02 - Diabolos
CHAPTER 2 - Man possesses a threefold nature.
- The opposition between the institutions of society and the commands of Christ.
- Submission of self.
- Means to obtain this submission.
- False-accusation state of mind.
- Passages illustrative.
- Parable of the tares.
- Parable of the sower of the seed.
- The misintroduction of the Devil into the Old Testament.
MAN has three departments in his constitution, an animal, selfish in its tendencies; a moral and religious, or spiritual, universal in its tendencies; and an intellectual, operative in the formation and communication of ideas. The institutions of society are, in general, appeals to man’s nature; they patronise self; they give nutriment to self; they draw forth the abundant and destructive fruits of self. The religion of Christ, on the other hand, appeals to man’s moral and religious nature; it cultivates universality of feeling and the love-neighbour principle; it draws forth the fruits of kindness, of mercy, of justice, and of true humility God-ward. The distinction between the institutions of society and the requirements of the truth is forcibly depicted by the great teacher. Matthew 5:38-48. To act in accordance with these commands of Christ requires the subjugation of self-requires not the destruction, but the control of self. To do this, man must have some motive, and that motive must be very powerful; both because his selfish nature is peculiarly strong, and because the institutions of society have a constant tendency to foster its development. What, then, is a motive sufficiently powerful? The belief that “God exists, and that He becomes a rewarder of those who are diligently seeking Him” after the fashion set forth in the revelation of the secret (“mystery”) of “God all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28) “made known for the obedience of faith among all nations” by Jesus and his apostles (Romans 16:23); such a belief will enable a man to overcome himself, and thus approach towards the perfection of God. The love of self - the natural state - leads one to act in harmony with his selfish nature; to become its slave; to believe that God is a hard master, gathering where He has not strewed; that He is a revengeful God, who seeks His own sovereign will and pleasure, and has no regard for man; that He has left man to struggle, as well as he can, through the turmoils of life, and to take care of himself; and that the subduing of the animal nature is taking a great deal of pains for no purpose; and that to aim at the perfection of God is all a mistake.
These latter states of mind, too common, and often boasted of, are states in which God is falsely accused. Those who act under these states falsely accuse their Maker by refusing to believe that that which He commands is for their good rather than for His. They become diaboloi, false-accusers of God: and the term diabolos can be transferred from the individual to the state of mind of the individual. In such sense, namely, as indicating a state, a falsely-accusing state, this word is frequently used in Scripture. This disposition of mind, this falsely-accusing state, being in opposition to the higher (the-likeness-to-God) possibilities of man’s nature, is subversive to happiness, which is the fruit of these higher principles. This state punishes its possessor. It creates a fire that burns within; a worm that dieth not, continually gnawing at the happiness and peace of its possessor. Those, then, who gratify this selfish state, who falsely accuse God by refusing to believe His promises, and who, from this disbelief, do not exercise what He commands, namely, the kindlier feelings of humanity, and the love-principles of Christianity, for fear they should lose thereby; who will not sacrifice to heaven for fear that heaven (though heaven has promised to repay) should not repay them for the sacrifice; and who, in so neglecting to sacrifice, will not feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, lodge the stranger, clothe the naked, or visit the prisoner, do, as plainly as, possible, by their conduct falsely accuse God, and the arrangements of His divine wisdom. To such responsible persons, our Saviour, the judge, will say, stationed, as they will be, in the place of inferiority, the left hand, “Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41) - that is, prepared for the false-accuser and his messengers. They have, by living in selfishness, been calumniating God, who “brought life and incorruptibility to light” for such as fulfil His will; and they have become the slaves of their own selfishness and falsely-accusing principle; and thus, under the power of the false-accuser, or selfish state of mind, they shut out all the kindlier sympathies of their higher nature, and thus they did not feed the hungry, clothe the naked, or perform any of the duties of humanity. This falsely-accusing state is that which deceives men, and hence in the Revelations the falsely-accusing state is defined as- “the devil that deceiveth them” (Revelation 20:10) - more correctly, the false-accuser, the error-creator (ho planon). This falsely-accusing of God’s principles is the source of fear - all fear arising from false notions of God. The mind that falsely accuses God by ascribing to Him the same revengeful disposition that itself feels, creates fear in reference to the future. Hence the glorious mission of Christ, who came to establish the truth that those who believe in and follow him are sons of God, and, as such, shall inherit the kingdom prepared for them. The writer to the Hebrews appreciated this glorious dilspeller of fear, as when lie writes: “And again, I will put trust in him. And again, behold I and the children which God hath given me. Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise shared the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death-that is, the devil; And deliver them who through the fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Hebrews 2:13-15). Or, as properly rendered, “make inoperative him having the strength of death-that is, the false-accuser” - the state of mind which leads man falsely to accuse God: and the result of this state of mind, this falsely-accusing state, being done away (Christ having been raised, and thereby having demonstrated the completion of his work), is to “deliver them who, through fear of death,” from this false accusation of God, “were all their lifetime liable to (this evil) servitude” (Hebrews 2:15). An additional illustration of the word diabolos being expressive of this falsely-accusing state of mind is afforded in the interesting parable of the sower of tares: “Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the household came and said unto him, Sir, didst thou not sow good seed in thy field? from whence then bath it tares? He said unto them, an enemy has done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares ye root -up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest; and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into, my barn. Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. He answered and said unto them, He that sowed the good seed is the son of man: the field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked: the enemy that sowed them is the devil: the harvest is the end of the world, and the reapers are message-bearers” (Matthew 13:24-30; Matthew 13:36-39).
