Home
DISCLAIMER: This is not an article that deals with the nature of angels, including "Satan". I never wrote this to deal with whether angels are literal spirit beings, or forces, or even the forces in our own hearts, as some Jews would say. When I describe Satan, I'm not definitively saying that he is one or the other. I am only showing what scripture says about this adversary.
I'm not going to go into the philosophy of dualism or the affect that some Persian religious idea affected ancient beliefs about the Deity of good and a Deity of evil. I'm sure they may have some role in what's gone on, but that is not the aim of this article.
The aim is simply to deal with the Hebrew Scriptures, using them as much as possible to derive a biblical idea about the satan, the adversary. That is the source of truth and a good foundation to build a worldview.
Sections (for easy browsing):
As I walked away from christianity, my thought patterns had begun to change once I realised the significance of my decision and how it would affect my other beliefs. This was brought home to me when I remembered studying places like Genesis 3 and the fact that christians like to say that Satan tempted Chawwah (Eve) to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I had to ask myself the question: did he?
You see, I had rejected the "new testament" as a whole, and had not yet accepted orthodox Judaism, with its oral torah. All I had was the Hebrew Scriptures in front of me and the question of sin and its origin, and Satan's role in it all. Was he the rebel angel of christianity, the devil, who tempted Eve, fell from heaven with a horde of fellow rebellious angels when he tried to take the Almighty's throne and now is the enemy of Deity and man? Or is he the prosecuting lawyer angel in orthodox Judaism who has many facets, such as tempting man to do evil, pointing out to the Almighty the crimes of man, and being mischievous here and there?
As usual, the question for me was what do the Hebrew Scriptures plainly say?
Firstly I had to know what the word meant, not simply in the english language, but in the language it was originally used in: the Hebrew.
The word "Satan" is actually a good transliteration of the Hebrew word.[1] The Hebrew word would be pronounced more like "Sah-tahn" rather than our "Say-tan". The Hebrew word "Sah-tahn" comes from the root verb spelt "sin", "tet", "nun", which means to hinder or retard [2] or to be or act as an adversary, resist or oppose[3] (strongs numbers 7853 and 7854). So the word satan means "adversary", "opponent".[4]
The word itself "sah-tahn", in the Hebrew scriptures, doesn't appear to be a proper name, like Abraham or David, but a common noun, like fighter or table. In Hebrew, common nouns, like "table" or "chair" or "fighter" can have a definite article "the" (or the hebrew letter "heh") attached to them, i.e., "THE table", "THE chair", "THE fighter". But proper names never have a definite article attached to them, e.g., "The David" or "The Abraham". In the Hebrew Scritpures, there are times where the word "sah-tahn" has a definite article with it, e.g. "the satan", like in Job 1, showing that it is not a proper name, like David.
And other piece of evidence that shows this is the fact that the ancient greek translation of Job in the Septuagint does not transliterate the word into greek to put it into greek letters which it would do if the word were a proper noun. It translates the word by its meaning like it would with other common nouns.
So at least what we have here is what the word, in the Hebrew scriptures, is a common noun meaning "an adversary", coming from a verb meaning to resist, oppose, or hinder.
This is the very tip of the iceberg of understanding what or who "Satan" in scripture. Lets go deeper.
So how is the Hebrew word used in scripture? Where is it used?
Surprisingly enough, the first use of the word is not as early as Genesis 3 nor as late as the book of Job. Even more surprising for those who have christian ideas about "satan", is the person who holds the title.
The first occurrence of the noun "sah-tahn" is in Numbers 22. In this chapter, a king of Moab called Balak saw the children of Israel going into his land. They had come out of Egypt, had been in the wilderness for some time, and were marching onwards to the promised land of Canaan. Balak didn't like this idea so he sent for a man called Balaam, who seemed to have some connection with Deity, to go out to a hill and curse them. The king's messengers came to ask Balaam to curse the people. After telling the messengers to lodge the night while he finds the answer, he asks Deity what to do. The Almighty tells him not to go because his people are blessed. Balaam sends the messengers away. So king Balak sends more messengers, this time more honourable than the last as these messengers were princes. Balaam for some reason, possibly greed, decides to tell them to lodge the night again because he's gonna ask YHWH a second time. This time YHWH tells him IF the men should come and call for Balaam again, then he should go. But Balaam simply gets up in the morning, saddles his ass, and goes, without waiting for the men. So the Lord gets angry and sends his angel to stop him.
Now that isn't all of the story, but it is enough to allow me to ask a question. Now where in all this is a "satan" or an adversary?
Now if you said Balak, because he wanted to resist or oppose Israel, then you would be ........ wrong! If you guess Balaam or the messengers or the princes, you would still be wrong. If you said Israel, then you are really wrong. So there is only one character left. Yes, the angel of YHWH is the one who is called "sah-tahn" in the Hebrew Scriptures. Verse 22 says,
And the anger of Deity was kindled because he went; and the angel of YHWH placed himself in the way for an adversary against him.
Another way of putting that is that "the angel of YHWH stationed himself in the road as an adversary against him" or "to be an adversary against him". The word "adversary" is the word "sah-tahn" or "satan". Please note that this "satan" was not the enemy of YHWH or the enemy of humankind. It was "an angel of YHWH", the same phrase as the "angel of YHWH" that visited Hagar in Genesis 16 or the "angel of YHWH" that appeared to Moses as fire in the burning bush in Exodus 3. So in the foundational part of scripture, we have no other but a servant, a messenger of YHWH being a "sah-tahn", a satan, an adversary against Balaam. The point is repeated in verse 32, and it can be seen in the 35th verse that this angel even speaks for YHWH himself.
