Undeception

This is the fourth post in the guest series “Who is Satan?” by Arcamaede. An index for all posts in the series is here.

~ Steve

___________________________________________________

My apologies to everyone for the delay in this part.  I’ve been dealing with quite a few non-studies related issues lately, plus I’ve taken to listening to the Early Church Fathers — anticipating Part 5!

In the first three parts of this series, we set the stage for discussing Satan in the New Testament.  In this part, we’re going to look at the New Testament passages discussing Satan.

Gospel Satan

Satan makes an appearance in the story of the temptation of Jesus.  We need to be careful before taking this story as history.  A feature of the story which stands out is Satan taking Jesus “into a high mountain” where he “showed him all the kingdoms of the Earth.”  What stands out about this is the impossibility of it: there is no mountain tall enough to see the whole of the ancient Mediterranean (much less the whole spherical world).  Since the story contains an incredible element like this, a modern reader is forced to attribute it to either a non-historical event or (at the least) an account which has been amended with incredible elements.

Judas Satan

In Luke 22:3, it says “Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.”  The wording is not the same but this strikes me as very similar to another famous Old Testament villain, Pharaoh, as stated in Exodus 9:12 (“But the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart and he would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the LORD had said to Moses.”).  In the New Testament it’s often Satan who motivates but in the Old Testament this role is given over to the LORD.

Conflated Satan

As with the Old Testament, the problem with understanding Satan’s appearances in the New Testament is that we have to spend a great deal of time untangling later reinterpretations of Satan.  The perfect example of this is the popular contemporary pseudonym of Satan –  “Lucifer.”

First, a passage such as 2 Corinthians 11:14 describes Satan as an angel of light.  Second, Luke 10:18-19 says Satan fell from the sky like lightning.  Isaiah 14:12-17 recounts a being who is cast out of the heavens because of pride.  Contextually, this being is the ruling power of the day: Babylon.  Since Isaiah speaks of light, 2 Corinthians speaks of light, and Luke speaks of lightning, it appears to have been concluded that the verses in Isaiah must be related to Satan.

The original Hebrew word (helel), the first element in the name of the being in Isaiah 14, is believed to mean “to shine brightly.” This reference has always been associated with the bright planet Venus. You should note that some modern translations use “Day Star” (NSRV), another name for Venus. The word “lucifer” finds its origin from a Latin word (lucem ferre) for Venus. It wound up being used in the King James version of the Bible instead of translated to a more accurate word.  How we get from Venus to Satan is a wonderful example of conflation of passages from unrelated texts.

Roman Satan

Romans 16:20 is a passage which I have been asked not to forget in this sacred journey.  All I can really say is that while it has elements of the curse of Genesis 3, it does not make a solid connection of Satan to serpent.  Furthermore, even if we give it the level of a connection, the original audience of Genesis still didn’t look at the serpent that way.  What we’d be seeing is a future generation’s view of serpent-Satan relationship.

Apocalyptic Satan

Lastly, there is the Dragon of the Apocalypse (Revelation 12:9; 20:2).   This is the only book in the Bible in which we see a direct coupling of Satan to the serpent in Genesis 3 (more on that below).  Before we take that as a “slam dunk”, we need to consider the genre of the Book of Revelation and the purpose of it.  Much in the same way that “Lucifer” embodied the power of Babylon in Isaiah, the figure of the Dragon embodies the powers of the Roman state — a force of evil as perceived by the Christian communities that the book of Revelation was written to.  Really, the only defense of keeping this connection would be a view of Scripture which allows for later writers to clarify or enhance the meanings of earlier texts and other writers of the Bible — beyond the context of their original audiences.  Ultimately, the connection of the Serpent-cum-Satan and the Dragon tells us only that the writer of Revelation connected the two for his own literary purposes — it says nothing about how the audience of Genesis 3 thought about the serpent.

Going back deep into ancient history for a moment, the idea of serpent (“dragon”) as the force of evil (or chaos) battling with the forces of good (or order) are often found together in Ancient Near Eastern creation stories.  There is an excellent discussion of this here.  I find it intriguing that this particular line of thinking could be wonderful additional explanations for the serpent in both the Garden story and the Dragon of Revelation.

In conclusion, it is easy to see the connections Old Testament, Pre-Christian, and New Testament conceptions of Satan.  The modern reader has very little option but to see a shifting picture of who and what Satan is.  Some roles which God fulfilled in the Old Testament are fulfilled by Satan in the New Testament.  Incredible stories are used to show the interaction of Satan with characters such as Jesus.  Finally, Satan himself is depicted in highly symbolic contexts using figures with a long history of symbolic utilization.

