Is a Hebrew word, and signifies an adversary, or enemy, and is commonly applied in Scripture to the devil, or the chief of the fallen angels. "By collecting the passages, " says Cruden, "where Satan, or the devil, is mentioned, it may be observed, that he fell from heaven with all his company; that God cast him down from thence for the punishment of his pride; that, by his envy and malice, sin, death, and all other evils, came into the world; that, by the permission of God, he exercises a sort of government in the world over his subordinates, over apostate angels like himself; that God makes use of him to prove good men and chastise bad ones; that he is a lying spirit in the mouth of false prophets, seducers, and heretics; that it is he, or some of his, that torment or possess men; that inspire them with evil designs, as he did David, when he suggested to him to number his people; to Judas, to betray his Lord and Master; and to Ananias and Sapphira, to conceal the price of their field. That he roves full of rage like a roaring lion, to tempt, to betray, to destroy, and to involve us in guilt and wickedness; that his power and malice are restrained within certain limits, and controlled by the will of God. In a word, that he is an enemy to God and man, and uses his utmost endeavours to rob God of his glory, and men of their souls."
See articles ANGEL, DEVIL, TEMPTATION. More particularly as to the temptations of Satan.
1. "He adapts them to our temper and circumstances.
2. He chooses the fittest season to tempt: as youth, age, poverty, prosperity, public devotion, after happy manifestations; or when in a bad frame; after some signal source; when alone, or in the presence of the object; when unemployed and off our guard; in death.
3. He puts on the mask of religious friendship, 2Co 11:14. Mat 4:6. Luk 9:50. Gen 3:1-24:
4. He manages temptation with the greatest subtlety. He asks but little at first; leaves for a season in order to renew his attack.
5. He leads men to sin with a hope of speedy repentance.
6. He raises suitable instruments, bad habits, relations, Gen 3:1-24: Job 2:9-10.
See Gilpin on Temptation; Brooks on Satan’s Devices; Bishop Porteus’s Sermons, vol. 2: p. 63; Burgh’s Crito. vol. 1: ess. 3; vol. 2: ess. 4; Howe’s Works, vol. 2: p. 360; Gurnall’s Christian Armour.
One of the names of the devil; and as all the names of this apostate spirit have special signification beside that of identifying his person, we may consider this of Satan as implying that horrid part of his character, the adversary and accuser of the brethren. Thus he is particularly called Satan as the accuser, Job i. and Zech. 3: 1, &c.
It would form subject sufficient for a volume more than a Concordance to enter into the particulars the Holy Bible hath given us concerning this old serpent, the devil, and Satan which deceiveth the whole world. Nevertheless, in a work of this kind, I cannot prevail upon myself to pass it wholly by, without offering a few brief observations concerning the Scripture account which is given us of one, to whose infernal malice we owe all the miseries, sorrows, and evils of the present life.
Now the Scriptures of God relate to us that the devil, under the appearance of a serpent, beguiled our first parents in the garden of Eden, prompted them to break the divine commands, and by so doing introduced death into the circumstrances of them and all their posterity.
The Scriptures farther teach concerning Satan, that having thus by the introduction of sin brought in all the consequent effects of sorrow and misery, he hath set up a kingdom in the hearts of men and is "the ruler of the darkness of this world, " and carries on a despotic government over all men, yea even the Lord’s own children while remaining in their unregenerate and unawakened state. Hence he enticeth them to sin, as he did Ahab, when he became a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. (1 Kings xx2: 22.) And thesame in the instance of Ananias and Sapphira, when he filled their hearts to lie unto the Holy Ghost. (Acts v. 3, &c.) So in the ease of Hannah while going childless, he is said to have made her fret. (1 Sam. i. 6.) In like manner the traitor Judas, concerning whom it is expressly said, "Satan, entered into him." (John 13. 27.)
Hence, therefore, when the Lord Jesus Christ is spoken of in the holy Scriptures as coming for the redemption of his people, this great feature of character is intimately linked with it; for this purpose was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. (1 John 3: 8.) So again the apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, was commissioned to tell the church that forasmuch "as the children were partakers of flesh and blood, he, that is, Christ, also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver them who through fear of death were all their life - time subject to bondage. (Heb 2:14, 15.)
I stay not to remark, what hath not indeed in so many plain words Scripture authority, positively saying so, but what hath been the received opinion of learned and studious minds in all ages pondering over the word of God on this subject, that the devil’s enmity began not with our nature, but with the Son of God for assuming our nature. Personally first with Christ, and then with all mankind in Christ, that so he might persecute and render miserable the seed of Christ. I must not go so far into the subject as to bring in all thattheScripture seems to intimate of the quarrel of the devil being first levelled against Christ for becoming the Head of his body the church. This would lead too far. The war, said to be in heaven between Michael and his angels, and the Dragon and his angels, (Rev. x2: 7.) hath been thought by some very able and learned divines to say as much. But I do not speak decidedly on the subject, though I had not even mentioned it, if I had not inclined to the same opinion. But be this as it may, very certain it is, that among the grandpurposes for which the Son of God became incarnate this was eminently one, that he should conquer the devil and all the powers of hell, and root out of his kingdom all things that offend." This formed as great a part in the plan of JEHOVAH for the glory of Christ, as the salvation of men for his glory. "
In this view of the subject, if we take a comprehensive survey of what the Scriptures have said on the matter, we shall find that the kingdom Satan hath attempted to set up in the earth is personally directed against the kingdom of God and of his Christ: hence our Lord, speaking of Satan, calleth his empire a kingdom. Thus, when the Jews charged the Lord Jesus with casting out devils through Beelzebub, the prince of the devils, Christ made this answer, "If Satan cast out Satan he is divided against himself: how shall then hiskingdom stand?" (Matt. x2: 26.) So that the struggle of life and glory, hath been from first to last directed against Christ’s kingdom, and to establish the kingdom of Satan through the earth. When therefore we behold the Lord Jesus going forth for the salvation of his people, we behold him, as he is represented through all the Scriptures, as first conquering Saran in his own person and then destroying his dominion in the hearts of his people. The first he did when through death, as the Scripture speaks, he destroyed him thathad the power of death; and the second conquest was, and is, in every individual instance of his people, when by his regenerating grace in the sinner’s heart he converts him from sin to salvation, and the sinner is translated out of the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of God’s dear Son." (Col. i. 13.)
And there is another and a open display of victory: which the Lord Jesus Christ will obtain over Satan, before a whole congregated world, when he will set up a visible kingdom upon earth before the final judgment, during which period the Scriptures tell us Satan will be shut up, and his power restrained from tempting any of Christ’s church, as he now is permitted to do, neither will he during that period be allowed to deceive the world and make the ungodly harrass and afflict Christ’s people any more. The beloved apostle John, in one of the chapters of the Revelations, hath most sublimely stated those great truths, (chap. xx. 1, &c.) "And I saw an angel come down from heaven having the key of the bottomless pit, and a great chain in his hand; and he laid hold of the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years should be fulfilled; and after that he must beloosed a little season." To this account succeeds the relation of Christ’s kingdom upon the earth. "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them. And I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image neither had received his mark upon their foreheads or in their hands, and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."
To this succeeds the accounts of the final and everlasting triumph, of the Lord Jesus Christ over Satan, when bringing this infernal spirit to open trial before the whole world of angels and of men at the last day, the day of judgment. At the close of which follows the everlasting and eternal, destraction of the devil and his angels in hell forever. I must not farther enlarge. Let what hath been said suffice to comfort every, child of God under all the exercises he is called to go through, from the subtilty of Satan still working upon, andwith the remains of indwelling corruption in our poor fallen nature. Blessed be our triumphant Jesus, his devices are but for a season, for Christ hath conquered him for us, and he will conquer him in us; the victory is not doubtful, for it is already won, and, "the God of peace will bruise Satan under our feet shortly." (Rom 16:20.) In the meantime let us join that song of heaven, for we truly bear a part in it - - Now is come salvation and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ, for the accuser of ourbrethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony, and they loved not their lives unto the death." (Rev. x2: 10, 11.)
signifies an adversary or enemy, and is commonly applied in the Scriptures to the devil, or the chief of the fallen angels. By collecting the passages where Satan, or the devil, is mentioned, it may be concluded, that he fell from heaven with his company; that God cast him down from thence for the punishment of his pride; that by his envy and malice, sin, death, and all other evils came into the world; that, by the permission of God, he exercises a sort of government in the world over subordinate apostate angels like himself; that God makes use of him to prove good men, and chastise bad ones; that he is a lying spirit in the mouth of false prophets and seducers; that it is he, or his agents, that torment or possess men, and inspire them with evil designs, as when he suggested to David, the numbering of the people, to Judas to betray his Lord and Master, and to Ananias and Sapphira to conceal the price of their field; that he is full of rage like a roaring lion, and of subtlety like a serpent, to tempt, to betray, to destroy, and involve us in guilt and wickedness; that his power and malice are restrained within certain limits, and controlled by the will of God; in a word, that he is an enemy to God and man, and uses his utmost endeavours to rob God of his glory, and men of their souls. See DEVIL and See DEMONIACS.
Sa´tan (the adversary or opposer). The doctrine of Satan and of Satanic agency is to be made out from revelation, and from reflection in agreement with revelation.
Besides Satan, he is called the Devil, the Dragon, the Evil One, the Angel of the Bottomless Pit, the Prince of this World, the Prince of the Power of the Air, the God of this World, Apollyon, Abaddon, Belial, Beelzebub. Satan and Devil are the names by which he is oftener distinguished than by any other, the former being applied to him about forty times, and the latter about fifty times.