So what can we conclude so far? That when YHWH is angry with someone he can send his servant, his messenger, his angel to be an adversary, satan. Thus this satan is his messenger who does his will.[5]
For those who know the bible, there are a good number of books between Numbers and Job, Job being one of the most blatant incidents with "satan". Yet the word "sah-tahn" is still used a signficant amount of times. Allow me to show you another way it is used.
At a certain time during David's life (that is David, who would be king of Israel), he is being pursued by a jealous King Saul who fears that David is destined to take his crown and kingdom. Although near the end of his reign, Saul promises not to pursue David anymore, David chooses not to trust the promise so much. This is probably because Saul promised the same thing a time before and went back on his word. So David takes refuge in the midst of the enemies of Israel, the Philistines. One of their rulers, Achish, allows him to dwell with them.
But there was a time when the Philistines were going to fight against Israel, and some of the commanders were not too comfortable with an Israelite, such as David, being in their midst at such a time. This is what they said, according to 1 Samuel 29:4.
But the princes of the Philistines were angry with him [Achish]; and the princes of the Philistines said unto him: 'Make the man return, that he may go back to his place where you have assigned him, and don't let him go down with us to battle, so that in the battle he doesn't become an adversary [a satan] to us; for how should this man make himself acceptable to his lord? should it not be with the heads of these men?
Here we have the Philistines worrying about David becoming a satan, an adversary to them. They see that he can make himself look good in the eyes of his lord, king Saul, by taking the heads off of the rulers. Basically, they were afraid that David was gonna cause them trouble in the heat of battle.
Now we know that David is not an evil man. We know that with the previous example, the angel of Yahweh was not evil. Yet they are both referred to as being or becoming satans, adversaries, hinderers or opponents. The word itself does not reflect something evil in and of itself, but refers to an action someone does or an role they fill.
So far we have seen one supernatural servant of Yahweh being called a satan, and we have seen a human servant of Yahweh being called a satan. I'll just use this little section to show you the majority of its other uses before I get to the ones that are normally used to convey the christian idea of a fallen angel or an enemy against Deity.
The word is used 27 times in scripture. Six times it is clearly used for someone human. One I have already shown you, in 1 Samuel 29:4. Here are the other five occurrences.
2 Sam 19:23 (v22 in xtian versions) And David said: ‘What have I to do with you, sons of Zeruiah, that you should this day be adversaries to me? shall there any man be put to death this day in Israel? for don't I know that I am this day king over Israel?’
1 Ki 5:18 (v4 in xtian versions) But now YHWH my Deity has given me rest on every side; there is neither adversary, nor evil occurrence.
1 Ki 11:14 And YHWH raised up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite; he was of the king’s seed in Edom.
1 Ki 11:23 And God raised up another adversary unto him, Rezon the son of Eliada, who had fled from his lord Hadadezer king of Zobah.
1 Ki 11:25 And he was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon, beside the mischief that Hadad did; and he abhorred Israel, and reigned over Aram.
In each of these passages, the adversary/satan was human.
There is one questionable passage in Psalms 109 where the word is used, but it is translated different ways by different people. In verse 6 of that Psalm, it says, "‘Set a wicked man over him; and let an adversary [a "satan"] stand at his right hand." Some translators, normally christian ones, have translated the the verse as follows: "set a wicked man over him, and let Satan stand at his right hand". They seem to believe that David is asking the Almighty to set an bad angel on David's right hand. The reason why this is a questionable idea is that two verses before, in verse 4, David says, using the verbal form of the word, satan, "they are my adversaries" or "they have set themselves as adversaries to me". He is not talking about evil spirits but about men. Also in hebrew poetry, it is normal for there to be two sentences next to each other that reflect each other in meaning. For example, in Psalm 1 it says "his delight is in the law of YHWH; he meditates on it day and night". The first part of the verse is simply a reflection of the second part. In Psalm 109 verse 6, is David asking for a wicked man and an evil angel to attack his own adversaries, or is he simply asking that his adversaries be put into adversity themselves by means of a wicked man and a human adversary?
Either way, I guess both interpretations are possible, even though I side with the "human adversary" version, since in the book of Psalms the verb "satan", is used five times, three of those times in Psalms 109 (Ps 38:21 (v20 in xtian versions); Ps 71:13; Psalm 109:4,20,29), and every time it points to a human adversary.
The rest of the time in scripture, the word "adversary" [satan] is used in such a way as to suggest it is a supernatural creature. I have shown you one such usage previously when talking about the angel of Yahweh in Numbers 22.
Before I get into the other scriptures, there is something important one must notice about the Hebrew scriptures and its views on angels and spirits. Whenever the scriptures talk about any angel, it is an angel of Yahweh, i.e., one that belongs to him and is sent from him to do his bidding. Whenever the scriptures talk of a good or evil spirit, it is always one which is subservient to Yahweh, that do his bidding.
The first evidence of this is in Judges 9:24 where the Almighty sends an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem, most likely causing them to argue with one another. The word "sent" doesn't mean simply "to allow" but to send, like sending a messenger.