As we will see in the next part of this series, the role of demons and Satan play a large part in the explaining the nature of the world and humans.

A note on demons.  I’ve been asked what I think about demons (and spirits).  At this point, I’ve come to see them as a “reality” but only in the essence of a phenomena.  Ancient audiences lacked the explanations we have.  That is not to say we’ve totally figured out the behaviors of humans nor the neurology.  I simply find it unnecessary to attribute demons to anything but the misbehavior or short comings of humanity.  We are evil enough on our own.

This is the third post in the guest series “Who is Satan?” by Arcamaede. An index for all posts in the series is here.

~ Steve

___________________________________________________

As we discovered in Part 2, the concept of Satan that we find in the New Testament is missing from the Old Testament.  If it’s not all from there, where did the rest of it come from?

I know my answer until a few months ago might have been that it represented a change in the world of the New Testament and that it didn’t require any explanation from the Old Testament.

But what if we had information that pre-dated the New Testament and yet post-dated the Old Testament?  Information that describes Satan (and demons, spirits, etc.) and allows explanations of their evolution?

We don’t have to wonder — the writings of the Jewish pseudopedigrapha contain stories which sound tantalizingly like those we find in the New Testament (and later Christian literature). These pre-Christian conceptions are vital to understanding New Testament conceptions of Satan (and demons, spirits, etc).

Copies of pseudopedigraphical books such as 1 Enoch have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls; in fact, it is the third most plentiful work among the DSS — surpassed only by Psalms and Deuteronomy.

For an example of how this literature has impacted the New Testament writers, a few illustrative passages are important.

Jude 14-15 quotes from Enoch …

It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones,

to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”

compared to 1 Enoch 1:9 …

And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones

To execute judgement upon all,

And to destroy all the ungodly:

And to convict all flesh

Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed,

And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

It is clear that the writer of Jude knew about the book of Enoch.  More importantly the audience of Jude knew about Enoch’s stories.   I’ve read different spins on this:  the author knew but didn’t believe it or both the author and the audience knew but didn’t believe it.  Neither of these spins are meaningful.  What is meaningful is that the stories had some kind of explanatory power — otherwise what’s the use of even telling them?

Within the book of 1 Enoch we find two critical characters in the possible story of Satan.  The first I’d like to discuss is Azazel who is presented as a chief angel.

¹ And Azazel taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all ² colouring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they ³ were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjaza taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, ‘Armaros the resolving of enchantments, Baraqijal (taught) astrology, Kokabel the constellations, Ezeqeel the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiel the signs of the earth, Shamsiel the signs of the sun, and Sariel the course of the moon. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven . . . (1 Enoch [ Ahem...that would be "1 Enoch 8"! Thanks, James! ]

You can see that the writer of Enoch clearly envisioned a rebellious group of angels.  This is a totally foreign idea to angels we find in the Old Testament.  To my knowledge, we never find an angel opposing YHWH.   As we have seen in the older presentations of Satan, he was not generally depicted in the role of naked opposition to God.  It’s worth noting, though, that Enoch does not make the connection between Satan and the rebel angels.

It has been speculated that seeking a solution for the problem of evil (theodicy) encouraged the adaptation of Satan as a character upon which to blame evil in the world.   The above passage from Enoch hints at it.  The next one does as well.

Enoch 10.1-8 exposes us to a few critical ideas …

¹ Then said the Most High, the Holy and Great One spake, and sent Uriel to the son of Lamech, and said to him: ² ‘Go to Noah and tell him in my name “Hide thyself!” and reveal to him the end that is approaching: that the whole earth will be destroyed, and a deluge is about to come upon the whole earth, and will destroy all that is on it. ³ And now instruct him that he may escape and his seed may be preserved for all the generations of the world.’ ⁴ And again the Lord said to Raphael: ‘Bind Azâzêl hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dûdâêl, and cast him therein. ⁵ And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light. ^{6, 7} And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire. And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. ⁸ And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azâzêl: to him ascribe all sin.’

First of all, these fallen angels were before the Great Flood of Genesis (as witnessed by the Noah and deluge references in v2) and they are held responsible for the corrupted earth (v6). Second, we should see something that looks awfully familiar: an angel is ordered to throw the chief fallen angel (Azazel) into a pit and be sealed away in darkness under rocks (Revelation 20:3) until he is brought to a judgement of fire (Revelation 20:10).

