Your error is in concluding that the 'he' in 2 Samuel 24:1 is referring to Satan, when in it's grammatical context, it most definitly is not. The 'he' in 2 Sam. 24 is, without a doubt, referring to God. Only a person with any disregard or ignorance of the English language would say that it refers to someone or something else other than the reference to God as is the context of the verse.
Originally Posted by *Acts9_12Out*
BTW, the NKJV capitalizes the 'He' in 2 Samuel 24:1. And the ones that do not, also do not capitilize the 'you', or 'your', or other references that are made to indicate an action done by God, or something He possesses.
So in light of proper English, I'd have to disagree with you that 2 Sam. 24 and 1 Chron. 21 both mean Satan. That's an obvious and real conclusion. There can be no argument to it, unless you are willing to rewrite 2 Sam. 24 to read:
Again the anger of the [Satan] was aroused against Israel, and (He) moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.”
Then you ignore 2 Sam. 24:1. 1 Chron. 21 tells us that Satan was used by God to get David to take the census, but David would have never taken it had God not moved him to do it (through Satan).
ZMan, Scripture is clear that satan is the adversary who prompted David to sin, not God.
God didn't cause David to sin. David sinned on his own. God moved David to take the census; God's intent and motivation, as GIT has posted earlier, may have been to heal David's pride, or it could've been for some other unforseen, invisible great good that we may not know about. But David's intentions and motivations in taking the census was wrong. So God punished him for it.
Again, I ask, why would David need to ask for forgiveness for a sin that you say God caused him to commit?
It does if you understand God's will of decree and will of command.
Doesn't make much sense, does it?
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 doesn't will sin as sin or for the sake of anything evil; though it be his pleasure so to order things, that he permitting, sin will come to pass; for the sake of the great good that by his disposal shall be the consequence. His willing to order things so that evil should come to pass, for the sake of the contrary good, is no argument that he doesn't hate evil, as evil: and if so, then it is no reason why he may not reasonably forbid evil as evil, and punish it as such.
[God's] will of decree [or sovereign will] is not his will in the same sense as his will of command [or moral will] is. Therefore it is not difficult at all to suppose that the one may be otherwise than the other: his will in both senses is his inclination. But when we say he wills virtue, or loves virtue or the happiness of his creature; thereby is intended that virtue or the creature's happiness, absolutely and simply considered, is agreeable to the inclination of his nature. His will of decree is his inclination to a thing not as to that thing absolutely and simply, but with reference to the universality of things. So God, though he hates a things as it is simply, may incline to it with reference to the universality of things.
- Jonathan Edwards