| Farrell Till answers David Ariel's reply to Till's first post: ARIEL MY answer to Mr. Till's question:
A) Exodus 30:11-13 states: "God spoke to Moses saying:
When you take a census of the Children of Israel, according
to their numbers, every man shall give God an atonement
for his soul when counting them so that there will not be a
plague among them when counting them. This shall they
give, everyone who passes through the census, a half-shekel
(coin)..."
It is Jewish tradition that counting the people will cause a
plague because it expresses a symptom of haughtiness and
general lack of realizing that one must always work on spiritual
growth.
|
TILL
This may be a Jewish tradition, but you won't find any basis
for it in the text you quoted above. The text is stating that the
"plague" would come if the census tax of a half shekel of silver
was not paid by those who were counted. In other words, the
census wouldn't have caused the plague but failing to pay the
tax would have, so are you suggesting that if everyone who
was counted in David's census had paid a half shekel of silver,
there would have been no plague? If so, quote the language
in the text of 2 Samuel 24 or 1 Chronicles 21 that justifies
this conclusion?
Furthermore, the statement in Exodus 31 was said in reference
to a census that was going to be conducted at that time. A
second census was taken at the end of the wilderness wanderings
(Num. 26), but nothing at all was mentioned about the collection
of the half shekel census tax. Exodus 38:25-26, however, states
the amount of silver that was collected after the census referred
to in chapter 31. The rest of Exodus 38 indicates that the
talents of silver collected in the census at that time were used
in making the tabernacle, so this would have been a tax for a
special occasion. What textual evidence do you have to justify
your apparent assumption that the plague in 2 Samuel 24 came
from a failure to collect a tax from those who were counted.
Joab protested David's command to take the census (1 Chron.
21:2-4).
| 2 So David said to Joab and the commanders of the army, "Go, number Israel, from Beer-sheba to Dan, and bring me a report, so that I may know their number." 3 But Joab said, "May the LORD increase the number of his people a hundredfold! Are they not, my lord the king, all of them my lord's servants? Why then should my lord require this? Why should he bring guilt on Israel?" 4 But the king's word prevailed against Joab. So Joab departed and went throughout all Israel, and came back to Jerusalem. |
The text indicates that there was some "sin" involved in taking
the census, but if the problem was that a tax was required,
why didn't Joab mention this in his complaint?
ARIEL
| Presenting oneself to "be counted" by "himself" puts a spotlight on the person. |
TILL
Well, no one "presented" himself to be counted. Joab was ordered
to conduct the census, so the counting was being forced upon
those who were counted. David gave the order to take the census,
and Joab departed and went throughout Israel to count the people.
ARIEL
| The person is standing up and saying they are worthy of inspection. Therefore their bad deeds that were being overlooked until now have been brought into the spotlight of scrutiny. |
TILL
We would like to see something besides your opinion and what
you call "Jewish tradition." What does the Tanakh say to support
your claims? You will learn that the members of this group don't
think too much of argumentation by assertion.
ARIEL
| Example: A waiter was told by his boss that he could either stay in the backroom unloading frozen fish, or serve the visiting Congressman at table #4 for more pay. The waiter had a stain on his uniform and forgot his tie. He then went out and started to serve the Congressman's table. The boss called him over and fired him for the sloppy uniform. The writer protested that he had the sloppy uniform on in the backroom! Why wasn't he fired then? The boss answered that he was willing to let it slide back there but not in front of the important client. The boss thought he would have the decency of fixing his attire before serving a Congressman and bringing insult on his establishment. |
TILL
As I said, we would like textual evidence to support your
assertion. We aren't interested in strained analogies, especially
those that aren't at all parallel.
ARIEL
| Therefore Jews do not count a census unless using an indirect object like a coin. The person approaching says "count the coin, not me personally. I don't want direct scrutiny." The half-coin was also a sign of humility. It signified that one was only half a man without his fellow man and was a sign to God that he was approaching to be counted as part of a group not as a so called "superior individual with a great track record". |
TILL
Once again, you're talking about customs and traditions. We
want to see textual evidence that supports your claim. I have
shown that Exodus 31:11ff doesn't support it.
ARIEL
| B) The Jewish government was not an absolute monarchy. Even King David had to answer to the Sanhedrin of 70 elders who legislated the nation. He also consulted the High Priest and Prophets who informed him of God's will. He could not just act in all circumstance. |
TILL
And this proves what? We have a text in Deuteronomy 24:16
and another one in Ezekiel 18:20, with which the killing of 70,000
people by a divinely sent plague in 2 Samuel 24 is in obvious
conflict. We want to see a resolution of the problem, and we
aren't really interested in Jewish traditions.
ARIEL
| David's general, Yoav, knew this was a bad move. (I Chronicles 21:6 "But {Yoav} did not tally Levi and Benjamin among them for the king's command was abhorrent to Yoav." |
TILL
But you're tap dancing around the problem. It was the KING'S
command, so if it was a "sin" for some reason, it was a sin that
David committed. David, however, got off with no punishment,
while 70,000 others died for something they didn't do. We want
to see you reconcile this with the texts in Deuteronomy and Ezekiel.
ARIEL
| Since the officers and judges and people may have prevailed on King David to completely stop the census, it would appear they were all responsible for exposing their sins to full scrutiny before God. |
TILL
Is that so? First Chronicles 21:4 says that despite Joab's
complaint, "the king's word prevailed against Joab." What is
your evidence that if some judges had stepped in to protest
too, that would have put a complete stop to the census?
You see, we want textual evidence here and not conjecture. I'm
sorry to see that there really isn't any difference in a Jewish
inerrantist and a Christian inerrantist. Both depend on speculation
to "explain" biblical discrepancies.