The word Satan occurs in its specific sense as a proper name in Zec 3:1-2, and in Job 1-2. See also 1Ch 21:1. When we pass from the Old to the New Testament, this doctrine of an invisible evil agent becomes more clear. With the advent of Christ and the opening of the Christian dispensation, the great opposer of that kingdom, the particular adversary and antagonist of the Savior, would naturally become more active and more known. The antagonism of Satan and his kingdom to Christ and his kingdom runs through the whole of the New Testament.
Devil is the more frequent term of designation given to Satan in the New Testament. With one or two exceptions, which go to confirm the rule, the usus loquendi of the New Testament shows this term to be a proper name, applied to an extraordinary being, whose influence upon the human race is great and mischievous (Mat 4:1-11; Luk 8:12; Joh 8:44; Act 13:10; Eph 6:11; 1Pe 5:8; 1Jn 3:8; Rev 12:9). In the original this name is given exclusively to the prince of evil spirits, never to these spirits themselves, who, in connection with demoniacal possessions, are almost always termed ’demons’—a distinction which the Authorized Version has failed to observe.
We determine the personality of Satan by the same criteria that we use in determining whether Caesar and Napoleon were real, personal beings, or the personifications of abstract ideas, viz., by the tenor of history concerning them, and the ascription of personal attributes to them. All the forms of personal agency are made use of by the sacred writers in setting forth the character and conduct of Satan. They describe him as having power and dominion, messengers and followers. He tempts and resists; he is held accountable, charged with guilt; is to be judged, and to receive final punishment. On the supposition that it was the object of the sacred writers to teach the proper personality of Satan, they could have found no more express terms than those which they have actually used. And on the supposition that they did not intend to teach such a doctrine, their use of language, incapable of communicating any other idea, is wholly inexplicable.
The class of beings to which Satan originally belonged, and which constituted a celestial hierarchy, is very numerous: ’Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him’ (Dan 7:10). They were created and dependent (Joh 1:3). Analogy leads to the conclusion that there are different grades among the angels as among other races of beings. The Scriptures warrant the same. Michael is described as one of the chief princes (Dan 10:13); as chief captain of the host of Jehovah (Jos 5:14). Similar distinctions exist among the fallen angels (Col 2:15; Eph 6:12). It is also reasonable to suppose that they were created susceptible of improvement in all respects, except moral purity, as they certainly were capable of apostasy. As to the time when they were brought into being, the Bible is silent; and where it is silent, we should be silent, or speak with modesty. It is probable, that as they were the highest in rank among the creatures of God, so they were the first in the order of time; and that they may have continued for ages in obedience to their Maker, before the creation of man, or the fall of the apostate angels.
The Scriptures are explicit as to the apostasy of some, of whom Satan was the chief and leader (Jud 1:6; 2Pe 2:4). Those who followed him in his apostasy are described as belonging to him. The company is called the devil and his angels (Mat 25:41). The relation marked here denotes the instrumentality which the devil may have exerted in inducing those called his angels to rebel against Jehovah and join themselves to his interests. As to what constituted the first sin of Satan and his followers, there has been a diversity of opinions. Some have supposed that it was the beguiling of our first parents. Others have believed that the first sin of the angels is mentioned in Gen 6:2. The sacred writers intimate very plainly that the first transgression was pride, and that from this sprang open rebellion. Of a bishop, the apostle says (1Ti 3:6), ’He must not be a novice, lest, being puffed up with pride, he fall into the condemnation of the devil.’ From which it appears that pride was the sin of Satan, and that for this he was condemned. This, however, marks the quality of the sin, and not the act.
The agency of Satan extends to all that he does or causes to be done. To this agency the following restrictions have been generally supposed to exist: it is limited, first, by the direct power of God; he cannot transcend the power on which he is dependent for existence—secondly, by the finiteness of his own created faculties—thirdly, by the established connection of cause and effect, or the laws of nature. The miracles, which he has been supposed to have the power of working, are denominated lying signs and wonders (2Th 2:9). With these restrictions, the devil goes about like a roaring lion.
His agency is moral and physical. First, moral. He beguiled our first parents, and thus brought sin and death upon them and their posterity (Genesis 3). He moved David to number the people (1Ch 21:1). He resisted Joshua the high-priest (Zec 3:1). He tempted Jesus (Matthew 4); entered into Judas, to induce him to betray his master (Luk 22:3); instigated Ananias and Sapphira to lie to the Holy Ghost (Act 5:3); hindered Paul and Barnabas on their way to the Thessalonians (1Th 2:18). He is the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience (Eph 2:2); and he deceiveth the whole world (Rev 12:9).
But his efforts are directed against the bodies of men, as well as against their souls. That the agency of Satan was concerned in producing physical diseases the Scriptures plainly teach (Job 2:7; Luk 13:16). Peter says of Christ, that he went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed of the devil (Act 10:38).
It is, no doubt, true that there are difficulties connected with the agency ascribed to Satan. But objections are of little weight when brought against well-authenticated facts. Any objections raised against the agency of Satan are equally valid against his existence. If he exists, he must act; and if he is evil, his agency must be evil. The influence exerted by wicked spirits no more militates against the benevolence of God, than does the agency of wicked men, or the existence of moral evil in any form. Evil agents are as really under the divine control as are good agents. And out of evil, God will cause good to come. He will make the wrath of devils as well as of men to praise him, and the remainder He will restrain.
Signifies, properly, adversary, enemy, 1Ki 11:14 Psa 109:6, and is so applied by Jesus to Peter, Mat 16:23 Mar 8:33 . Hence it is used particularly of the grand adversary of souls, the devil, the prince of the fallen angels, the accuser and calumniator of men before God, Job 1:7,12 Zec 3:1,2 Jer 12:10 . He seduces them to sin, 1Ch 21:1 Luk 22:31 ; and is thus the author of that evil, both physical and moral, by which the human race is afflicted, especially of those vicious propensities and wicked actions which are productive of so much misery, and also of death itself, Luk 13:16 Heb 2:14 . Hence Satan is represented both as soliciting men to commit sin, and as the source, the efficient cause of impediments which are thrown in the way of the Christians religion, or which are designed to diminish its efficacy in reforming the hearts and lives of men, and inspiring them with the hope of future bliss, Mat 4:10 Joh 13:27 1Ch 16:20 Zep 2:2 . See DEVIL.\par The "synagogue of Satan," Jer 2:9,13, probably denotes the unbelieving Jews, the false zealots for the Law of Moses, who at the beginning were the most eager persecutors of the Christians. They were very numerous at Smyrna, to which church John writes.\par
Sa’tan. The word itself, the Hebrew, satan, is simply an "adversary", and is so used in 1Sa 29:4; 2Sa 19:22; 1Ki 6:4; 1Ki 11:14; 1Ki 11:23; 1Ki 11:25; Num 22:22-23; Psa 109:6. This original sense is still found in our Lord’s application of the name to St. Peter in Mat 16:23. It is used as a proper name or title only four times in the Old Testament, namely, (with the article), in Job 1:6; Job 1:12; Job 2:1; Zec 2:1, and without the article in 1Ch 21:1. It is with the scriptural revelation on the subject, that we are here concerned; and it is clear, from this simple enumeration of passages, that it is to be sought in the New Testament, rather than in the Old Testament.
I. The personal existence of a spirit of evil is clearly revealed in Scripture; but the revelation is made gradually, in accordance with the progressiveness of God’s method. In the first entrance of evil into the world, the temptation is referred only to the serpent. In the book of Job, we find, for the first time, a distinct mention of "Satan," the "adversary," of Job. But it is important to remark the emphatic stress laid on his subordinate position, on the absence of all, but delegated power, of all terror and all grandeur in his character. It is especially remarkable that no power of spiritual influence, but only a power over outward circumstances, is attributed to him.
The captivity brought the Israelites face to face with the great dualism of the Persian mythology, the conflict of Ormuzd with Ahriman, the co-ordinate spirit of evil; but it is confessed by all that the Satan of Scripture bears no resemblance to the Persian, Ahriman. His subordination and inferiority are as strongly marked as ever. The New Testament brings plainly forward the power and the influence of Satan. From the beginning of the Gospel, when he appears as the personal tempter of our Lord, through all the Gospels, Epistles, and Apocalypse, it is asserted, or implied, again and again, as a familiar and important truth.
II. Of the nature and original state of Satan, little is revealed in Scripture. He is spoken of as a "spirit" in Eph 2:2; as the prince or ruler of the "demons" in Mat 12:24-26; and as having "angels" subject to him in Mat 25:41; Rev 12:7; Rev 12:9. The whole description of his power implies spiritual nature and spiritual influence. We conclude, therefore, that he was of angelic nature, a rational and spiritual creature, superhuman in power, wisdom and energy; and not only so, but an archangel, one of the "princes" of heaven.
We cannot, of course, conceive that anything essentially and originally evil was created by God. We can only conjecture, therefore, that Satan is a fallen angel, who once had a time of probation, but whose condemnation is now irrevocably fixed. As to the time, cause, and manner of his fall, Scripture tells us scarcely anything; but it describes to us distinctly, the moral nature of the evil one. The ideal of goodness is made up of the three great moral attributes of God -- love, truth, and purity or holiness; combined with that spirit, which is the natural temper of the finite and dependent, we find creature, the spirit of faith. We find, accordingly, opposites of qualities are dwelt upon as the characteristics of the devil.
