Essenes, Rabbis, and Christians (rewind)

For we wanted to come to you—I, Paul, more than once—and yet Satan hindered us. 1 Thessalonians 2:18  NASB

Satan – What was the first century Jewish view of “Satan”?  Why does Paul refer to Satan when he writes to the Thessalonians?  Where did the idea come from?

For most contemporary believers, Satan is as real as it gets.  He and his cohorts rule the world, interfere with God’s purposes all the time, and are intent on preventing human beings from being saved.  In fact, in Christian circles Satan is often treated as a being virtually equal to God in power and persistence.  He is responsible for all kinds of bad things and even if he loses the war in the end, he is a considerable adversary now.

Dante added a lot to our view of Satan (and Hell) but his character and power were also enhanced by centuries of pagan syncretism in the Church. I often take photos in Catholic churches of fantastic creatures, fertility goddesses, and demons painted up and down the walls, all incorporated into the “Christian” message.  As Camille Paglia said, “ . . . Judeo-Christianity never did defeat paganism, which still flourishes in art, eroticism, astrology, and pop culture.”[1]  And we might add, in the Church itself.

The problem with Satan is that the Tanakh never really treats ha-satan as a uniquely identifiable being.  In the Tanakh, ha-satan is more like an office in the divine court, an adversary whose job is to raise questions about human loyalty and obedience.  In fact, the word is used of real human persons, not just divine figures.  But by the time Hellenism had penetrated the thinking of the Mediterranean world, all of this changed.  In the Qumran documents, “The angel of darkness is the same as Belial elsewhere, whom God has created, with whom he is in conflict, who oppresses the righteous, and who will finally be judged. The term stn occurs in the Scrolls only three times in obscure connections.”^[2]  In later Judaism, “The rabbis suggest that the devil is a fallen angel, although Qumran finds no place for this view.”^[3]  In the Gospels, Satan has a role much like the accuser in Job (an office).  It’s worth noting: “In general, the NT does not refer to a primal fall of Satan. Thus Jn. 8:44 speaks of lying from (rather than in) the beginning (cf. 1 Jn. 3:8). Rev. 12:9 equates Satan with the serpent, but the NT does not relate Satan to the angel of death or the evil impulse.”^[4]  “We also find that ‘Satan’ is referred to by a host of Greek terms: ho peirázōn, sataná, ho diábolos, ho echthrós, and ho ponērós.”^[5]  “John uses ho diábolos, ho satanás, ho ponērós, and ho árchōn toú kósmou as terms for the devil.” ^[6]  Furthermore, “No explanation of the origin of Satan is present in the Synoptists but they portray a single force that seeks human destruction and that is broken, although not yet completely eliminated, by the work of Jesus.”^[7]

With this background we discover that “Satan” isn’t quite the uniform idea that the Church presents.  Additionally, until we trace the development of “Satan” in early Christian and Medieval theology, we are probably left with a conglomerate idea rather than a clear picture of some essentially morally corrupt, powerful being.

Makes you wonder why the West put so much emphasis on Satan and his minions, doesn’t it?  Maybe C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien did more damage than good.

We need this sort of background when we consider ha-satan in Job’s story.  Right?

Topical Index:  Satan, 1 Thessalonians 2:18

[1] Camille Paglia, Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickenson, p. xiii.

^[2] Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. (1985). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (1007). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.

^[3] Ibid.

^[4] Ibid.

^[5] Ibid.

^[6] Ibid.

^[7] Ibid.