ARIEL
| C) Please notice that the people were already sinful in God's eyes at that time even before the census: II Samuel 24:1 "The anger of God again flared...". The land was also already in famine the past three years according to our tradition. This was because of the lower state of spiritual affairs than desired. |
TILL
Well, if the temperamental Yahweh had something against the
people at that time, he should have punished them for what had
pissed him off and not punished them for something that David did.
Let's take another look at David's question.
| 2 Samuel 24:17 When David saw the angel who was destroying the people, he said to Yahweh, "I ALONE have sinned, and I ALONE have done wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done?" |
We're looking for an answer to that question, but apparently
you don't have one.
ARIEL
| D) All 3 punishment choices were things that would affect the people at large not just the king personaly. 1. Famine 2. War 3. Plague. |
TILL
Which merely confirms that there is a problem here. David
ALONE sinned, but in the punishments that Yahweh offered
David, only the second one would have brought punishment
upon him.
ARIEL
| Conclusion: The punishment of plague was for sins already committed by the people. |
TILL
As I said, we take a dim view of argumentation by assertion.
Show us your textual evidence to support this.
ARIEL
| Until now, those sins were being sugar-coated in God's eyes to allow time for repentance. |
TILL
I'll say again that we take a dim view of argumentation by
assertion. Show us your textual evidence to support this.
ARIEL
| The first three years of famine were a hint to tell the people they needed to change. |
TILL
Excuse me, but there was no famine. This was just one of
three proposed punishments that David could have chosen.
| 1 Samuel 24:10 But afterward, David was stricken to the heart because he had numbered the people. David said to Yahweh, "I have sinned greatly in what I have done. But now, Yahweh, I pray you, take away the guilt of your servant; for I have done very foolishly." 11 When David rose in the morning, the word of Yahweh came to the prophet Gad, David's seer, saying, 12 "Go and say to David: Thus says Yahweh: Three things I offer you; CHOOSE ONE OF THEM, and I will do IT to you." 13 So Gad came to David and told him; he asked him, "Shall three years of famine come to you on your land? Or will you flee three months before your foes while they pursue you? Or shall there be three days' pestilence in your land? Now consider, and decide what answer I shall return to the one who sent me." 14 Then David said to Gad, "I am in great distress; let us fall into the hand of Yahweh, for his mercy is great; but let me not fall into human hands." 15 So Yahweh sent a pestilence on Israel from that morning until the appointed time; and seventy thousand of the people died, from Dan to Beer-sheba. |
Now that's clear enough that anyone should be able to
understand it. Yahweh gave David his choice of three punishments
and told him to CHOOSE ONE OF THEM. David decided to leave
the matter into Yahweh's hand, who then sent the pestilence that
killed 70,000 people. Where then does the text say anything
about a famine that was sent as a "hint" that the people
needed to change?
ARIEL
| King David's census simply exposed those sins that were being hidden by mercy to be fully exposed to God's scrutiny of justice. |
TILL
Would you quote for us the text that says this? Please keep in
mind that we aren't interested in argumentation by speculative
assertions.
ARIEL
| Therefore the people were suffering for their own sins. |
TILL
Well, since you reached this "therefore" from premises that
you have yet to prove, you haven't proven anything except
that you can argue by speculative assertions as well as any
Christian inerrantist we have had on this list.
ARIEL
| When King David said "I sinned. why should they suffer...etc" he was simply pleading for mercy. |
TILL
What does the text say? "I ALONE am guilty, I ALONE have
done wrong" (JPS version). David, of course, was pleading
for mercy on the people, but his plea was based on the premise
that "these sheep" had done nothing, that he
was the guilty one.
ARIEL
| "Please God, you would have continued to overlook those sins they did if I hadn't goofed and pushed them to scrutiny. Please consider that my position as king influenced them strongly to act haughtily. Let the situation return to status quo." |
TILL
And your textual proof? I will close with a reminder that
we aren't interested in speculative assertions. We have seen
that from Christian inerrantists for seven years on this list.
We were hoping for better from you.
The example in 2 Samuel 24 is by no means the only case
of conflict with the texts of Deuteronomy and Ezekiel that I
could cite. Second Samuel 11 relates the case of David's
adultery with Bathsheba, which resulted in the birth of a son.
In chapter 12, Yahweh sent the prophet Nathan to reprimand
David for his sin. Despite the fact that death was decreed in
Deuteronomy 22:22 for the sin of adultery, David got off by
just saying to Nathan, "I have sinned against Yahweh"
(2 Sam. 12:13). The child, however, wasn't so lucky.
| 2 Samuel 12:14 Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned Yahweh, the child that is born to you shall die." 15 Then Nathan went to his house. Yahweh struck the child that Uriah's wife bore to David, and it became very ill. 16 David therefore pleaded with God for the child; David fasted, and went in and lay all night on the ground. 17 The elders of his house stood beside him, urging him to rise from the ground; but he would not, nor did he eat food with them. 18 On the seventh day the child died. |
Notice that Nathan told David that the child would die
BECAUSE the deed David had committed had scorned Yahweh.
David committed the sin, but Yahweh "struck" the child born
as a result of David's sin and killed him.
Whatever happened to Yahweh's decree in Deuteronomy
24:16?
| 16 Parents shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their parents; only for their own crimes may persons be put to death. |
We'll be interested in seeing Ariel "explain" his way out of
this. Let's hope he remembers that we aren't interested in
traditions. We want to see textual evidence for whatever
"solution" he presents.
No comments:
Post a Comment