III. The power of Satan over the soul is represented as exercised, either directly, or by his instruments. His direct influence over the soul is simply that of a powerful and evil nature on those, in whom lurks the germ of the same evil. Besides this direct influence, we learn from Scripture, that Satan is the leader of a host of evil spirits, or angels, who share his evil work, and for whom, the "everlasting fire is prepared." Mat 25:41. Of their origin and fall we know no more than of his.
But one passage Mat 12:24-26 -- identifies them distinctly with the "demons," (Authorized Version, "devils"), who had power to possess the souls of men. They are mostly spoken of in Scripture in reference to possession; but in Eph 6:12, find them sharing the enmity to God and are ascribed in various lights. We find them sharing the enmity to God and man, implied in the name and nature of Satan; but their power and action are little dwelt upon in comparison with his.
But the evil one is not merely the "prince of the demons;" he is called also the "prince of this world" in Joh 12:31; Joh 14:30; Joh 16:11, and even the "god of this world," in 2Co 4:4; the two expressions being united in Eph 6:12. This power, he claimed for himself, as the delegated authority, in the temptation of our Lord, Luk 4:6, and the temptation would have been unreal, had he spoken altogether falsely.
The indirect action of Satan is best discerned, by an examination of the title, by which he is designated in Scripture. He is called, emphatically, ho diabolos, "the devil". The derivation of the word in itself implies only the endeavor to break the bonds between others, and "set them at variance;" but common usage adds to this general sense, the special idea of "setting at variance by slander." In the application of the title to Satan, both the general, and special senses, should be kept in view.
His general object is to break the bonds of communion between God and man, and the bonds of truth and love, which bind men to each other. The slander of God to man is best seen in the words of Gen 3:4-5. They attribute selfishness and jealousy to the Giver of all good. The slander of man to God is illustrated by the book of Job. Job 1:9-11; Job 2:4-5.
IV. The method of satanic action upon the heart itself. It may be summed up in two words -- temptation and possession. The subject of temptation is illustrated, not only by abstract statements, but also by the record of the temptations of Adam and of our Lord. It is expressly laid down, as in Jas 1:2-4 , that "temptation," properly so called, that is, "trial," is essential to man, and is accordingly ordained for him, and sent to him by God, as in Gen 22:1. It is this tentability of man, even in his original nature, which is represented in Scripture as giving scope to the evil action of Satan. But in the temptation of a fallen nature, Satan has a greater power. Every sin committed makes a man, the "servant of sin" for the future, Joh 8:34; Rom 6:16, it, therefore, creates in the spirit of man, a positive tendency to evil, which sympathizes with, and aids, the temptation of the evil one. On the subject of possession, see Demoniacs.
("adversary".) Four times in Old Testament as a proper name (Job 1:6; Job 1:12; Job 2:1; Zec 3:1, with
As the judicial adversary of God’s people he accuses them before God, but is silenced by Jehovah their Advocate (Zec 3:1-2; 1Pe 5:8; Psa 109:6; Psa 109:31; 1Jn 2:1-2). The full revelation of "the strong man armed" was only when "the stronger" was revealed (Luk 11:21-23). He appears as personal tempter of Jesus Christ.
They "kept not their first estate but left their own habitation"; so God "hath reserved them in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day" (Jud 1:6). Again "God spared not the angels, but cast them into hell (
Pride was his "condemnation," and to it he tempts others, especially Christian professors (Gen 3:5; 1Ti 3:6). As love, truth, and holiness characterize God, so malice or hatred (the spring of murder), lying, and uncleanness characterize Satan (Joh 8:44; 1Jn 3:10-12). Disbelief of God is what first Satan tempts men to (Genesis 3); "IF Thou be the Son of God" was the dart he aimed at Christ in the wilderness temptation, and through human emissaries on the cross. Also pride and presumption (Mat 4:6). Restless energy, going to and fro as the "roaring lion"; subtle instilling of venom, gliding steadily on his victim, as the "serpent" or "dragon"; shameless lust (Job 1:7; Mat 12:43); so his victims (Isa 57:20). He steals away the good seed from the careless hearer (Mat 13:19), introduces "the children of the wicked one" into the church itself, the tares among and closely resembling outwardly the wheat (Mat 13:38-39).
His "power" is that of darkness, from which Christ delivers His saints; cutting off members from Christ’s church is "delivering them to Satan" (1Co 5:5; 1Ti 1:20; Act 26:18; Col 1:13). The Jews might have been "the church of God," but by unbelief became "the synagogue of Satan." His "throne" opposes Christ’s heavenly throne (Rev 4:2; Rev 2:9-10; Rev 2:13). He has his "principalities and powers" in his organized kingdom, in mimicry of the heavenly (Rom 8:38; 1Co 15:24; Col 2:15; Eph 6:12). He instigates persecution, and is the real persecutor. He has "depths of Satan" in opposition to knowledge of "the deep things of God" (Rev 2:24); men pruriently desire to know those depths, as Eve did. It is God’s sole prerogative thoroughly to know evil without being polluted by it. Satan has "the power of death," because "the sting of death is sin" (1Co 15:56); Satan being author of sin is author of its consequence, death. God’s law (Gen 2:17; Rom 6:23) makes death the executioner of sin, and man Satan’s "lawful captive."
Jesus by His death gave death its deathblow and took the prey from the mighty; as David cut off Goliath’s head with his own sword (Mat 12:29; Luk 10:19; Isa 49:24; 2Ti 1:10; Psa 8:2; Heb 2:14). "Christ ... through death ... destroy (
The believer’s victory by "the God of peace bruising Satan" is foretold from the first (Gen 3:15; Rom 16:20). The opposition of Satan in spite of himself will be overruled to the believer’s good, the latter thereby learning patience, submission, faith, and so his end being blessed, as in Job’s case. Man can in God’s strength "resist Satan" (Jas 4:7); by withholding consent of the will, man gives Satan no "place," room or scope (Eph 4:27). "The wicked one toucheth not" the saint, as he could not touch Christ (1Jn 5:18; Joh 14:30). Self restraint and watchfulness are our safeguards (1Pe 5:8).
Translate 2Ti 2:26 "that they may awake (
Satan tempts, but cannot force, man’s will; grace can enable man to overcome (Jas 1:2-4; 1Co 10:13; Jas 4:7, etc.). Satan steals the good seed from the careless hearer (Jas 1:21) and implants tares (Mat 13:4; Mat 13:19; Mat 13:25; Mat 13:38). Satan thrusts into the mind impure thoughts amidst holy exercises; 1Co 7:5, "come together that Satan tempt you not because of your incontinency," i.e., Satan takes advantage of men’s inability to restrain natural propensities. Satan tempted Judas (Luk 22:5; Joh 23:27), Peter (Luk 22:31), Ananias and Sapphire (Acts 5). Augustine’s (De Civit. Dei, 22:1) opinion was that the redeemed were elected by God to fill up the lapsed places in the heavenly hierarchy, occasioned by the fall of Satan and his demons.
Satan (sâ’tan), adversary. 1Ch 21:1. The adversary of God and man, the foe to goodness, and the tempter to evil. The proper name appears five times in the Old Testament, 1Ch 21:1; Job 1:6; Job 1:12; Job 2:1; Zec 3:1; in the New Testament 25 times; the word "devil" occurs 25 times; "the prince of this world," three times; "the wicked one," six times; "the tempter," twice. In one remarkable verse several epithets are combined—the old serpent, the devil, and Satan, who deceiveth the whole world. Rev 12:9. The most striking mention of Satan is in Job, where he appears among "the sons of God," This is in itself sufficient to prove the subordination of the powers of evil unto God and the permissive nature of sin, and that Satan has no authority to vex save as God grants it. The existence of Satan is a perpetual menace to godliness. See Devil.
[Sa’tan]
A name by which THE DEVIL, the great enemy of God and man, is designated. The name may be said to be the same in Hebrew, Greek, and English, and signifies ’adversary ,’ as the word is rendered in several places where other adversaries are alluded to: cf. Num 22:22; 1Ki 11:14; 1Ki 11:23; 1Ki 11:25. It was Satan who at the outset deceived Eve, for it is clear that the dragon, the old serpent, the devil, and Satan all represent the same evil spirit. Rev 20:2. Satan was the great adversary of God’s people in O.T. times, 1Ch 21:1; the tempter of the Lord Jesus, who treated him as Satan; and is the tempter and adversary of the saints and of all mankind now. He endeavours to neutralise the effect of the gospel; catches away the good seed sown in the heart (Mat 13), and blinds the minds of the unbelieving lest the light of the gospel of Christ’s glory should shine to them. His efforts are frustrated by God or none would be saved.
Further, to counteract God’s work, Satan has raised up heretics to mingle with the saints and to corrupt them by evil doctrine, as taught in the metaphor of the tares sown among the wheat. He goes about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour, but saints are told to resist him, and he will flee from them. The power of death, which Satan had, has been annulled by Christ in His death. Saints are warned against his devices, for he is transformed into an angel of light, a teacher of morality. God has provided complete armour for His saints in order that they may withstand him and all his wiles, and has given them the sword of the Spirit (the word of God), as a weapon of attack. Eph 6:11-18.
The origin of Satan is not definitely stated, but if Eze 28:12-19 refer to him, under the appellation of the king of Tyre (as was very early believed in the church, and may be correct), he is described as the anointed cherub that ’covereth;’ all the precious stones and gold were also his covering, resplendent by reflected light; he had a place in Eden, the garden of God, and was upon the holy mountain of God. He was perfect in his ways from the day he was created, until iniquity was found in him. Tyre, in its worldly wisdom and beauty, is looked at morally as the creation of the prince and god of this world. He will eventually be cast out as profane and find his portion in the lake of fire.
