Satan: For Or Against God?

Submitted on 2020/11/18 for Biblical and Theological Studies (BTS) 1130 - Introducing Jesus: An Overview of the Christian Bible course at Canadian Mennonite University (Winnipeg, Manitoba) 

(Paper lost but Jonathan is working at restoring it and/or searching for it) 

Table Of Contents

Linguistic Origins and Meaning of Śāṭan

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 985.

  • • “The problem arises when one attempts to select the best English equivalent for Hebrew śāțan especially since śāțan lacks a cognate in any of the Semitic languages. The choice appears to be between ‘accuse’, ‘slander’, and ‘be an adversary’”, 985

The Verb Śāṭan: Accusation vs. Slander

• Occurs 6 times as a verb: Psalm 38:20, Psalm 71:13, Psalm 109:4, Psalm 109:20, Psalm 109:29, Zechariah 3:1

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 985.

  • “There is a good deal of overlap in meaning between ‘accuse’ and ‘slander’ but they are not synonyms. To accuse means to find fault and bring charges, falsely or accurately, against another. Thus an accusation may be valid or inaccurate1 and damaging to the character and reputation of another.”, 985

  • Using language of algebraic logic, the verb “to slander” is a proper subset of the verb “to accuse.” Slandering is a possible way of accusing but accusing is not always slandering.

Arguments for "Slander" as the Primary Verbal Meaning

• “It is clear from the six passages cited above, and from especially the five from the Psalms, that the enemies of the writer are defaming his character and thus are slanderers. What they are saying about the writer is palpably false, and therefore their mouths must be shut, one way or another.”,2 985

The Noun Śāṭan: Adversary or Slanderer?

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 986.

  • “But does the fact that śāțan = “to slander” suggest that the noun śāțan should always be translated as ‘slanderer’? Not necessarily so. There are some instances where a śāțan engages in activities that are patently slanderous (for example, Job 1 and 2). However, there are other places where a śāțan engages, or is urged to engage himself, in activities that are clearly non-slanderous (e.g. 2 Sam 19:22 [Abishai’s charge of blasphemy is legitimate]; Psalm 109:6). On the basis of actual uses of śāțan, we would suggest that śāțan means either ‘adversary’ or ‘slanderer’ depending on context”, 985-986

• 26 occurences of noun śāțan (986)

  • 7 “terrestrial”

  • 19 “celestial”

  • 3 with no definite article (Num 22:22, 32, 1 Chr 21:1)

    • Num 22:23, 32 refer to the Angle of Yahweh as being “a śāțan”

    • 1 Chr 21:1, possibly a proper noun

  • 14 with article haśśāțan, literally meaning “the satan”

    • Scholarly analysis of grammar shows that this kind of definite article could make the word translate to “a certain one of satan”

• Earthly Adversaries: Human Instances of Śāṭan
  *David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 986

  • David

    • “Philistine rulers, observing the presence of David and his supporters in their camp as they prepared for war with Israel, complained that David would in fact become their ‘adversary’ (1 Sam 29:4), and thus win the favor of his own king, Saul”,3 986

  • Abishai

    • “Abishai a member of David’s court pushed for Shimei’s execution for blaspheming the king. David however opted for leniency and branded Abishai (and his brothers) as an ‘adversary’ for even suggesting such a thing (2 Sam 19:22).4 Killing Shimei, while legally permissable, would seriously diminish David’s chance of effectively ingratiating himself with the Saulide Benjaminites. David will decide who, if anybody, shall die for any crime.”5

    • Me: Abishai slanders Shimei but I would add that David also slanders Abishai because Abishai had a good point (ethics vs morals though, was Abishai was just trying to enforce the law but might’ve gone against God’s will if David hadn’t been able to find favour with Saul).

  • Military enemies of King David (in conversation with Solomon)

    • “Now however, Solomon is free to pursue that project, for his era is one of relative peace, one in which Soloman is without any kind of an ‘adversary (1 Kings 5:4). Clearly śāțan here designates military enemies, those who threaten the well-being of others.”

  • Appointed wicked man in Psalm 109:6

    • “The writer of this Psalm has been on the receiving end of verbal and physical abuse. His request to God is that God will, in response to such vilification, ‘appoint a wicked man against him; let an ‘accuser’ bring him to trial.”, 986

    • Me: The writer himself is being a satan. Does Jesus becomes a satan when we see him as a judge (or is there a stark difference between a “satan” and a “judge” – slander vs accuse?)?

    • “Only with the help of such a prosecutor will the culprits be brought to justice. The verb and preposition for ‘stand at’ are ‘āmad ‘al, the same words used to describe the activity of a celestial śāțan against Israel (1 Chr 21:1) and against Joshua the high priest (Zech 3:1). In the latter two ‘āmad ‘al conveys sinister work by a śāțan (inciting one to do something illicit, or falsely condemning someone), while the first example speaks of truthful accusation against one who is clearly in the wrong.”, 986

    • “Among modern Psalm commentators only Dahood (Psalms III AB, 101-102) argues for a celestial śāțan in this passage. He translates the verse ‘Appoint the Evil One (rāša) against him; and let Satan stand at his right hand. So understood, vv 6-7 would refer to the psalmist’s wish for judgement on his enemies after death, while vv 8-19 would be his wish for their terrestrial misfortunes. Dahood’s translation, if supportable, would challenge the idea, frequently advanced, that Satan as an Evil One is not an OT teaching, but rather a development of the intertestamental period.”, 986

Heavenly Adversaries: Celestial Instances of Śāṭan

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 986.