Another example of this can be seen in 1 Samuel 16:14 where King Saul, who has disobeyed the Almighty and forfeited his kingdom, has the spirit of YHWH leave him and an "evil spirit" frightened him. The text doesn't leave it simply as "an evil spirit" but it actually says "an evil spirit from YHWH". This doesn't leave much room for the idea that Yahweh simply allowed something to trouble Saul. The text tells you where the spirit came from: YHWH.
One other example is in 1 Kings 22 and 2 Chronicles 18 where the prophet Micaiah has a vision of the heavenly courts and sees Yahweh surrounded by his armies. In the vision, Yahweh asks who will go down and make sure a sinful king called Ahab gets killed at a certain battle. After some offers, a spirit comes before him and offers to go down and be a lying spirit in the mouths of the prophets of Ahab to convince the battle ahead will go well. The Heavenly King agrees with this offer and sends forth the lying spirit.
Now understand, this is going to be a "lying spirit" which implies it is not going to allow the priests to tell the truth. That's why this spirit could be called a evil spirit. Even if people say that this was only a parable, the fact of the matter is that the story itself points to YHWH being in control of "evil" forces too.
There are no scriptures that speaks of spirits having another supernatural captain, like the Demon Lord, Beelzebub/Satan of the christians. Now I know this has serious implications and brings some challenging questions about what good and evil is all about in our existence, but that is for another time. The main point is that in every case of evil spirits being used, or angels being used in scripture, they all belong to Yahweh.
Now whether you believe that these spirits are simply moods or dispositions that the Creator sends upon people, or that they are actual spirit creatures, the scriptures is clear about one thing: spirit creatures or spirits are under YHWH's command.
That does leave one question standing, which, again, is against the christian notion of "Satan": where are Satan's fallen angels and all the spirit beings he is supposed to be in control of? Some christians interpret a portion of their new testament book, Revelation, to say that a third of the angels fell, along with Satan, and became his minions/servants. Such an idea is absent in the plain reading of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Stripped of all these fallen angels, what power does the scriptural "Satan" really have? In fact, is he really the enemy of Yahweh? What about the scriptures that are used to promote such an idea? Lets now look at the scriptures that show the satan to be possible a supernatural agent.
1 Chronicles 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel.
Now even the Jewish translations translate the 1 Chronicles 21:1 as above. The version above is the Jewish Publication Society's version from 1917. The more recent Jewish translations, such as the New JPS and the Artscroll Tanakh, all contain the same words, that "Satan" did it. A lot of christian translations would agree with them too, at least in wording, but most likely not in concept as I shall show you.
Just an aside, but not all translators and commentators accept this rendering. A few, such as the Youngs Literal Translation, and the christian commentary called "Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible prefer to keep the word as "an adversary" rather than the proper name "Satan", pointing to the fact that it could simply refer to a human adversary. This is because he sees that the "satan" here has no definite article, "the", unlike in Job 1 where the definite article "the" accompanies the word "satan" to refer to a certain adversary, or "THE Satan". The places that clearly refer to human adversaries and the questionable Psalms 109:6 all have the word with no definite article, leading Barnes to conclude that 1 Chronicles 21:1 is only talking about an adversary (a human one), not The Adversary (the angelic one).
Anyway, for the sake of argument, lets just say that it is refering to an angelic "satan". What can we really say about him? Before we make any judgments, lets compare 1 Chronicles 21:1 with its almost exact counterpart in 2 Samuel 24:1, which tells the same story.
And again the anger of YHWH was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them, saying: ‘Go, number Israel and Judah.’
Now clearly, this version of events says that the main operator behind events was YHWH himself![6]
So I guess the question is, did Satan do it? Or did YHWH do it?
Based on what has been said before, no such question is needed. If one compares this scripture with Numbers 22, you will see that the satan came against Balaam because YHWH's anger was kindled. According to Numbers 22:33, if Balaam's donkey hadn't tried to stop and turn away from the invisible satanic angel, the satanic angel would have killed Balaam. In the same way, here we see that YHWH's anger was kindled against who? Against Israel! So he uses his satanic angel to punish them by means of David.
If we also compare these scriptures with one interpretation of Psalm 109:4, where David asks YHWH to put Satan upon his adversaries who are wicked, we can see the satanic angel can be used to punish people.
So there is little need to add words to scripture or wonder how Yahweh could be in one account and "a satan" in another. Going upon scriptural context, we can see it is most likely that the satan is a servant of YHWH who has a specific job. One of them is to punish people.
Some may complain at the idea of Yahweh moving someone to sin. It is understandable. How can Yahweh, who is supposed to be righteous, lead someone to do wrong? To answer this question, lets take a closer look at this.
Firstly, looking at 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1, you will see that YHWH was angry because Israel had sinned. In judgment, he led to a place to get punished. So we are not talking about YHWH moving totally righteous people to sin, but he is leading sinners to the consequence and punishment for their sins.
According to Proverbs 22:8, he who sows injustice shall reap iniquity/wickedness [7]. This shows that sometimes the punishment for sin is more sin, or the principle that sin leads to greater sin. The principle is further strengthened by what happened to Pharaoh, when he held the people of Israel captive. When the Almighty first spoke to him, through Moses his prophet, telling him to let his people go, Pharaoh disobeyed and made life harder for the Israelites. After that, during the time of the 10 plagues on Egypt, the scripture starts with Pharaoh hardening his own heart (e.g. Exodus 8:11 [15 in xtian versions]) and then, after continued stubbornness, YHWH hardening Pharaoh's heart (e.g. Exodus 9:12), leading him to greater stubbornness and more judgment. The principle is that Pharaoh sinned, and YHWH caused him to be punished by adding to his stubbornness in order to bring judgment upon him and his land.