In the Epistle of Jude, the act of Michael the archangel in reference to Satan is given as an example of restraint in speaking of dignities: he dared not bring a railing accusation against the devil, but said, "The Lord rebuke thee." This implies that Satan had been set in dignity, which, though he had fallen, was still to be respected - as Saul’s life was sacred in David’s eyes because he was the anointed of God, though he had then fallen. That Satan had been set in dignity is confirmed by the fact of Christ having on the cross spoiled ’principalities and authorities ’ (
The expressions "the prince of this world," "the god of this world," and "the prince of the power of the air," all presumably refer to Satan. When the Lord was tempted in the wilderness, Satan, after showing Him "all the kingdoms of the world," proposed to give to Him all the power and glory of them, if He would worship him, adding "for that is delivered unto me: and to whomsoever I will I give it." Luk 4:5-6.
From the Book of Job we learn that Satan has access to God in the heavens; the Christian wrestles with the spiritual powers of wickedness in the heavenlies; and a day is coming when Michael and his angels will fight against Satan and his angels, and the latter will be cast out of heaven. This seems to indicate that Satan has a place in heaven originally given to him by God. During the millennium he will be shut up in the abyss, then loosed for a little season, and finally be cast into the lake of fire, a place prepared for him and his angels.
When Jesus was born, Satan attempted to destroy Him. Mat 2:16; Rev 12:1-5. At the close of the Lord’s course Satan was the great mover in His being put to death. To accomplish this Satan entered into Judas the traitor, whereas, as far as is revealed, in other cases, possession was by a demon, and not by Satan himself. When the Lord was arrested He said to the Jews, "This is your hour and the power of darkness." But Christ was morally the victor: in His death He annulled him that had the power of death, that is, the devil: He led captivity captive. Still Satan works, and will, when cast down to earth, be the spirit of a trinity of evil. He gives his throne and authority to the beast, that is, to the resuscitated Roman Empire, whose power is wielded by the Antichrist. Rev 13. He will also be the leader of the nations in the last battle against the camp of the saints. Rev 20:7-9.
It is remarkable that, notwithstanding the malignity of Satan, God uses him in the discipline of His saints, as in the case of Job, but allows the evil one to go only as far as He pleases. Paul used his apostolic power to commit some to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. 1Co 5:5; 1Ti 1:20. The thorn in the flesh which Paul himself had was a messenger of Satan to buffet him, lest he should be puffed up because of the marvellous revelations made to him in the third heaven. It is well to remember that Satan is morally a vanquished foe, for he is exposed; and that no Christian can be touched by him except as permitted and controlled by his God and Father in discipline for his good.
The epithet ’Devil ’ is from ’to strike through,’ and hence figuratively to stab with accusation: so Satan is called "the accuser of the brethren." Rev 12:10: cf. Zec 3:1-2. Satan and the devil being identical, there is but one devil. In the A.V. of the N.T., where ’devils’ are spoken of, the word in the original is always ’demons.’
In the Bible, the great adversary of God and the tempter of mankind
SATAN.—1. The word ‘Satan’ (
This fact, together with the circumstance that references to Satan as an accuser of mankind occur only in those books of the OT which belong to a comparatively late period, has been taken as a proof of the theory that the Jewish belief in Satanic agency was introduced into the Hebrew theology from a foreign source. Traces appear elsewhere of early beliefs current among the Hebrews in the existence of demons, satyrs, liliths, and the like, as in the use of the name ‘Azazel,’ a mysterious being mentioned in the Pentateuch in connexion with the ordinance of the scapegoat (Leviticus 16). It has been supposed that upon those popular beliefs of early Semitie religion there was grafted, from Persian sources, the conception of a Prince of Darkness whose agency is similar to that which, in the religion of Zoroaster, is ascribed to the demon-god Ahriman, and that the belief in Satan and his angels as fallen spirits was thus introduced into Hebrew theology. But, as a matter of fact, the connexion between Satan and the Zoroastrian Ahriman is more apparent than real. A simpler explanation of the history of the doctrine of the personality and agency of Satan is that it has been the subject of development under the influence of a progressive revelation. The complete revelation of such a being as the malignant author of evil was reserved for the time when, with the advent of Christ’s Kingdom, the minds of God’s people were prepared, without risk of idolatry, or of the mischievous dualism of such a religion as that of Zoroaster, to recognize in the serpent of Eden and in the Satan who appeared as the adversary of Job and of Joshua, the great Adversary of God and man, whose power is to be feared and his temptations resolutely resisted, but from whose dark dominion the Son of God had come to deliver mankind.
2. If the OT is remarkable for its reticence on this subject, we find in the NT the doctrine of Satanic agency very fully developed. It meets us on the threshold. It is one of the most conspicuous elements of NT teaching. Jesus and His disciples distinctly assume the reality of Satan and his kingdom as a mighty power for evil, opposed to the Kingdom of God in the world and in the hearts of men. This is nowhere more noticeable than in the Gospels, and there in the direct teaching of our Lord. At the outset of the Gospel narrative Satan appears as the antagonist of Christ. The story of the Temptation, which must have been communicated to the disciples from the lips of Jesus Himself, is related by the three Synoptists. St. Mark (Mar 1:13) informs us that Jesus was forty days tempted of Satan, using that word or title as a proper name. St. Matthew (ch. 4) and St. Luke (ch. 4), who relate the incident with clear circumstantiality of detail, note three distinct temptations, in which they quote the arguments used by the Tempter and the answers returned by Jesus. They describe the Tempter as
Again, these same Gospels, as also the Acts of the Apostles, take notice of Christ’s works of healing, and especially of those wrought upon persons possessed with demons, as illustrating the nature of His mission, which was to heal ‘all that were oppressed of the devil’ (Act 10:38). St. Luke (Luk 22:3) no less clearly than St. John (Joh 13:2) informs us that Satan entered the heart of Judas and prompted him to betray his Lord.
In the recorded utterances of Jesus, in His express teaching, allusions are clearly made to the power and activity of Satan as a personal being, and the great Adversary of God and man. He attributes the trouble of the woman who had the spirit of infirmity to the malign power of Satan to afflict even the bodies of men (Luk 13:16). Thus, so far from discouraging the popular belief which ascribed to Satan and his angels power over soul and body, Jesus distinctly acknowledged it. Accused by the Pharisees, representatives of those to whose speculations in angelology and demonology that popular belief has been traced, of casting out demons through Beelzebub the prince of demons, Jesus, so far from controverting or throwing doubt upon the current opinions of the time, repels the charge by the argument that if Satan should cast out Satan, he would only be defeating his own ends and destroying his own work. Then He proceeds to say, ‘But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you’ (Mat 12:28, cf. Luk 11:20), illustrating His argument by the similitude of the strong man and the Stronger than he, implying that Satan is the strong man who would enslave mankind, but that Jesus Himself is the Stronger than he, who has appeared for the deliverance of the victims of Satanic power. That Jesus should thus have argued in controversy with the Pharisees has its own significance. We cannot explain it away on the principle of accommodation. Jesus could and did rebuke the spirit of Pharisaic traditionalism which led them to introduce all manner of mischievous subtleties, making void the Law by their unauthorized traditions, but never once did He even cast suspicion upon this part of the doctrine of the Pharisees. He accepted it without question.
Again, when the Seventy expressed their joy at the success of their mission, and exclaimed, ‘Lord, even the demons are subject unto us,’ Jesus replied, ‘I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven,’ and went on to say, ‘Behold, I give you power to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy’ (Luk 10:17-19). Passing over such passages as those in the Sermon on the Mount, ‘Whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil’ or ‘the evil one’ (Mat 5:37); ‘Deliver us from evil’ or ‘the evil one’ (Mat 6:13), which have been explained, and even, as in the Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 , translated as referring to the personal Author of Evil, we find Jesus in His discourses and in warnings addressed to His disciples making distinct allusion to Satan as the great adversary whom they have cause to fear. In the parables of the Sower and the Tares, the Evil One, variously termed ‘the devil,’ ‘Satan,’ ‘the enemy,’ ‘the wicked one,’ is described as seeking to frustrate the work of Christ by catching away the good seed sown in the heart (Mat 13:19, Mar 4:15, Luk 8:12); or by sowing tares among the wheat (Mat 13:38-39), the tares denoting the children of ‘the wicked one’ as the enemy that sowed them is ‘the devil.’ Here we see clearly illustrated the New Testament doctrine of the irreconcilable antagonism between the Kingdom of Christ and that of Satan.
Again, Jesus warns Peter on one occasion that Satan has asked and obtained the Divine permission to sift the disciples as wheat; and indicates that their only hope lies in the intercession of Christ Himself, who has prayed for Simon that his ‘faith fail not’ (Luk 22:31).
Once more, in Christ’s discourse on the Last Judgment, it is expressly stated that the everlasting punishment to which the unfaithful are condemned was ‘prepared for the devil and his angels’ (Mat 25:41), a passage which well illustrates the manner in which, in the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus is consistently represented as alluding to Satan and his power and kingdom. That is, that the doctrine is not so much set forth by way of dogmatic statement as assumed, taken for granted. Jesus does not enlarge upon it, but quictly accepts it, presupposes it as a matter about which there is no dispute. The belief is there, and Jesus sets upon it the seal of His authority.
