seriously embarrassed if that wish had been fulfilled? But, it may be said, the text does not support that view. Does it not? 1. David was very much troubled when the time for decision came: he was "in a great strait." 2. His choice was more devout in form than in substance; for, had he chosen defeat in war, he would still have been "in the hand of God." 3. It is highly probable that, after the choice was made, David was doubtful of its wisdom. We may consider — I. THE ELEMENT OF CHOICE IN THE EVILS OF LIFE. — Two things are open to us here. 1. One relates to the measure of trouble we experience. By healthy habits, by obedience to the laws of our spiritual and our physical nature, by keeping within the lines of wisdom and virtue, by commending ourselves to the approval of man and also of God, we may materially reduce the measure of evil which otherwise we should endure. 2. The other relates to the kind of trouble we are called to face. It is often left to our choice to decide whether we will meet the dangers, the difficulties, the temptations, the trials of our condition in life, or those of the opposite condition — whether those of ignorance or of learning, of loneliness or of society, of obscurity or of conspicuousness and responsibility. It may be timidity or cowardice that inclines us to the one, and high-minded courage that incites us to the other; or it may be modesty and wisdom that urge us to the one, and nothing better than an unhallowed ambition, or even an exaggerated sense of importance, that allures to the other. Ii; behoves us, as we stand in front of the future, with our path in life before us, very earnestly to seek the guidance of God, that we may choose that course, the perils of which we may face with hope, the evils of which we shall endure with calmness and fortitude. II. THE WORKING OF THE DIVINE HAND IN THEM. The measure and the nature of our troubles is uncertain. That they will come is as certain as anything can be. No "good fortune," no sagacity, no caution will exclude them from the experience of life. 1. Our preference in regard to their form. Like David, we prefer to feel ourselves in the hand of God rather than in the hand of men. We feel that our burden is heavier when it is due to human carelessness, and heavier still when due to human heartlessness and malignity. The severest aggravation of trouble is where the evil that has been wrought is the work of some near relative or some familiar friend, or some old colleague from whom we had a right to expect quite opposite treatment (see Psalm 4:12-14). We feel that if we are to have suffering or sorrow we should much prefer the unaccountable sickness, or the unavoidable loss, or the inevitable bereavement which we can refer at once to the ordinary will of God. 2. The truth we recognise when we consider it. As we think on this subject we realise that all trouble is ultimately of God.(1) Much of it is penal, the just consequence of ill-doing, the outcome of those laws which originate in Divine holiness.(2) Much of it is disciplinary; it is the pruning, the refining process of Him who is seeking spiritual fruit; it is the ordering of the wise and faithful Father of spirits ( Hebrews 12:1-12 ).(3) All of it is permissive. If the sparrow does not fall without the Divine permission, how much less does the obedient son or daughter suffer grief or pass through troublesome times or go down to death without the sanction of the present and watchful Lord. So that, whatever comes and whencesoever it comes, we are free to think and say, "Thy will be done, Lord"; the trial never comes to us when we are not "in the hand of the Lord." 3. The attitude we should assume toward it. Even when we have to reproach ourselves, or even when we are obliged to condemn our neighbours or our ancestors as the immediate authors of our trouble, we may and we should accept it as that which comes in the providence of God.(1) We should bow submissively to His will who (to say the least) suffers us to be tried as we are.(2) We should seek from Him the sustaining strength which will empower us to bear all things unrepiningly and even cheerfully.(3) We should have an open mind to .perceive, and an open heart to welcome the practical lessons which our heavenly Father is desiring to teach us. ( William Clarkson, B. A. ) Let me fall now into the hand of the Lord Falling into the hand of the Lord J. Parker, D. D. The doctrine is, that as sinners, as sinners before God, and as sinners towards each other, our highest hope is not in the incomplete and perverted mercy of men, but in the infinite mercy which is founded upon the infinite righteousness of God. We may perhaps help ourselves to a clearer understanding of this doctrine by first considering that it is better to fall into the hands of the highest class of men than into the hands of the lowest. 1. Take a legal case. In the first instance it may be brought before the local magistracy; but very possibly the result may be considered unsatisfactory by one party or the other, hence the case may be moved to the court above; there again dissatisfaction may be the result, and an appeal may be carried to the highest court in the land. The result even then may not be satisfactory; still by so much as the case has been carried to the highest tribunal and pronounced upon by the highest wisdom, there is strong ground to rest upon. Not only so, but there is a point beyond this; for by so much as a man wishes that there were yet another superior court to which an appeal might be made does he show how deeply graven upon the heart is the law that it is better to fall into the hands of the highest than into the hands of the lowest; that it is better to fall into the hands of God than into the hands of men. 2. What is true in the law is equally true in all criticism. 