David acknowledged the fact that YHWH can move (or persuade/instigate) someone in 1 Samuel 26:19, where, after stating that his innocence for anything done to Saul, who has been chasing him, he proceeds to say the following:
19 Now therefore, I pray thee, let my lord the king hear the words of his servant. If it be YHWH that has stirred you up against me, let Him accept an offering; but if it be the children of men, let them be cursed before YHWH; for they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave unto the inheritance of YHWH, saying: Go, serve other gods.
The hebrew word translated "has stirred you up" is the same word translated "moved", when it says in 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 "YHWH/Satan moved David to number Israel" [8]. David is saying that if YHWH himself has moved you against me, that means I have sinned and thus I will give a sin offering to atone for it.
So yes, the Almighty can move you to do the wrong actions in order to judge you and punish you, but only once you've started down that sinful road yourself. It can also be to show a person their own sinfulness in order for them to repent like David did in the chapters we are studying. And in the case of 1 Chronicles 21:1 and 2 Samuel 24:1, he used a "satan" or an adversary to do it.
So there is still no hint that the satan is an adversary of Deity. Lets see what else we can find out about the satan.
(1) And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of YHWH, and Satan standing at his right hand to oppose him. (2) And YHWH said to Satan: 'YHWH rebuke you, O Satan, yea, YHWH that has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you; isn't this man a brand plucked out of the fire?' (3) Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel. (4) And he answered and spoke to those that stood before him, saying: 'Take the filthy garments from off him.' And to him he said: 'See, I cause your iniquity to pass from you, and I will clothe you with robes.' (5) And I said: 'Let them set a fair mitre upon his head.' So they set a fair mitre upon his head, and clothed him with garments; and the angel of YHWH stood by. (Zechariah 3:1-5)
So here we have "Satan" opposing the high priest and being rebuked by YHWH. Surely now we have evidence that "Satan" is the enemy of Deity and man.
Before we jump to such a conclusion, lets read the whole thing and also use what we have already learnt about YHWH and the adversary, "satan".
Now "satan" or "the adversary" was standing at Joshua's right hand to oppose him. Was this for no reason at all? Look at verse 3, and you will see that Joshua had filthy garments on. Since this is a prophetic vision of Zechariah, we have to ask what filthy garments mean? In Isaiah 64:5 (6 in xtian translations), he compares the righteousness of Israel to filthy garments, meaning that they had sinned (cf Isa 64:5,7,9 [6,8,10 in xtian versions]). So Joshua, or Israel, since the high priest sometimes has the bear the sins of the nation, like in the day of atonement (Lev 16), must have sinned. This would be reason why an adversary was present, since, if we are talking about the angelic adversary, he is normally present when people have sinned.
To further strengthen this point, once again we can look at the text of Psalm 109:6 where David prays that an adversary/satan would be at the right hand of his adversaries. The fact that Joshua's adversary is also at his right hand is very coincidental and points to the fact that Joshua had sinned.
The phrase "isn't this man a brand plucked out of the fire?" has been interpreted a number of ways. One interpretation that fits the context of this event is that "this man" is Joshua, and he has been saved from the fire of Yah's wrath (cf Ezekiel 21:36 [31 for xtians]; 22:21). It does appear to refer to some judgment. This would explain Yahweh rebuking this adversary. Since we are reading the vision of Zechariah with some figurative language and pictures, the rebuking of "satan" would symbolize YHWH taking his judgment from Joshua.[9]
This is further shown by the fact that the Lord takes away the filthy garments, clothes Joshua in new garments and, while doing so, says that he is taking Joshua's iniquities from him.
There is no strong evidence that the adversary, the satanic angel is the enemy of Deity and man. The best that we can say is that he is like a prosecuting angel, the one is present when sin is present in a person in order to resist them.
Here we are at the most significant appearance of the satan. I think this is one of the strongest pieces of evidence for the adversary having something against Deity and against man. But I also think that once the evidence is inspected closely, reading everything the text has to offer, it will give a slightly different picture of who the "Adversary" is and who he is to Yahweh.
The context of the story of Job is started of with a description of Job that really shows his upstanding character. It is a character that shines so much that even Yahweh decides to boast about him. Now that is a very prestigious, highly esteemed and favoured man. I wonder if anyone today can be credited with such an honour. Anyway, back to our point.
(6) Now there came the day when the sons of the Deity came to present themselves before YHWH, and Satan [Heb. the adversary] came also among them. (7) And YHWH said to Satan [the adversary], Where have you come from? Then Satan [the adversary] answered YHWH, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking about in it. (8) And YHWH said unto Satan [the adversary], Have you set your heart upon my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that fears Deity, and avoids evil? (9) Then Satan [the adversary] answered YHWH, and said, Does Job fear Deity for no reason? (10) Haven't you made an fence around him, and about his house, and about all that he has on every side? you have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions is spread out in the land. (11) However put forth your hand, I beseech you, and touch all that he has, and he will curse thee to thy face. (12) And YHWH said to Satan, Behold, all that he has is in your hand; only don't put forth your hand upon him. So Satan went forth from the presence of YHWH.
Let us be, rather than idle spectators of this meeting, inspectors and investigators into what is happening. Lets ask a few question.