To these examples from the Synoptic Gospels must be added the very emphatic testimony of the discourses of Christ according to the Fourth Gospel. The darkness under whose dominion, according to the introductory verses, the world is held, the dead weight, the vis inertiae of human insensibility to the Divine light, is no negative thing, but itself a power, a kingdom in deadly opposition to the Kingdom of Christ, and under the rule of Satan. Jesus directly attributes the opposition of His antagonists to the malice of the devil. So He says to the Jews, ‘Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do’ (Joh 8:44). The false accusations of Scribe and Pharisee, and the untiring malignity of their persecuting zeal, show the spirit and are the work of him who was a liar and a murderer from the beginning. Again, He speaks of Satan as the Prince of this world, and represents as the aim and the certain result of His own work, the judgment and the easting out of Satan and his kingdom (Joh 12:31; cf. Joh 14:30, Joh 16:11).
3. The other portions of the NT confirm but do not materially add to the testimony of the Gospels on the subject of the personality and the power of the Evil One. Thus St. James (Jas 4:7) merely counsels his readers to resist the devil, assuring them that he will flee from them; while in another passage (Jas 2:19) he speaks of ‘the demons’ (
Literature.—Cremer, Bibl.-Theol. Lexicon, s.v.; Commentaries of Meyer, Alford, etc.; Cheyne, The Origin of the Psalter, pp. 159, 270 ff., 281; A. B. Davidson, The Book of Job (Cambridge Bible), pp. 7–13, alao Theol. of OT, p. 300 ff.; Schmid, Bibl. Theol. of NT, p. 187; Beyschlag, NT Theol. 7 p. 93; Reuss, Christian Theol. of the Apostolic Age, i. pp. 162, 420; Wernle, The Beginnings of Christianity, p. 47; Gfrörer, Das Jahrhundert des Heils, p. 368; Wright, Zechariah and his Prophecies, p. 46 ff.; art. ‘Satan’ in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (Whitehouse), and in the Encyc. Bibl. (G. B. Gray and J. Massie); art. ‘Teufel’ in PRE
H. H. Currie.
By: Joseph Jacobs, Ludwig Blau
In the Bible.
Term used in the Bible with the general connotation of "adversary," being applied (1) to an enemy in war (I Kings v. 18 [A. V. 4]; xi. 14, 23, 25), from which use is developed the concept of a traitor in battle (I Sam. xxix. 4); (2) to an accuser before the judgment-seat (Ps. cix. 6); and (3) to any opponent (II Sam. xix. 23 [A. V. 22]). The word is likewise used to denote an antagonist who puts obstacles in the way, as in Num. xxii. 32, where the angel of God is described as opposing Balaam in the guise of a satan or adversary; so that the concept of Satan as a distinct being was not then known. Such a view is found, however, in the prologue to the Book of Job, where Satan appears, together with other celestial beings or "sons of God," before the Deity, replying to the inquiry of God as to whence he had come, with the words: "From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it" (Job i. 7). Both question and answer, as well as the dialogue which follows, characterize Satan as that member of the divine council who watches over human activity, but with the evil purpose of searching out men's sins and appearing as their accuser. He is, therefore, the celestial prosecutor, who sees only iniquity; for he persists in his evil opinion of Job even after the man of Uz has passed successfully through his first trial by surrendering to the will of God, whereupon Satan demands another test through physical suffering (ib. ii. 3-5).
Yet it is also evident from the prologue that Satan has no power of independent action, but requires the permission of God, which he may not transgress.He can not be regarded, therefore, as an opponent of the Deity; and the doctrine of monotheism is disturbed by his existence no more than by the presence of other beings before the face of God. This view is also retained in Zech. iii. 1-2, where Satan is described as the adversary of the high priest Joshua, and of the people of God whose representative the hierarch is; and he there opposes the "angel of the Lord," who bids him be silent in the name of God. In both of these passages Satan is a mere accuser who acts only according to the permission of the Deity; but in I Chron. xxi. 1 he appears as one who is able to provoke David to destroy Israel. The Chronicler (third century B.C.) regards Satan as an independent agent, a view which is the more striking since the source whence he drew his account (II Sam. xxiv. 1) speaks of God Himself as the one who moved David against the children of Israel. Since the older conception refers all events, whether good or bad, to God alone (I Sam. xvi. 14; I Kings xxii. 22; Isa. xlv. 7; etc.), it is possible that the Chronicler, and perhaps even Zechariah, were influenced by Zoroastrianism, even though in the case of the prophet Jewish monism strongly opposed Iranian dualism (Stave, "Einfluss des Parsismus auf das Judenthum," pp. 253 et seq.). An immediate influence of the Babylonian concept of the "accuser, persecutor, and oppressor" (Schrader, "K. A. T." 3d ed., p. 463) is impossible, since traces of such an influence, if it had existed, would have appeared in the earlier portions of the Bible.
In the Apocrypha.
The evolution of the theory of Satan keeps pace with the development of Jewish angelology and demonology. In Wisdom ii. 24 he is represented, with reference to Gen. iii., as the author of all evil, who brought death into the world; he is apparently mentioned also in Ecclus. (Sirach) xxi. 27, and the fact that his name does not occur in Daniel is doubtless due merely to chance. Satan was the seducer and the paramour of Eve, and was hurled from heaven together with other angels because of his iniquity (Slavonic Book of Enoch, xxix. 4 et seq.). Since that time he has been called "Satan," although previously he had been termed "Satanel" (ib. xxxi. 3 et seq.). The doctrine of the fall of Satan, as well as of the fall of the angels, is found also in Babylonia (Schrader, l.c. p. 464), and is mentioned several times in the New Testament. Satan rules over an entire host of angels (Martyrdom of Isaiah, ii. 2; Vita Adæ et Evæ, xvi.). Mastema, who induced God to test Abraham through the sacrifice of Isaac, is identical with Satan in both name and nature (Book of Jubilees, xvii. 18), and the Asmodeus of the Book of Tobit is likewise to be identified with him, especially in view of his licentiousness. As the lord of satans he not infrequently bears the special name Samael. It is difficult to identify Satan in any other passages of the Apocrypha, since the originals in which his name occurred have been lost, and the translations employ various equivalents. An "argumentum a silentio" can not, therefore, be adduced as proof that concepts of Satan were not wide-spread; but it must rather be assumed that reference to him and his realm is implied in the mention of evil spirits of every sort (comp. Demonology, and Kautzsch, "Apokryphen," Index).
In the New Testament.
The high development of the demonology of the New Testament presupposes a long period of evolution. In the Gospels the beliefs of the lower orders of society find expression, and Satan and his kingdom are regarded as encompassing the entire world, and are factors in all the events of daily life. In strict accordance with his manifold activity he bears many names, being called "Satan" (Matt. iv. 10; Mark i. 30, iv. 15; Luke x. 18 et passim), "devil" (Matt. iv. 1 et passim), "adversary" (I Peter v. 8,
Satan and his host are mentioned comparatively seldom in the Talmud and Midrash, although the material on this subject is not without importance. In the older or tannaitic literature the name of Satan is met with but rarely. Thus in Ab. iv. 11 sin itself, and not Satan, is the accuser, the term
In Talmud and Midrash.
The Angelology of the Talmud, moreover, proves that, according to the older view (until about 200 C.E.), punishment was inflicted by angels and not by Satan. In the course of time, however, official Judaism, beginning perhaps with Johanan (d. 279), absorbed the popular concepts of Satan, which doubtless forced their way gradually from the lower classes to the most cultured. The later a midrashic collection the more frequent is the mention therein of Satan and his hosts. The Palestinian Talmud, completed about 400, is more reticent in this regard; and this is the more noteworthy since its provenience is the same as that of the New Testament. Samael, the lord of the satans, was a mighty prince of angels in heaven (Gen. R. xix.). Satan came into the world with woman, i.e., with Eve (Yalḳ., Gen. i. 23); so that he was created and is not eternal. Like all celestial beings, he flies through the air (Gen. R. xix.), and can assumeany form, as of a bird (Sanh. 107a), a stag (ib. 95a), a woman (Ḳid. 81a), a beggar (ib.), or a young man (Tan., Wayera, end); he is said to skip (Pes. 112b; Meg. 11b), in allusion to his appearance in the form of a goat (comp. the goat-demons of the Bible), and it was as such that he was addressed with the words "an arrow between thine eyes" by one who wished to express contempt for him (Ḳid. 30a, 81a, et passim).
He is the incarnation of all evil, and his thoughts and activities are devoted to the destruction of man; so that Satan, the impulse to evil ("yeẓer ha-ra'"), and the angel of death are one and the same personality. He descends from heaven and leads astray, then ascends and brings accusations against mankind. Receiving the divine commission, he takes away the soul, or, in other words, he slays (B. B. 16a). He seizes upon even a single word which may be prejudicial to man; so that "one should not open his mouth unto evil," i.e., "unto Satan" (Ber. 19a). In times of danger likewise he brings his accusations (Yer. Shab. 5b et passim). While he has power over all the works of man (Ber. 46b), he can not prevail at the same time against two individuals of different nationality; so that Samuel, a noted astronomer and teacher of the Law (d. at Nehardea 247), would start on a journey only when a Gentile traveled with him (Shab. 32a).