3. Take the case of the young speaker. It will be for the advantage of such a man to be judged by the greatest orators which the country can supply. ( J. Parker, D. D. ) Why is it better that the sinner should fall into the hand of God rather than into the hands of men J. Parker, D. D. ? — Good use might be made of the many pleasing considerations which arise in connection with God's wisdom, God's righteousness, and God's perfect knowledge of facts; but we shall include all these in a higher answer, viz., because in His whole treatment of human sin God is constantly seeking not the destruction, but the salvation of the sinner. ( J. Parker, D. D. ) David falling into the hand of God Homilist. We shall look at David's exclamation here in three aspects. I. AS INDICATING WHAT IS A. NATURAL TENDENCY IN ALL SOULS. There is a strong propensity in all men to "fall into the hand" of others, giving up their judgment, freedom, individuality to others. This shows itself in the exercise of unbounded trust. Man is essentially dependent. Hence his existence is one of trust in others. This trust is the very base and bond of social life. Trusting others within certain limits is right and necessary, but when the principle carries us to the entire subjection of ourselves to our fellow-men, we have gone wrongly and ruinously. II. AS REVEALING THE TRUE SPIRIT OF LIFE. David's tendency to trust took the right direction. 1. His preference was right.(1) God is our Owner.(2) God is all-powerful in His character. There is everything in His character to command our unbounded trust, our entire surrender. 2. This preference is expedient. It is far better to fall into the hand of God than man.(1) Unbounded trust in man must destroy your freedom. Such trust in God secures it.(2) Unbounded trust in man pollutes and degrades the character. Such trust in God purifies and elevates it. He whom we most trust exerts the most influence on our characters.(3) Unbounded trust in man must issue in the utmost disappointment and misery. Such trust in God leads to the highest blessedness. III. AS FORESHADOWING THE INEVITABLE DOOM OF ALL. In one of two ways every man must fall into the hand of God. 1. Voluntarily, by the influence of His grace. 2. Compulsorily, by the force of justice. ( Homilist. ) The hand of God and the hands of men Literary Churchman. I. DAVID'S STRAIT. II. THE GROUNDS OF HIS CHOICE. III. DIVINE PUNISHMENT AND HUMAN PUNISHMENT. Human punishment is necessarily to a great extent for self-protection, and therefore selfish. When the laws of society punish the crime of murder or of theft, it is primarily with the object of preventing the committal of more murders and more thefts. God's laws have penalties attached to them, but when God punishes He seeks not the destruction of the sinner, but his healing and reformation. While man's punishments are in principle revengeful, or at best for the defence of society, God's punishments are remedial and reformatory; and therefore it is better to fall into the hand of God than into the hands of men. Application: 1. God in human redemption. 2. Human legislation directed to the repression of wrong incomplete, because it can only reach the outward action. God's laws deal with motives, and are therefore complete and perfect ( 1 Samuel 16:7 ; Hebrews 4:12 ). ( Literary Churchman. ) Man's inhumanity H. W. Beecher. There is more mercy in the fang of a rattlesnake and in the tooth of a wolf than in the heart of men and women for a poor soul who has gone astray; and if she try to swim ashore and finally come up to the rock and get the tips of her fingers on the rock and try to climb up, then you will come out and with your hard heels smash the tips of her fingers until she falls off. ( H. W. Beecher. ) And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it. 1 Chronicles 21:15 The destroying angel R. Young, M. A. Lessons: I. THAT IDLENESS IS THE PARENT OF SIN. It was when David was living as king in ease at Jerusalem that he was tempted of Satan. II. THAT ONE OF THE BEST REMEDIES FOR WOE IS WORK. The angel of destruction stayed his steps at the threshing-floor of Ornan, even as the angel of salvation visited Gideon as he was threshing wheat. III. THAT PRAYER, EVEN AT THE ELEVENTH HOUR, MAY BE BY GOD'S GRACE EFFICACIOUS. When the sword was actually drawn in the hand of the destroyer it was kept from further execution when David and the elders of Israel, who were clothed in sackcloth, fell upon their faces. IV. THAT OUR GIFTS TO GOD, AS TO MEN, SHOULD BE BESTOWED IN A GENEROUS SPIRIT. V. THAT WE SHOULD NOT OFFER TO GOD WHAT COSTS US NOTHING. VI. THAT GOD SANCTIFIES EFFORTS, HOWEVER WEAK THEY MAY BE, IF THEY BE SINCERELY MADE; ACCEPTS GIFTS, HOWEVER HUMBLE THEY MAY BE, IF BESTOWED FROM THE HEART. VII. THAT THE BEST PROOF THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT OUR OFFERING IS ACCEPTED BY GOD IS NOT THAT WE EXPERIENCE A SENSE OF INFLATED IMPORTANCE OR SELF-SATISFACTION, BUT THAT WE ARE FILLED WITH AN ABIDING SENSE OF PEACE. VIII. THAT THOUGH WE MAY WORSHIP GOD ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE, YET THAT IN HIS DULY CONSECRATED SANCTUARY, IT IS FITTEST TO DO HIM REVERENCE. ( R. Young, M. A. ) Man, through the devil, bringing tremendous evils on the world Homilist. That men suffer for the sins of others is a fact written in every page of history, obvious in every circle of life, and recognised as a principle in the government of God. "The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge." That this principle is both just and beneficent, consider — 1. That no man is made to suffer more than he deserves on account of his own personal sins. 2. The men of Israel now for their own sins deserved this stroke of justice. 3. That the evil which descends to us from others is not to be compared to

21:1-30 David's numbering the people. - No mention is made in this book of David's sin in the matter of Uriah, neither of the troubles that followed it: they had no needful connexion with the subjects here noted. But David's sin, in numbering the people, is related: in the atonement made for that sin, there was notice of the place on which the temple should be built. The command to David to build an altar, was a blessed token of reconciliation. God testified his acceptance of David's offerings on this altar. Thus Christ was made sin, and a curse for us; it pleased the Lord to bruise him, that through him, God might be to us, not a consuming Fire, but a reconciled God. It is good to continue attendance on those ordinances in which we have experienced the tokens of God's presence, and have found that he is with us of a truth. Here God graciously met me, therefore I will still expect to meet him.