Who are the sons of the Deity? What was Satan doing among them? Why did YHWH even bother to talk to this adversary? What was Satan doing upon the earth? Who is Satan for YHWH to point out Job to him? And the most important question, does Satan really come across as the evil and rebellious angel?
Now it appears that the sons of the Deity are supernatural messengers or "angels". This is evident from another usage of this phrase later on in Job (Job 38:7). What does it mean to stand before YHWH or present oneself before him? The closest scriptures I could find were Joshua 24:1; Judges 20:2; 1 Sam 10:19; Zech 6:5 and these scriptures do not totally clear up the picture, but they do help us get an idea. The servants of YHWH would present themselves before him for either him to tell them something or command them. It may also include the notion of them giving account of their actions before him.
The scriptures say that the adversary was among them. But it gives no hint which says that he shouldn't have been there because of some evil nature. There is no shock or questioning about his presence there. I hope you would have understood from the above discussion that there is nothing in the name "adversary" that makes "satan" inherently evil. In fact, the first question YHWH asks is "where have you been?" or "where have you come from?" This is not the sort of welcome an enemy, an unholy creature would get. It is more the question one would ask someone who was still in their employment. He never said "what are you doing here?" The fact that the adversary was among the sons of Deity may show that he was actually one of them and one with them
"Satan" says he was "going to and fro" in the earth. Whenever the hebrew word this is translated from is used in scripture, it appears to be linked to some form of searching (e.g. Numbers 11:8; 2 Sam 24:2; 2 Chronicles 16:9; Jeremiah 5:1) [10]. He appears to be someone going around and looking, watching or searching, which gives us a good clue as to why YHWH said what he said next.
"Have you set your heart on [or paid attention to] my servant Job?" YHWH points out Job as an outstanding righteous person. That also gives a clue as to what the adversary would be looking for: righteous and unrighteous people. In other places, we have seen an adversary attach himself to sinful people in order to punish them, at the will of Yahweh. But Yahweh points out his righteous servant.
The adversary then asks if Job's integrity is just there because he is blesssed, and thus begins the testing of Job. YHWH accepts the idea of testing Job's commitment. Note the special way this is done. Satan, or the adversary, doesn't go by his own will and power to attack Job. He says to Yahweh "YOU [YHWH], put forth your hand and take away his blessings and see what happens" (Job 1:11). Then YHWH gives Satan the power to adversely touch all that is Job's, but not his body. Job loses his children and his wealth. Yet he still gives thanks to Yahweh and doesn't sin.
I would like you to take good note of Job's response to this first adversity. He says:
Then Job arose, and tore his robe, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped; And he said; naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither; YHWH gave, and YHWH has taken away; blessed be the name of YHWH. (Job 1:20-21)
Note that it is Yahweh, not "Satan", who has taken away. Job ascribes this authority to no-one else.
Even the next time Satan comes among the sons of the Deity, in YHWH's presence, after Job has passed the first test, and still YHWH boasts about Job. And still Satan has to ask for permission to touch Job again, this time on his body. And again, YHWH gives him power. Again, we see Job holds onto his integrity and says the following to his complaining wife:
But he said unto her: 'You speak as one of the impious women speaks. What? shall we receive good at the hand of Deity, and shall we not receive evil?' For all this did not Job sin with his lips. (Job 2:10)
The implication of the above statement by Job is the fact that both good and evil come from YHWH. We can paraphrase his statement to say "Shall we receive good from YHWH and not receive evil from him also?" Still the adversary gets no airtime from Job's mouth.
In fact, for the rest of the chapter the adversary does not exist. Job's quarrel is with his friends and YHWH alone. At the very end of the book, his family and friends come to bemoan him and comfort him "for all the evil that YHWH had brought upon him" (Job 42:11). The responsibility for what happens falls on Yahweh, not the adversary.
What motive can we get from Satan, the adversary? He seems to want to show that Job only serves YHWH because of what He gives, not for any true love or fear. Overall, he is shown to be wrong. Being a being that is attached to the punishment of sin, then it is not unreasonable to see that he would hold a skeptical view of humans. But can we get from this that he is some fallen, rebellious, sinful angel? Only if we already have the idea in our heads before we approach the scripture, and have a mind only to prove such an idea, rather than to test and challenge it. In fact, the very idea that something unholy could be in Yahweh's presence, and even have a conversation with him, which Yahweh starts(!!!) is kinda ridiculous (Job 15:15; Psalm 5:4; Psalm 11:4-7; Deut 32:4). [11]
What Yahweh does through his servants is always attributed to him. When Moses takes the people out of Israel, it is Yahweh who did it. When angels come with a message for YHWH's people, it is Yahweh talking to his people. In very much the same way, when bad things happened to Job that had a supernatural source, it is still attributed to Yahweh alone.
There is no place in Job, or the whole of the Hebrew Scriptures, where the being called "Satan" is blamed or punished by YHWH for anything. The worst he gets is a rebuke in Zechariah 3, which I've already gone through. From what we see in Job, the Adversary is one who YHWH can use to test the hearts of men and their integrity. He may even be used to search the actions and hearts of men in order to accuse them. This probably why there is an Orthodox Jewish tradition that it was "Satan" who caused Abraham to be tested, where Abraham is told to kill Isaac, and it is still attributed to Yahweh. [12]
But christians have another name for the devil which is supposed to be derived from the Hebrew Scriptures. That name is "Lucifer" and he is supposed to be spoken about in Isaiah 14. Lets take a look, and I will specifically quote from the King James Version.