Satan's knowledge is circumscribed; for when the shofar is blown on New-Year's Day he is "confounded" (R. H. 16b; Yer. Targ. to Num. x. 10). On the Day of Atonement his power vanishes; for the numerical value of the letters of his name (
) is only 364, one day being thus exempt from his influence (Yoma 20a). Moses banished him by means of the Divine Name (Grünhut, "Sefer ha-Liḳḳuṭim," v. 169). If Satan does not attain his purpose, as was the case in his temptation of Job, he feels great sorrow (B. B. 16a); and it was a terrible blow to him, as the representative of moral evil, that the Torah, the incarnation of moral good, should be given to Israel. He endeavored to overthrow it, and finally led the people to make the golden calf (Shab. 89a; Yer. Targ. to Ex. xxxii. 1), while the two tables of the Law were bestowed on Moses of necessity without Satan's knowledge (Sanh. 26b).
His Functions.
The chief functions of Satan are, as already noted, those of temptation, accusation, and punishment. He was an active agent in the fall of man (Pirḳe R. El. xiii., beginning), and was the father of Cain (ib. xxi.), while he was also instrumental in the offering of Isaac (Tan., Wayera, 22 [ed. Stettin, p. 39a]), in the release of the animal destined by Esau for his father (Tan., Toledot, 11), in the theophany at Sinai, in the death of Moses (Deut. R. xiii. 9), in David's sin with Bath-sheba (Sanh. 95a), and in the death of Queen Vashti (Meg. 11a). The decree to destroy all the Jews, which Haman obtained, was written on parchment brought by Satan (Esther R. iii. 9). When Alexander the Great reproached the Jewish sages with their rebellion, they made the plea that Satan had been too mighty for them (Tamid 32a). He appeared as a tempter to Akiba and Mattithiah b. Ḥeresh (Ḳid. 81a; Midr. Abkir, ed. Buber, p. 11). He sowed discord between two men, and when Meïr reconciled them, he departed, crying, "Alas, Meïr has driven me from home!" (Giṭ. 52a; comp. 'Er. 26a)—i.e., Satan is the angel of strife (see also Yoma 67b; Shab. 104a; Yeb. 16a). If any one brings a beautiful captive home, he brings Satan into his house, and his son will be destroyed (Sifre, Deut. 218); for Satan kindles the evil impulse ("yeẓer ha-ra'") to impurity (Ex. R. xx.). Where one makes his home Satan leaps about; where merriment rules, or wheresoever there is eating or drinking, he brings his accusations (Gen. R. xxxviii. 7); and when there is a chance that prosperity may be enjoyed in this world or in the next he likewise rises up as an accuser. Even Jacob was forced to prove to Satan that he had borne much suffering in this world (Gen. R. lxxxiv., in Weber, "System der Altsynagogalen Palästinischen Theologie," p. 323); and when Satan reveals the sins of Israel to God others plead the alms which Israel has given (Ex. R. xxxi.). In the hour of birth, and thus in the hour of peril, he brings his accusation against the mother (Eccl. R. iii. 2). The serpent of Gen. iii. is identified with Satan (see Weber, l.c. pp. 218 et seq.; comp. Adam; Eve; Serpent).
As the incarnation of evil Satan is the arch-enemy of the Messiah: he is Antichrist. The light which was created before the world was hidden by God beneath His throne; and to the question of Satan in regard to it God answered, "This light is kept for him who shall bring thee to shame." At his request God showed Satan the Messiah; "and when he saw him he trembled, fell upon his face, and cried: 'Verily this is the Messiah who shall hurl me and all the princes of the angels of the peoples down even unto hell'" (Pesiḳ. R. iii. 6 [ed. Friedmann, p. 161b]; further details are given in Bousset, "Der Antichrist").
In the Cabala.
While the Pirḳe R. Eli'ezer, and the mystic midrashim edited by Jellinek in his "Bet ha-Midrash," belong historically to the post-Talmudic period, they do not fall under this category so far as their content is concerned. Here belong, strictly speaking, only the Zohar and other esoteric works comprised under the name "Cabala." The basal elements remain the same; but under the influence of medieval demonology a wider scope is ascribed to the activity of Satan and his host, daily life falling within the range of his power. The miscreants of the Bible, such as Amalek, Goliath, and Haman, are identified with him; and his hosts receive new names, among them "Ḳelippa" (husk, rind, peeling, scale). Antichristian polemics also complicate the problem (see the rich collection of material in Eisenmenger, "Entdecktes Judenthum," i. 812 et seq.).
Satan was mentioned in the liturgy at an early period, as in the daily morning prayer and in the Blessing of the New Moon; and his name has naturally occurred in amulets and incantations down to the present day. Terms and phrases referring to Satan which are met with in Judæo-German must be regarded as reminiscences of the ancient popular belief in him.
Bibliography:
Davidson, Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 300-355, Edinburgh, 1904;
Faivre, La Personalité du Satan d'Après la Bible, Montauban, 1900;
Hennecke, NeutestamentlicheApokryphen, Tübingen, 1904;
Köberle, Sünde und Gnade, Munich, 1902;
Herzog-Plitt, Real-Encyc. xv. 358-362 (and the bibliography there given);
Schrader, K. A. T. 3d ed., pp. 463 et seq.
SATAN
1. In the OT.—The term Satan is Hebrew and means ‘adversary.’ In the earlier usage of the language it is employed in the general sense of ‘adversary,’ personal or national: (cf. e.g. Num 22:22, 2Sa 19:22, 1Ki 5:4; 1Ki 11:25 etc.). In such passages no trace of a distinct being designated ‘Satan’ is to be seen. Such a being meets us for the first time in the OT in the prologue (chs. 1 and 2) of the Bk. of Job, in the person of one of ‘the sons of God’ who bears the title of ‘the Satan.’ Here Satan appears as a member of the celestial council of angelic beings who have access to the presence of God. His special function is to watch over human affairs and beings with the object of searching out men’s sins and accusing them in the celestial court. He is thus invested with a certain malevolent and malignant character; but it is to be observed that he has no power to act without the Divine permission being first obtained, and cannot, therefore, be regarded as the embodiment of the power that opposes the Deity. In Zec 3:2 essentially the same view of ‘the Satan’ is presented. But in 1Ch 21:1 (‘And Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel’) the personality of this being is more distinct: he appears now as ‘Satan’ (a proper name without the article), the tempter who is able to provoke David to number Israel. This is the Chronicler’s (4th or 3rd cent. b.c.) reading of the incident which in the earlier narrative (2Sa 24:1) is ascribed to the direct action of God Himself. Here (in Chron.) the work of Satan is apparently conceived of as more or less independent of, and opposed to, the Divine action.
2. In the extra-canonical literature of the OT.—In the later (apocryphal) literature of pre-Christian Judaism the dualistic tendency becomes more pronounced—a tendency powerfully affected by Persian influence, it would seem, which is also apparent in the development of an elaborate Jewish angelology and demonology. This is most clearly visible in the apocalyptic literature. In the oldest part of the Bk. of Enoch (chs. 1–36), dating, perhaps, from about b.c. 180, the origin of the demons is traced to the fall of the angelic watchers, the ‘sons of God’ who corrupted themselves with the ‘daughters of men’ (Gen 6:1 f.). It was from the offspring of these sinful unions—the ‘giants’ or nephîlîm—that the demons were sprung. Of these demons the Asmodæus of the Bk. of Tobit (Tob 3:8; Tob 3:17) seems to have been regarded as the king (Bab.
In the Bk. of Wisdom (Wis 2:24: ‘by the envy of the devil death entered into the world’) we already meet with the identification of the Serpent of Gen 3:1-24 with Satan, which afterwards became a fixed element in belief, and an allusion to the same idea may be detected in the Psalms of Solomon 4:11, where the prosperous wicked man is said to be ‘like a serpent, to pervert wisdom, speaking with the words of transgressors.’ The same identification also meets us in the Book of the Secrets of Enoch (? 1st cent. a.d.), where, moreover, satanology shows a rich development (the pride, revolt, and fall of Satan are dwelt upon). Cf. art. Fall.
The secondary Jewish (Rabbinical) Literature which is connected with the text of the OT (esp. the Targums and the Midrashim) naturally reflects beliefs that were current at a later time. But they are obviously connected closely with those that have already been mentioned. The Serpent of Gen 3:1-24 becomes ‘the old serpent’ who seduced Adam and Eve. The chief of the Satans is Sammael, who is often referred to as ‘the angel of death’: and in the Secrets of Enoch he is prince of the demons and a magician. It is interesting to note that in the later Midrash one of the works of Messiah ben-Joseph is the slaying of Sammael, who is ‘the Satan, the prime mover of all evil.’ In the earlier literature his great opponent is the archangel Michael. The Rabbinic doctrine of the ‘evil impulse’ (yetser ra’), which works within man like a leaven (Berak. 17a), looks like a theological refinement, which has sometimes been combined with the popular view of Satan (Satan works his evil purpose by the instrumentality of the ‘evil impulse’).
3. In the NT.—In the NT, Satan and his kingdom are frequently referred to. Sometimes the Hebrew name ‘Satan’ is used (e.g. Mar 3:26; Mar 4:15 etc.), sometimes its Greek equivalent (diabolos: cf. our word ‘diabolical’), which is translated ‘devil,’ and which means ‘accuser’ or ‘calumniator.’ In Mat 12:26-27 (cf. Mat 10:25) Satan is apparently identified with Beelzebub (or Beelzebul), and is occasionally designated ‘the evil one’ (Mat 13:19; Mat 13:38 etc.; so, perhaps, also in the Lord’s Prayer: ‘deliver us from the evil one’). Some scholars are of opinion that the name Beelzebub means not ‘fly-god’ but ‘enemy’ (i.e. the enemy of God). He is called the ‘prince of the devils (or demons)’ in Mat 12:24, just as Sammael, ‘the great prince in heaven,’ is designated the ‘chief of Satans’ in the Midrash.