It is here positively asserted that the son of man sowed the good seed, and that the enemy who sowed the tares is, according to the Common Version, the Devil. The good seed, it is stated, are the children of the kingdom; the tares, the children of the wicked. These statements are not true literally, for Christ never sowed literal seed: he was a carpenter: and the Devil never sowed tares; he would have been useful if he had. It is quite clear that the children of the kingdom were not Christ’s literal children: no, Christ sowed truth, and the children, begotten by that truth, were thus spiritually its children. It is clear also that the children of the wicked were not the Devil’s literal children, but were those begotten by the opposite to truth, namely, the lies, which the falsely-accusing state of man’s mind generates in reference to God.
It should be remembered, also, that though it is stated that the tares are the children of the “wicked one “ there is no word for “one” in the original, and that the same term is in other passages translated “wickedness,” “the wicked.”
Besides, tares are not bad in themselves, but are bad when sown in soil appropriated for other uses. So the animal feelings, which the tares represent, are not bad in themselves, but are bad when they, as in the field of the world, usurp dominion over the moral and religious feelings. This is the evil. They grow together; but if tares kept to their field, then, instead of being an evil, they would be useful, as are the animal feelings. But when the false-accuser, who, Christ asserts, sowed the tares, makes use of the animal feelings to decry and vilify the government of the higher feelings that produce good fruit, then the tares are sown amidst the wheat - an arrangement which is a disturbance of the order that God has appointed. If the tares grew in their own field they would be useful, because nutritive; but when they grow in the wheat field, then, as they cannot be gathered till useless, they must, when gathered, be burned.
Another passage in which “devil” occurs in the Common Version, is in the parable of the sower of the seed: “A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed some fell by the wayside; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it ... Now, the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. Those by the wayside are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved” (Luke 8:5; Luke 8:11-12). That no literal Devil can come and do this is quite certain. He must have very delicate fingers to take hold of words, those winged messengers of thought. The diabolos here represents the falsely-accusing state of the mind that represents God as a hard master, gathering where He had not strewed; which destroys the word teaching love to God and love to our neighbour. Let the falsely-accusing state preponderate - a preponderance which trial is very apt to occasion - the good word is overpowered, and a disregard of the beauties of mercy, justice, and humility becomes predominant in the adverse state of mind: thus the good seed, without the aid of any being, miscalled the Devil, is taken out of the heart.
Understanding the word diabolos as expressing a falsely-accusing state of mind, the forcible correctness of the statement of John becomes apparent: “He that committeth sin is of the devil,” the false-accuser - that is, he acts from the falsely-accusing state of mind; he acts in harmony with his animal nature, uncontrolled by the spiritual (he is, therefore, carnal): “for the devil (diabolos) sinneth from the beginning” (1 John 3:8). Hence it was, as John continues, “for this purpose the Son of God was manifested; that he might destroy (luo, to unloose) the works of the false-accuser (diabolos).” This “destruction” of his works is being accomplished in all those “born of God”; “for,” says John, “whosoever is born of God cloth not commit sin, because he is born of God” (1 John 3:9). “In this,” he adds, “the children of God are manifest, and the children of the false-accuser (diabolos): whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of (ek, out of) God; neither he that loveth not his brother” (1 John 3:10). The passages have now been considered in which the word diabolos occurs, excepting those which refer to the temptation of the Saviour, being four passages in Matthew’s testimony, four in Luke’s, and one in John’s; and three passages in the Revelations where the term diabolos is used in connection with satan. These will be considered, and proof will be given that the same idea is intended to be conveyed by the word diabolos used in these passages. The consideration of all these passages has proved - first, that the legitimate meaning of the word diabolos is false-accuser, calumniator; second, that in some passages the Translators, or rather the Revisers (for they did not translate), of the Common Version, have given the proper interpretation; third, that if the same translation had been given to all the passages in which the word diabolos occurs as that given in the passages referred to, the meaning of the divine writer would have been rendered intelligible; fourth, that there is no ground for a belief in a super-natural, invisible, individual existence called the Devil.
Before concluding these views, it may be proper to notice that the word “devil” does not occur in the Old Testament, though the word “devils” occurs four times. It is quite certain that the ancient Jews were not aware of the existence of a Devil - for the four passages in which the word “devils” occurs imply no such being. It may be useful to examine these passages, as the examination will throw some light upon the common notion of “the Devil.” The passages are four: two in the Pentateuch, one in the book of Chronicles, and one in the Psalms. In two of them, the word translated “devils” is sheedim; in the other two, s’gnirim. The word s’gnirim, rendered “devils,” occurs in the following passage: - “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron, and unto his sons, and unto all the children of Israel, and say unto them, This is the thing which the Lord hath commanded, saying, What man soever there be of the house of Israel, that killeth an ox, or lamb, or goat, in the camp, or that killeth it out of the camp, and bringeth it not unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to offer an offering unto the Lord before the tabernacle of the Lord, blood shall be imputed unto that man; he bath shed blood; and that man shall be cut off from among his people: to the end that the children of Israel may bring their sacrifices, which they offer in the open field, even that they may bring them unto the Lord unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation unto the priest, and offer them for peace-offerings unto the Lord. And the priests shall sprinkle the blood upon the altar of the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and burn the fat for a sweet savour unto the Lord. And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils, after whom they have gone a whoring. This shall be a statute for ever unto them, throughout their generations” (Leviticus 17:1-7).