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. (Isaiah 14:12-15)
This is supposed to be about Satan, the devil, the old serpent. And if we took these verses on their own, it would be a good description for the Devil. But remember, that is only if we took these verses on their own.
The best way to analyse any biblical claim is to look at the written context. Although a person can start at verse 1 of this chapter (Isaiah 14), it is safe enough to start from verse 3, which says:
And it shall come to pass in the day that the LORD shall give you rest from your pain, and from your trouble, and from the hard service in which you was made to serve, that you shall take up this parable against the king of Babylon, and say: How the oppressor has ceased! the torturer/distresser [13] ceased!
If you read through Isaiah 14 from this point, then you will see there is no break, or change in subject between Isaiah 14:4 and Isaiah 14:12-15. The whole thing is a proverb about the king of Babylon.
I've got to stop right here! Many times I've tried to discuss this with christians and they would tell me that it is talking spiritually about the Devil. Lets be very honest here. Firstly we are dealing with the word of Yahweh here. Because it is the message of Yahweh, it is very important to stick to the letter of what is being said. When you hear something about the "spiritual" meaning or the "dual" meaning, it simply means it is not in the text, i.e., not in the word or message of Yahweh. That means if a person was listening to the word/text being read, or just reading the word/text, they would never come to this opinion simply by the clear word. If it's not clearly in the text or context, then it is simply somebody's opinion being called "spiritual" as though it gives it the same authority as Yahweh's plain word.
To further crush this "spiritual meaning" idea, lets look at two important things: the style of writing; and the written context (surrounding chapters).
Style of writing: The style of writing tells us what the plain understanding of scripture is supposed to be. When reading the life of Abraham or David, or the history of Israel's trek in the wilderness, we can see that this is historical narrative which is mostly taken literally. It's like when I say "I went out today and went to the shops to get my supper". The plain meaning of the text is literal.
But then there is also poetry and figurative language which is used a lot in the Hebrew Bible. This is the sort of language that, although it carries a definite message, is not meant to be taken literally. This can be seen in Psalms 1, where David describes a man who studies Torah as a tree. The man isn't literally a tree nor does he literally spring fruit like apples or have to live near a river. But it is using the words as an analogy, a parable with a motto, e.g., a thriving tree is similar to a man who is successful. Thus the plain meaning of the scripture is figurative. This style is used an awful lot in the prophets (e.g., Hoshea 2). I'll let you find that out for yourself.
Because Isaiah has already said that the subject of this parable or proverb is the king of Babylon, and he has described the style of writing as a proverb or parable, which normally uses figurative language, we can see that the text is going to be figurative and not literal.
Context: By context, I simply mean the surrounding words, verses and chapters. Looking at the context of Isaiah 14, it is possible to see that Isaiah is starting to prophecy about different countries, cities, and tribes. In chapters 13 and 14, he is talking about Babylon and the king of Babylon. In chapters 15 and 16, he is talking about the country of Moab. In chapter 17, he is talking about Damascus. In chapter 18, he is talking about a country beyond the river of Cush (or Ethiopia). And in chapter 19 he is talking about Egypt. Notice that this is really on about literal places and people, not demons and spirits. But somehow, christians pick on the king of Babylon to say that he is talking about Satan. This choice is simply arbitrary, chosen because it fits the picture of their Devil. But the text itself does not naturally bring about such a conclusion.
If we simply stayed within Isaiah 14, there is still evidence that we are not talking about some spiritual entity. In the verse next to the passage that is supposed to be about the Devil, namely verse 16, it says the following:
They that saw you narrowly look upon you, they gaze earnestly at you: 'Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
This is not talking about the antichrist. Verse 12-15 is supposed to be talking about the devil himself. I believe it should be fairly obvious to christians that the devil is not a man/human. Yet this text is definitely talking about a man. Verse 22 shows that the point of this parable is still Babylon, not the literal pits of hell. That's why it is much more likely that the subject of the chapter is the literal king of Babylon, who could be figuratively described as wanting to ascend to heaven and be like the Most High, meaning that he thought that he could have the highest authority in the world and rule it by conquering all the nations and kings in his own power. This is much more likely than the idea that the devil is literally a man, as is said in verse 16.
To be brutally honest, the name "Lucifer" is not even in the Hebrew texts of verse 12. In fact, if one were to look up the ancient greek translation of the Hebrew text, called the Septuagint or LXX, you wouldn't even find the name Lucifer there. I've checked. It ain't there.
What is the word used in verse 12 that the King James translators covered with the name "Lucifer"? The actual word is pronounced "heylel" [14] meaning "shining one". The reason why the next phrase is "son of the morning" is because the word "heylel" refers to Venus, the bright morning star.
The word "Lucifer" comes to us from a Latin translation of Septuagint, the ancient greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Note that the word is the translation of words used in the Septuagint, not a translation of the actual Hebrew.
The word in the Septuagint, "heosphoros" [15] coming from two greek words, one meaning "day, morning, light, or dawn", and the other meaning "bearer", thus it means dawn-bringer or light-bearer. The word was then translated by a man called Jerome into latin as the word "lucifer" coming from two latin words: lux, meaning "light"; and fero, meaning to bear or bring. The whole thing means "light bearer". Thus we have an exact translation of the greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures but not an exact translation of the Hebrew.