  • 4 passages: Num 22;22, 32; Job 1 and 2; Zech 3: 1-2, 1 Chr 21:1

The Śāṭan as a Figure Within God's Realm

• Seputigant (LXX) uses “ho diabolos” in Job and elsewhere, rather than “ho Satanas”) which is used in it as both a celestial being (Zech 3:1-2), and a human adversary (Esth 7:4, 8:1) which likely shows translator wanted to use a neutral term that didn’t have the public perception of being a leader of forces in opposition to divine intervention (986)

• Num 22;22, 32, Angel of Yahweh is both adversary to and accuser of Balaam, and is sent by God (986)

The Śāṭan in the Book of Job

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 986-987.

• “The question arises whether he is with the assembly as a legitimate member or whether he is an intruder. In favor of the latter interpretation is the fact that the satan alone is asked ‘from where have you come?’ But possibly he is a heavenly agent whose responsibilities have taken him to earth, and the question comes not from surprise in the deity at an outsider’s6 perspective, but rather from the deity’s questioning of the agent’s faithful expediting of his chore.” (986-987)

• “the satan directly impugns Job’s motive for service to God and indirectly accuses God of divine patronage:…’does Job fear God for nothing?’” (987)

The Śāṭan in Zechariah

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 987.

  • “the prophet observes Joshua, the high priest, in front of the Angle of Yahweh, and the śāțan standing by his right side to accuse him…Neither the iniquity of Joshua nor the sins of the Judeans are such that they bar the way to the investiture of the high priest or the forgiveness of the community, much to the dismay of the prosecuting satan.”7 (987)

  • Me: God brings along Satan to show Satan that no matter how bad the priest Joshua might seem, God still forgives/loves him and the community

The Śāṭan and the Census in Chronicles

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 987.

  • Chronicler “informs the reader that it was śāțan who rose up against Israel and incited David to number his people” (987) while 2 Samuel 24 “attributes the stimulus for David’s census to Yahweh (2 Sam 24:1), while the Chronicler attaches blame to a śāțan/Satan.”8 3 possible reasons for this:

    • Chronicler bothered by Yahweh inciting David to take a census which is morally questionable, so replaced Yahweh with śāțan in this part of story

    • Chronicler wanted relationship between Yahweh and David to seem as beautiful as possible

    • “Most of the earlier literature of the OT explained evil in terms of a primary cause (Yahweh). Later OT literature such as Chronicles, expanded on this by introducing the concept of a secondary cause in its explanation9 of evil

Appearances of "Satan" by Name in the New Testament

• David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 (O-Sh) (New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.), 988.

  • “Satan” mentioned by name 35 times: 14 in Synoptics, 1 in gospel of John, 2 in Acts, 5 in Corinthians; 10 in Pauline epistles in total, 8 in Revelation (5 in letters to church, 3 in prophetic portion) (988)

Satan's Binding and Release in Revelation

Early Church Fathers: Satan's Sin and Fall

• Henry Ansgar Kelly, Satan: A Biography (New York, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 323.

  • “The earliest Fathers of the Church, notably Justin Martyr and Tertuallian, asserted that Satan first sinned and was punished for causing Adam and Eve to sin. Other Fathers, however, namely Cyprian and Irenaeus, said that his first sin was jealousy of Adam, and because of this sin he fell from Heaven, and only then out of resentment and envy, did he mount his attack against Mankind. This scenario was elaborated in The Life of Adam and Eve, which in turn was used by Mohammed in the Koran.

Origen and the "New Biography" of Satan 

• Henry Ansgar Kelly, Satan: A Biography (New York, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 323.

  • “Origen of Alexandria in the third century came up with a new original sin for Satan, namely pride and rebellion against God by applying to him the Lucifer passage of Isaiah 14. In the New Testament, only Jesus had been called Lucifer or Morning Star. Oriegen’s idea received general acceptance, and from now on a ‘New Biography’ of Satan replaced older views, and it has remained the ‘orthodox’ view to the present day. It starts out with Satan as a rebel against God, who then out of spite caused Adam and Eve to sin, and who has kept up a running battle against Mankind ever since. The parasitic Possessing Demons of the Gospels are now identified as Fallen Angles who were cast out of Heaven with Lucifer.

Satan as Redeemer of Mankind, Paganism, and Battles with Saints

• Henry Ansgar Kelly, Satan: A Biography (New York, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 323.

  1. 1. • “One new idea that developed after Origen was that Satan actually received title to all of Mankind, and that Jesus had to ‘redeem’ them, that is, buy them back, with the payment of His death. Most of the elaborations upon the character of Satan in the early Christian centuries centered on his supposed role as the distracting _ behind the Idolatry of Paganism and on his ongoing battles with the Saints. The Pagan Satan was ‘renounced’ before Baptism and he was shown to be a ridiculous loser in confronting the Saints.”

Late Developments: Lord of Hell and Sorcerers 

Dismantling the "New Biography": Liberal Protestantism 

• • Henry Ansgar Kelly, Satan: A Biography (New York, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 324

    • “The New Biography of Satan began to be dismantled by the Liberal Protestants of the nineteenth century, beginning with Fredrich Schleiermacher, who stripped away the post-Biblical myths of Satan as rebel against God and inciter of Adam and Eve. He sees Satan as an unimportant element of the world-view of the time of Christ. The twentieth century saw increased efforts to define the original contexts of the Bible, which resulted in many of the specific interpretations set forth in the first half of this book. At the same time, adherents of the New Biography are still plentiful.”