How could these incredible tales have come to be told?  We can only speculate, but one possible explanation is that as the ancient world went through great upheavals of politics and ideology the role of the Accuser was influenced by Persia and its Zoroastrian beliefs. The people in Judea appear to have absorbed the elements of Zoroastrian teaching in a few significant ways: angels, an idea of a purely good god (named Ahura Mazda), and an opponent who was totally evil (named Angra Mainyu).

Regardless of how they came to make these connections, it’s easy to see that Satan seems to have been adapted to fulfill the role of absolute evil using both biblical and extra-biblical sources.

This is the second post in the guest series “Who is Satan?” by Arcamaede. An index for all posts in the series is here.

~ Steve

___________________________________________________
Satan’s development in the Old Testament is very hard to harmonize due largely to uncertainty of the dating of the writings of the Old Testament. What we will attempt to do below is speculate using the boundaries we have.

Associations of the serpent in the Garden of Eden with Satan are problematic. Even if we were to view the Garden story as history (which I do not), we are faced with a contextual interpretation issue:  the text of Genesis does not make a connection between Satan and the serpent.  In fact, the story gives us a clear indication that the serpent is just a snake (albeit a talking one and apparently a walking one).

We have to go to a later period of the writing of the Bible to find the identification of the serpent of Genesis 3 with the Satan.  Which indicates that the original audience of Genesis probably did not put the serpent in the role of Cosmic source of all things Evil.

In the Old Testament the word that ends up being Satan in English is הַשָׂטָן (ha-satan, pronounced ha-sah-tahn) which literally means “the accuser”.  The word without its article gets translated adversary, accuser, or opponent: e.g. 1 Samuel 29:4 …

This is the first post in a guest series by Arcamaede, who has contributed previously. Hope you enjoy it!

~ Steve

___________________________________________________

This is the article that just wouldn’t die.  It has been several months in the making and due to ever increasing materials on the topic, it has been broken into six pieces.  I highly suspect it will evolve even after publication.

This article has been inspired primarily by my own curiosity into the origins, meanings, and application of all things “ancient.”  I don’t see the material herein as conclusive or by any stretch of the imagination complete.  This series is a result of my efforts to learn and grow in both knowledge and understanding.

I need to state my position from the outset that I see God as a reality which human words fail to encompass or describe as He is.  I understand evil arises as a product of social interactions between humans and does not have an existence outside of them.  Satan is a personification embodying those destructive interactions.

Approaching evil with this assumption presents problems.  A large part of the later utilization of the character of Satan will be to mitigate or absolve God from the problem of human suffering.  Because of this, we’ll be segregating “moral” evil from things like floods, hurricanes, and earthquakes.  I’m taking a naturalistic view of these — they are neither good nor evil; they just happen.

I do not want to leave the impression that I’m trying to make evil itself a moot concept.  The goal in this is to understand better the struggle that the communities that produced these ancient writings went through as they themselves struggled with evil and suffering.

The foundational challenge in this study has been untangling later conceptions of Satan from more ancient ones.  There are many cases where untangling becomes difficult and speculative.  We will attempt to untangle the sources of Satan over a series of five articles.

Part 2, Satan in the Old Testament, will introduce us to the “Accuser” and his role in the Divine Council.

Part 3, Co-evolution of pre-Christian Satan, will show how Jewish Scripture collides with outside influences.

Part 4, New Testament Development, will show how the New Testament presents Satan as a full-blown personification of Evil at war with a good God.

Part 5, Post 1st Century Development, demonstrates that modern theology of Satan had quite a bit of help from the early Christian Fathers.

Part 6, Modern Development, will be packed with interesting notes on how Satan became a commercial success despite an increasing doubt in his actual existence.

Hopefully these articles will come out roughly a week apart from one another (or less depending on favorable weather).  Given that I’m not a professional theologian, I’m forced to sprinkle these writings between actual work, family, and other spiritual activities.

Please feel free to comment agreement, disagreement, and hopefully contribution to the development of the ideas in each article.

Many of us prefer to stay at the threshold of the Christian life instead of going on to construct a soul in accordance with the new life God has put within. We fail because we are ignorant of the way we are made, we put things down to the devil instead of our own undisciplined natures. Think what we can be when we are roused!

There are certain things we must not pray about – moods, for instance. Moods never go by praying, moods go by kicking. A mood nearly always has its seat in the physical condition, not in the moral. It is a continual effort not to listen to the moods which arise from a physical condition, never submit to them for a second. We have to take ourselves by the scruff of the neck and shake ourselves, and we will find that we can do what we said we could not. The curse with most of us is that we won’t. The Christian life is one of incarnate spiritual pluck.

–Oswald Chambers, from My Utmost For His Highest, May 20th