The demonology that confronts us in the NT has striking points of contact with that which is developed in the Enochic literature. The main features of the latter, in fact, reappear. The ‘angels which kept not their first estate’ (Jud 1:6, 2Pe 2:4) are the angelic watchers whose fall through lust is described in Enoch 6–16. Their punishment is to be kept imprisoned in perpetual darkness. In Enoch the demons, who are represented as the evil spirits which went forth from the souls of the giant offspring of the fallen watchers, exercise an evil activity, working moral ruin on the earth till the final judgment. In exactly the same way the demons are described in the NT as disembodied spirits (Mat 12:43-45, Luk 11:24-26). The time of their punishment is to be the final judgment (cf. Mat 8:29: ‘Art thou come hither to torment us before the time?’). They belong to and are subject to Satan. As in the Book of Enoch, Satan is represented in the NT as the ruler of a counter-kingdom of evil (cf. Mat 12:26, Luk 11:13 ‘if Satan cast out Satan, how shall his kingdom stand?’); he led astray angels (Rev 12:4) and men (2Co 11:3); his functions are to tempt (Mat 4:1-12, Luk 22:31), to accuse (Rev 12:10), and to punish (1Co 5:5: impenitent sinners delivered over to Satan for destruction of the flesh). It should be added that in the Fourth Gospel and Johannine Epp. the lesser demonic agencies disappear. Opposition is concentrated in the persons of Christ and the devil. The latter is the ruler of this world (Joh 16:11), and enslaves men to himself through sin. The Son of God is manifested for the express purpose of destroying the devil’s works (1Jn 3:8).
Both in St. Paul (cf. Rom 16:20, 2Co 11:2-3) and in the Apocalypse Satan is identified with the Serpent of Gen 3:1-24. It is also noteworthy that St. Paul shared the contemporary belief that angelic beings inhabited the higher (heavenly) regions, and that Satan also with his retinue dwelt not beneath the earth, but in the lower atmospheric region; cf. Eph 2:2, where ‘the prince of the power of the air’ = Satan (cf. also Eph 6:12 and Luk 10:13 ‘I beheld Satan fallen as lightning from heaven’). For Satan’s rôle in the Apocalypse see art. Eschatology. Cf. also art. Devil.
4. The attitude of our Lord towards the Satan-belief.—Our Lord, as is clearly apparent in the Synoptic tradition, recognized the existence and power of a kingdom of evil, with organized demonic agencies under the control of a supreme personality, Satan or Beelzebub. These demonic agencies are the source of every variety of physical and moral evil. One principal function of the Messiah is to destroy the works of Satan and his subordinates (Mar 1:24; Mar 1:34; Mar 3:11-12; Mar 3:15 etc.). Maladies traced to demonic possession play a large part in the Synoptic narratives (see Devil, Possession). In the expulsion of demons by His disciples, Jesus sees the overthrow of Satan’s power (Luk 10:13). The evil effected by Satanic agency is intellectual and moral as well as physical (Mar 4:15, Mat 13:19; Mat 13:33; cf. 2Co 4:4). That our Lord accepted the reality of such personal agencies of evil cannot seriously be questioned; nor is it necessary to endeavour to explain this fact away. The problem is to some extent a psychological one. Under certain conditions and in certain localities the sense of the presence and potency of evil personalities has been painfully and oppressively felt by more than one modern European, who was not prone to superstition. It is also literally true that the light of the gospel and the power of Christ operate still in such cases to ‘destroy the works of darkness’ and expel the demons.
G. H. Box.
(Hebrew: an adversary, enemy)
Name for the chief demon or devil (1 Par 5), frequently used as a common noun in the Old Testament (3 Kings 5). The form Satanas is used throughout the New Testament in the Vulgate, while the form Satan occurs in the Old Testament only. In Matthew 16 it is used in the sense of contrariness or opposition.
(Greek diabolos; Lat. diabolus).The name commonly given to the fallen angels, who are also known as demons (see DEMONOLOGY). With the article (ho) it denotes Lucifer, their chief, as in Matthew 25:41, "the Devil and his angels".It may be said of this name, as St. Gregory says of the word angel, "nomen est officii, non naturæ"--the designation of an office, not of a nature. For the Greek word (from diaballein, "to traduce") means a slanderer, or accuser, and in this sense it is applied to him of whom it is written "the accuser [ho kategoros] of our brethren is cast forth, who accused them before our God day and night" (Apocalypse 12:10). It thus answers to the Hebrew name Satan which signifies an adversary, or an accuser.Mention is made of the Devil in many passages of the Old and New Testaments, but there is no full account given in any one place, and the Scripture teaching on this topic can only be ascertained by combining a number of scattered notices from Genesis to Apocalypse, and reading them in the light of patristic and theological tradition. The authoritative teaching of the Church on this topic is set forth in the decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council (cap. i, "Firmiter credimus"), wherein, after saying that God in the beginning had created together two creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal, that is to say the angelic and the earthly, and lastly man, who was made of both spirit and body, the council continues: "Diabolus enim et alii dæmones a Deo quidem naturâ creati sunt boni, sed ipsi per se facti sunt mali." ("the Devil and the other demons were created by God good in their nature but they by themselves have made themselves evil.") Here it is clearly taught that the Devil and the other demons are spiritual or angelic creatures created by God in a state of innocence, and that they became evil by their own act. It is added that man sinned by the suggestion of the Devil, and that in the next world the wicked shall suffer perpetual punishment with the Devil. The doctrine which may thus be set forth in a few words has furnished a fruitful theme for theological speculation for the Fathers and Schoolmen, as well as later theologians, some of whom, Suarez for example, have treated it very fully. On the other hand it has also been the subject of many heretical or erroneous opinions, some of which owe their origin to pre-Christian systems of demonology. In later years Rationalist writers have rejected the doctrine altogether, and seek to show that it has been borrowed by Judaism and Christianity from external systems of religion wherein it was a natural development of primitive Animism.As may be gathered from the language of the Lateran definition, the Devil and the other demons are but a part of the angelic creation, and their natural powers do not differ from those of the angels who remained faithful. Like the other angels, they are pure spiritual beings without any body, and in their original state they are endowed with supernatural grace and placed in a condition of probation. It was only by their fall that they became devils. This was before the sin of our first parents, since this sin itself is ascribed to the instigation of the Devil: "By the envy of the Devil, death came into the world" (Wisdom 2:24). Yet it is remarkable that for an account of the fall of the angels we must turn to the last book of the Bible. For as such we may regard the vision in the Apocalypse, albeit the picture of the past is blended with prophecies of what shall be in the future: And there was a great battle in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels: and they prevailed not, neither was their place found any more in heaven. And that great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, who seduceth the whole world; and he was cast unto the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. (Apocalypse 12:7-9)To this may be added the words of St. Jude: "And the angels who kept not their principality, but forsook their own habitation, he hath reserved under darkness in everlasting chains, unto the judgment of the great day" (Jude 1:6; cf. 2 Peter 2:4).In the Old Testament we have a brief reference to the Fall in Job 4:18: "In his angels he found wickedness". But to this must be added the two classic texts in the prophets: How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who didst rise in the morning? how art thou fallen to the earth, that didst wound the nations? And thou saidst in thy heart: I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit in the mountain of the covenant, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the height of the clouds, I will be like the most High. But yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, into the depth of the pit. (Isaiah 14:12-15)This parable of the prophet is expressly directed against the King of Babylon, but both the early Fathers and later Catholic commentators agree in understanding it as applying with deeper significance to the fall of the rebel angel. And the older commentators generally consider that this interpretation is confirmed by the words of Our Lord to his disciples: "I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven" (Luke 10:18). For these words were regarded as a rebuke to the disciples, who were thus warned of the danger of pride by being reminded of the fall of Lucifer. But modern commentators take this text in a different sense, and refer it not to the original fall of Satan, but his overthrow by the faith of the disciples, who cast out devils in the name of their Master. And this new interpretation, as Schanz observes, is more in keeping with the context.The parallel prophetic passage is Ezekiel’s lamentation upon the king of Tyre: You were the seal of resemblance, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. You were in the pleasures of the paradise of God; every precious stone was thy covering; the sardius, the topaz, and the jasper, the chrysolite, and the onyx, and the beryl, the sapphire, and the carbuncle, and the emerald; gold the work of your beauty: and your pipes were prepared in the day that you were created. You a cherub stretched out, and protecting, and I set you in the holy mountain of God, you have walked in the midst of the stones of fire. You were perfect in your wave from the day of creation, until iniquity was found in you. (Ezekiel 28:12-15) There is much in the context that can only be understood literally of an earthly king concerning whom the words are professedly spoken, but it is clear that in any case the king is likened to an angel in Paradise who is ruined by his own iniquity.Even for those who in no way doubt or dispute it, the doctrine set forth in these texts and patristic interpretations may well suggest a multitude of questions, and theologians have not been loath to ask and answer them. And in the first place what was the nature of the sin of the rebel angels? In any case this was a point presenting considerable difficulty, especially for theologians, who had formed a high estimate of the powers and possibilities of angelic knowledge, a subject which had a peculiar attraction for many of the great masters of scholastic speculation. For if sin be, as it surely is, the height of folly, the choice of darkness for light, of evil for good, it would seem that it can only be accounted for by some ignorance, or inadvertence, or weakness, or the influence of some overmastering passion. But most of these explanations seem to be precluded by the powers and perfections of the angelic nature. The weakness of the flesh, which accounts for such a mass of human wickedness, was altogether absent from the angels. There could be no place for carnal sin without the corpus delicti. And even some sins that are purely spiritual or intellectual seem to present an almost insuperable difficulty in the case of the angels. This may certainly be said of the sin which by many of the best authorities is regarded as being actually the great offense of Lucifer, to wit, the desire of independence of God and equality with God. It is true that this seems to be asserted in the passage of Isaiah (14:13). And it is naturally suggested by the idea of rebellion against an earthly sovereign, wherein the chief of the rebels very commonly covets the kingly throne. At the same time the high rank which Lucifer is generally supposed to have held in the hierarchy of angels might seem to make this offense more likely in his case, for, as history shows, it is the subject who stands nearest the throne who is most open to temptations of ambition. But this analogy is not a little misleading. For the exaltation of the subject may bring his power so near that of his sovereign that he may well be able to assert his independence or to usurp the throne; and even where this is not actually the case he may at any rate contemplate the possibility of a successful rebellion. Moreover, the powers and dignities of an earthly prince may be compatible with much ignorance and folly. But it is obviously otherwise in the case of the angels. For, whatever gifts and powers may be conferred on the highest of the heavenly princes, he will still be removed by an infinite distance from the plenitude of God’s power and majesty, so that a successful rebellion against that power or any equality with that majesty would be an absolute impossibility. And what is more, the highest of the angels, by reason of their greater intellectual illumination, must have the clearest knowledge of this utter impossibility of attaining to equality with God. This difficulty is clearly put by the Disciple in St. Anselm’s dialogue "De Casu Diaboli" (cap. iv); for the saint felt that the angelic intellect, at any rate, must see the force of the "ontological argument" (see ONTOLOGY). "If", he asks, "God cannot be thought of except as sole, and as of such an essence that nothing can be thought of like to Him [then] how could the Devil have wished for what could not be thought of?