What, then, is the meaning of the word s’gnirim, which is translated “devils?” The word is derived from s’gnir, which signifies “the hair of the head.” The word therefore, represents something hairy. It came to signify a goat; a hairy one. It was applied to the fanciful, lustful animal, called a satyr, of whom the heathen god Pan, was the representative. Pan is described as a monster in appearance he had two small horns on his head, his complexion was ruddy, his nose flat, and his lips, thighs, tail, and feet were those of a goat. He was worshipped with the greatest solemnity over all Egypt. He was the emblem of fecundity, and the Egyptians and other nations looked upon him as the principle of all things.* This description gives the parentage of the vulgar Devil, so that the common Devil was dug by the early corrupters of Christianity out of the grave of paganism:c and yet some believers in the Scriptures hug the monster still. It will be seen from this view that no justification exists for the word “devils” in this passage. The Israelites are commanded not to “sacrifice to hairy ones,” the Pans (or idols) of the heathen around. They were taught that God is the Author of all fruitfulness, and that He alone ought to be worshipped.
Another passage where the same word occurs presents the absurdity of rendering the word “devils” in a still stronger view. “And the priests of the Levite that were in all Israel resorted to him out of all their coasts. For the Levites let their suburbs and their possession, and came to Judah and Jerusalem: for Jeroboam and his sons had cast them off from executing the priests’ office unto the Lord. And he ordained him priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the calves which he had made” (2 Chronicles 11:13-15). Jeroboam manufactured a state religion: joined priestcraft and kingcraft: this he did most likely to keep his people, who by the law had to go up to Jerusalem to worship, from going back to Rehoboam, for he perceived it might be dangerous to his royal interests if the people associated with the subjects of Rehoboam, the king of Judah, when visiting Jerusalem to worship. In fact, this actually happened, it is stated, - “And after them out of all the tribes of Israel such as set their hearts to seek the Lord God of Israel came to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their father; So they strengthened the kingdom of Judah, and made Rehoboam the son of Solomon strong three years, for three years they walked in the way of David and Solomon” (5:15-17).
These “devils,” for which he ordained priests, were not “devils,” but the Pans, the hairy ones, the supposed prolific principle in nature, which he set up in place of the worship of Him who pours down fruitfulness on the earth, and provided for all in due season. The other two passages in which the term “devils” occurs have the word sheedim. The word is derived from sheed, which means to pour forth. It mean also breasts; because they pour forth nourishment. “As a noun masculine plural it was the name given by the Hebrews to the idols worshipped by the inhabitant of Canaan” - (Parkhurst). The Egyptian god, Isis, was one of these sheedim, and was called multimamia or many-breasted; because [the idol was] clustered over with breasts. Sud also was “tho great goddess Diana,” on which was inscribed “all various nature, mother of all things.” The Israelites, whenever prosperity attended them, forgot the source, and worshipped the gods of their neighbours. “But Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked: thou art waxen fat, thou art grown thick, thou art covered with fatness: then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation They provoked him to jealousy with strange gods, with abominations provoked him to anger. They sacrificed unto devils, not to God: to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.” (Deuteronomy 32:15-17). The use of the word “devils,” therefore, is not correct: they worshipped idols or gods representing the prolific principles in nature. John Bellamy renders this passage, “They sacrificed to spoilers, not God”4 (Deuteronomy 32:17). But not only was it evil to worship these false gods, but the worship itself was brutalising. “It is said of the Mexicans of America that, before the arrival of the Spaniards, children were offered up at the first appearance of green corn; when the corn was a foot above the ground, and again when it was two feet high.”c In reference to some such brutal worship the Psalmist observes, “They angered him also at the waters of strife, so that it went ill with Moses for their sakes: because they provoked his spirit, so that he spake unadvisedly with his lips. They did not destroy the nations, concerning whom the Lord commanded them; but were mingled among the heathen, and learned their works. And they served their idols: which were a snare unto them. Yea, they sacrificed their sons and daughters unto devils. . . . unto the idols of Canaan: and the land was polluted with blood. Thus they were defiled with their own works, :And went a whoring with their own inventions” (Psalms 106:32-37).
Such, then, is a review of all the passages, with the few exceptions already referred to, in the Old and the New Testaments, in which, in the Common Version, the words “devil” and “devils” occur. This examination will serve to establish the inaccuracy of the translation, the absurdity of the belief in a being such as the Devil is represented to be, and will prepare the mind for a still more extended examination of the subject in the remaining chapters.