Now the idea of light bringer is not so far off the mark from the Hebrew word which means "shining one". But once it was combined with actual pagan myths and legends of the fall of angels, and read into the text of Isaiah, "lucifer" became a proper name which was now linked to the leader of the demons or fallen angels. [16]
Unfortunately, the King James translators and christian church fathers adopted the myth and attempted it write it into scripture. I'm not saying that they did this purposely or maliciously. But they did make a mistake in translation that helped cause an error in the teaching of a good number of people. Modern translations do not make the same mistake.
So the idea of Lucifer, chief of the fallen angels, is alien to the text of Isaiah and the spirit of the Hebrew scriptures.
I would like you to read the following passage:
Thus says Lord YHWH:
"You, a seal most accurate, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty, (13) you were in Eden, the garden of Deity; every precious stone was your covering, the carnelian, the topaz, and the emerald, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the carbuncle, and the smaragd, and gold; the workmanship of your settings and of your sockets was in thee, in the day of your creation they were prepared. (14) You were an anointing cherub, the covering one; and I set you, you were upon the holy mountain of Deity; you have walked up and down in the midst of stones of fire. (15) You were perfect in your ways from the day of your creation, until unrighteousness was found in you.
(16) By the multitude of your trade/commerce they filled your midst with violence, and you have sinned; therefore I have cast you as profane out of the mountain of Deity; and I have destroyed you, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. (17) Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty, you have corrupted your wisdom by reason of your brightness; I have cast you to the ground, I have laid you before kings, that they may gaze upon you. (18) By the multitude of your iniquities, in the unrighteousness of your trade/commerce, you have profaned your sanctuaries; therefore I have brought forth a fire from the midst of you, it has devoured you, and I have turned you to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold you. (19) All they that know you among the peoples shall be appalled at you; you have become a terror, and you shall never be any more."
Ezekiel 28:12b-19
Now I can be really honest about this passage. If I just had this in front of me, and I knew of the theory of a fallen angel who rebelled against Yahweh because of pride, then I could say that it seems to fit quite well. You have statements about this person being in Eden, the garden of Deity (v13), and this person being a cherub (v14,16). The only things that seem slightly off-beat is the part that talks about the multitude of trade or commerce, i.e., buying and selling (v16,18). But maybe I could simply explain that all away.
As I said, it seems to fit quite well, but not perfectly, IF I only had this passage in front of me. But what of the context?
If you look back at what I quoted, at the end of the passage, where I tell you where it is taken from, you will see I highlighted "12b". Why? Because I wanted to show you that I had started from the latter half of verse 12. Would you like to know how it starts? Well I'm gonna tell you anyway.
'Son of man, take up a lamentation for the king of Tyre, and say unto him: Thus says the Lord YHWH: You seal most accurate, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty,
Well what do we have here? According to the scripture, we are not talking about a fallen angel, but a man - the king of Tyre. And just in case you don't believe me when I say we are talking about a man, then lets broaden our context further to the beginning of Ezekiel 28, which says:
'Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyre: Thus says the Lord YHWH: because your heart is lifted up, and you have said: I am a god, I sit in the seat of God, in the heart of the seas; yet you are man, and not God, though you did set thy heart as the heart of God--
So we are talking about a man who was the king of Tyre. And just in case you are not sure that we really are talking about the place called Tyre, just broaden the context again to include the previous chapter, chapter 27, and you will see that the prophecy against Tyre, the place, started way back there.
But the question will be asked: How can such extravagant and almost superhuman things be said about a man? Was this man in the garden of Eden? Was he covered with jewels?
Permit me to point out to you the word "lamentation". In the Hebrew it is pronounced "qiynah" [17], which means a "dirge". Believe me, the first time I saw that word, I had no clue as to what it was. But looking in a dictionary and where the word comes from helped me understand what it means. It means a funeral song or hymn of mourning, or a poem in memorial of a dead person [18]. The hebrew refers to a poem of lamentation, to cry for someone.
With the knowledge that this is a song, can you guess what style of writing we would see here? Let me tell you. Poetical and figurative! And that is exactly what we have. To give further evidence of this, you can look at Ezekiel 32 where the word "qiynah" or "lamentation" is used again in verse 2. I'll quote it to give you a taster of its figurative language.
'Son of man, take up a lamentation for Pharaoh king of Egypt, and say unto him: you likened yourself to a young lion of the nations; but you are as a dragon in the seas; and thou gushed forth with your rivers, and did trouble the waters with your feet, and foul their rivers.
You can read the rest. Such language cannot be taken literally. The style of writing is poetic, as pointed out to us with the word "lamentation" or "dirge".
So what does Ezekiel 28:12-15 really mean? According to the context, it simply means that the king of Tyre was wise, rich, and powerful and gained a lot of wealth by trade, which is why it talks about "merchandise (KJV)", commerce or trade. We don't have to take words like "perfect" or "innocent" totally and absolutely literally. The king of Tyre was most likely very handsome and very wise, and possible had some righteousness to begin with. Being in the garden of Deity can be understood as being in a place of luxury. But then he got proud, as you can see in the surrounding text, if you actually start from the beginning of the chapter. The rest is not so hard to understand.
So again, because of what is written - the style of writing and the context - we can find out the real meaning of these words and passages. I hope you can see that there is no devil here, no fallen angel who does business or trading. And we got this just from the text and not from a previous theory.
So who is Satan? He is the adversary who comes to punish sin and test man. He appears to be the adversary of sin and wickedness rather than the adversary or enemy of man. All in all, he appears to be a servant of Yahweh and a manifestation of his wrath or his character of searching out his human servants.
What isn't Satan? He is not the diabolical, demonic, chief of fallen angel who has set himself in opposition to Yahweh and/or man. He did not rebel against Yahweh because of pride. He never got cast out of heaven, being thrown to earth, bringing with him a third of the heavenly court. He never had the keys of death and hell (cf. Deut 32:39).
Throughout scripture, we have two main parties: man, who sins; and YHWH who punishes the sin. At Moav, in Deuteronomy, Yahweh gave Israel a choice to obey him and live, or disobey him and die. The responsibility falls with man, and he, and he alone, is accountable to Yahweh. There is no devil or fallen angel in the program of sin and righteous. Only us and YHWH.
This helps us (or just me) to understand who is really in charge of things. Yahweh, the almighty, is in charge of everything. He is the Sovereign and he has no equal, and thus cannot really have a viable enemy. And us human, we are responsible for our own actions. We cannot blame a devil for sinning. We cannot say "the snake made me do it". Because in the end of it all, it will come down to you and Yahweh, the creation and the Creator.
See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god with Me; I kill, and I make alive; I have wounded, and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of My hand. (Deuteronomy 32:39)
I am YHWH, and there is none else, beside Me there is no God; I have girded you, though you have not known Me; That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside Me; I am YHWH; and there is none else; I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am YHWH, that does all these things. (Isaiah 45:5-7)
1. In case you don't know, transliteration is where you have an alphabet in one language, and you have a word written in that alphabet. You then have another language, like english, with another alphabet, in which you want to write the foreign word. So you match the letters in hebrew with letters in english as best you can, since english doesn't have exactly all the same sounding letters as hebrew, but you do the best you can. So for the letter "sin" in Hebrew, we would use "s" because it sounds about the same. For the letter "yodh" in Hebrew, we would use a "y" because it sounds about the same.
2. Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew: Based on the Commentaries of Samson Raphael Hirsch
3. The Abridged Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon
4. For those, whose computer have Hebrew letters in it, the word is spelt as follows, reading from right to left (the opposite direction to english): שטן
5. It is because of the use of the word "sah-tahn" in this passage why I question the root definition of verb which "sah-tahn" comes from in Strongs Hebrew Dictionary, which has it as "to attack or accuse".
6. Now just to nip some arguments in the butt, I will point out that the Youngs Literal Translation is not so literal when it comes to 1 Samuel 24:1. The hebrew is translated accurately by the KJV and the JPS. But Youngs Translation adds the words "an adversary", which are not in the Hebrew, to make the verse say "And the anger of Jehovah addeth to burn against Israel, and an adversary moveth David about them". Now some may quarrel saying that the words are added to balance this account with 1 Chronicles 21, but that is unnecassary. The reason is more like to be that it is to balance both accounts with the christian belief that YHWH cannot move a person to sin. Whether this is true or not remains to be seen.
7. The word in hebrew is און pronounced "ah-wen" (strongs number 205). In all the book of Proverbs, this word is translated as wickedness, iniquity, or injustice, apart from one place, in the JPS version of Proverbs 11:7, where it is strangely translated as "strength". The NJPS corrects that error, translating the word as "wicked men".
8. סות pronounced "sooth" and meaning to entice, persuade, incite or instigate (strongs number 5496).
9. Once again I will note that not all commentators say that this is literally the satanic angel being referred to. Some see it that Joshua was being accused or resisted by some human adversary.
10. שוט pronounced shoot, meaning to rove about, to go to and fro (strongs number 7751).
11. For some who may worry that I am saying that YHWH is evil, then please don't hold that thought. As I have already said, YHWH uses "evil" to punish sin. He used the idolatrous kingdom of Babylon to punish Israel, his people. And in this instance, he uses his supernatural servant, the Satan, or the adversary, to test men and to punish sin.
12.For example, see Satan and Abraham or Sacrifice of Isaac
13. It is strongs number 4062, מדהבה (pronounced "mad-hei-vah") from the verb דהב pronounced dahav. Although translators have translated this word as "exactress of gold" (JPS) or "golden city" (KJV) based on an Aramaic word (i.e., not exactly Hebrew) meaning "gold", I tend to agree with the derivations of Keil and Delitzsch in their commentary of the "old testament" and the work of Samson Raphael Hirsch. They both see the word closely related to a Hebrew verb meaning to become faint or languish (Brown-Driver-Briggs), or feel pain (Hirsch) (דאב), and another verb, דוב, meaning to pine away or pass away (BDB) or to distress over pain (Hirsch). Using these verbs and the knowledge of fact that Hebrew words appear to be related to one another, the root meaning to point to pain, oppression (causing one to faint or pine away), and distress. Hence we are talking about a torturer, exploiter, or oppressor, which Babylon was.
14. It is spelt in Hebrew as הילל come from the hebrew word halal הלל, meaning to radiate or shine, and also having the implication of praising or boasting.
15. In the greek that is εωσφορος
16. Information on Lucifer in the online Jewish encyclopedia in the article called Lucifer and on a Wikipedia article of the same name.
17. The word in Hebrew is קינה (strongs number 7015) meaning "a dirge, lamentation, or elegy", coming from the word קון (strongs number 6969) which means to chant a dirge, chant, wail, lament
18. The definition of dirge from dictionary.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.