--He surely was not so dull of understanding as to be ignorant of the inconceivability of any other entity like to God" (Si Deus cogitari non potest, nisi ita solus, ut nihil illi simile cogitari possit, quomodo diabolus potuit velle quod non potuit cogitari? Non enim ita obtusæ mentis erat, ut nihil aliud simile Deo cogitari posse nesciret). The Devil, that is to say, was not so obtuse as not to know that it was impossible to conceive of anything like (i.e. equal) to God. And what he could not think he could not will. St. Anselm’s answer is that there need be no question of absolute equality; yet to will anything against the Divine will is to seek to have that independence which belongs to God alone, and in this respect to be equal to God. In the same sense St. Thomas (I:63:3) answers the question, whether the Devil desired to be "as God". If by this we mean equality with God, then the Devil could not desire it, since he knew this to be impossible, and he was not blinded by passion or evil habit so as to choose that which is impossible, as may happen with men. And even if it were possible for a creature to become God, an angel could not desire this, since, by becoming equal with God he would cease to be an angel, and no creature can desire its own destruction or an essential change in its being. These arguments are combated by Scotus (In II lib. Sent., dist. vi, Q. i.), who distinguishes between efficacious volition and the volition of complaisance, and maintains that by the latter act an angel could desire that which is impossible. In the same way he urges that, though a creature cannot directly will its own destruction, it can do this consequenter, i.e. it can will something from which this would follow.Although St. Thomas regards the desire of equality with God as something impossible, he teaches nevertheless (loc. cit.) that Satan sinned by desiring to be "as God", according to the passage in the prophet (Isaiah 14), and he understands this to mean likeness, not equality. But here again there is need of a distinction. For men and angels have a certain likeness to God in their natural perfections, which are but a reflection of his surpassing beauty, and yet a further likeness is given them by supernatural grace and glory. Was it either of these likenesses that the devil desired? And if it be so, how could it be a sin? For was not this the end for which men and angels were created? Certainly, as Thomas teaches, not every desire of likeness with God would be sinful, since all may rightly desire that manner of likeness which is appointed them by the will of their Creator. There is sin only where the desire is inordinate, as in seeking something contrary to the Divine will, or in seeking the appointed likeness in a wrong way. The sin of Satan in this matter may have consisted in desiring to attain supernatural beatitude by his natural powers or, what may seem yet stranger, in seeking his beatitude in the natural perfections and reflecting the supernatural. In either case, as St. Thomas considers, this first sin of Satan was the sin of pride. Scotus, however (loc. cit., Q. ii), teaches that this sin was not pride properly so called, but should rather be described as a species of spiritual lust.Although nothing definite can be known as to the precise nature of the probation of the angels and the manner in which many of them fell, many theologians have conjectured, with some show of probability, that the mystery of the Divine Incarnation was revealed to them, that they saw that a nature lower than their own was to be hypostatically united to the Person of God the Son, and that all the hierarchy of heaven must bow in adoration before the majesty of the Incarnate Word; and this, it is supposed, was the occasion of the pride of Lucifer (cf. Suarez, De Angelis, lib. VII, xiii). As might be expected, the advocates of this view seek support in certain passages of Scripture, notably in the words of the Psalmist as they are cited in the Epistle to the Hebrews: "And again, when he bringeth in the first-begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore Him" (Hebrews 1:6; Psalm 96:7). And if the twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse may be taken to refer, at least in a secondary sense, to the original fall of the angels, it may seem somewhat significant that it opens with the vision of the Woman and her Child. But this interpretation is by no means certain, for the text in Hebrews 1, may be referred to the second coming of Christ, and much the same may be said of the passage in the Apocalypse.It would seem that this account of the trial of the angels is more in accordance with what is known as the Scotist doctrine on the motives of the Incarnation than with the Thomist view, that the Incarnation was occasioned by the sin of our first parents. For since the sin itself was committed at the instigation of Satan, it presupposes the fall of the angels. How, then, could Satan’s probation consist in the fore-knowledge of that which would, ex hypothesi, only come to pass in the event of his fall? In the same way it would seem that the aforesaid theory is incompatible with another opinion held by some old theologians, to wit, that men were created to fill up the gaps in the ranks of the angels. For this again supposes that if no angels had sinned no men would have been made, and in consequence there would have been no union of the Divine Person with a nature lower than the angels.As might be expected from the attention they had bestowed on the question of the intellectual powers of the angels, the medieval theologians had much to say on the time of their probation. The angelic mind was conceived of as acting instantaneously, not, like the mind of man, passing by discursive reasoning from premises to conclusions. It was pure intelligence as distinguished from reason. Hence it would seem that there was no need of any extended trial. And in fact we find St. Thomas and Scotus discussing the question whether the whole course might not have been accomplished in the first instant in which the angels were created. The Angelic Doctor argues that the Fall could not have taken place in the first instant. And it certainly seems that if the creature came into being in the very act of sinning the sin itself might be said to come from the Creator. But this argument, together with many others, is answered with his accustomed acuteness by Scotus, who maintains the abstract possibility of sin in the first instant. But whether possible or not, it is agreed that this is not what actually happened. For the authority of the passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel, which were generally accepted as referring to the fall of Lucifer, might well suffice to show that for at least one instant he had existed in a state of innocence and brightness. To modern readers the notion that the sin was committed in the second instant of creation may seem scarcely less incredible than the possibility of a fall in the very first. But this may be partly due to the fact that we are really thinking of human modes of knowledge, and fail to take into account the Scholastic conception of angelic cognition. For a being who was capable of seeing many things at once, a single instant might be equivalent to the longer period needed by slowly-moving mortals.This dispute, as to the time taken by the probation and fall of Satan, has a purely speculative interest. But the corresponding question as to the rapidity of the sentence and punishment is in some ways a more important matter. There can indeed be no doubt that Satan and his rebel angels were very speedily punished for their rebellion. This would seem to be sufficiently indicated in some of the texts which are understood to refer to the fall of the angels. It might be inferred, moreover, from the swiftness with which punishment followed on the offense in the case of our first parents, although man’s mind moves more slowly than that of the angels, and he had more excuse in his own weakness and in the power of his tempter. It was partly for this reason, indeed, that man found mercy, whereas there was no redemption for the angels. For, as St. Peter says, "God spared not the angels that sinned" (2 Peter 2:4). This, it may be observed, is asserted universally, indicating that all who fell suffered punishment. For these and other reasons theologians very commonly teach that the doom and punishment followed in the next instant after the offense, and many go so far as to say there was no possibility of repentance. But here it will be well to bear in mind the distinction drawn between revealed doctrine, which comes with authority, and theological speculation, which to a great extent rests on reasoning. No one who is really familiar with the medieval masters, with their wide differences, their independence, their bold speculation, is likely to confuse the two together. But in these days there is some danger that we may lose sight of the distinction. It is true that, when it fulfils certain definite conditions, the agreement of theologians may serve as a sure testimony to revealed doctrine, and some of their thoughts and even their very words have been adopted by the Church in her definitions of dogma. But at the same time these masters of theological thought freely put forward many more or less plausible opinions, which come to us with reasoning rather than authority, and must needs stand or fall with the arguments by which they are supported. In this way we may find that many of them may agree in holding that the angels who sinned had no possibility of repentance. But it may be that it is a matter of argument, that each one holds it for a reason of his own and denies the validity of the arguments adduced by others. Some argue that from the nature of the angelic mind and will there was an intrinsic impossibility of repentance. But it may be observed that in any case the basis of this argument is not revealed teaching, but philosophical speculation. And it is scarcely surprising to find that its sufficiency is denied by equally orthodox doctors who hold that if the fallen angels could not repent this was either because the doom was instantaneous, and left no space for repentance, or because the needful grace was denied them. Others, again, possibly with better reason, are neither satisfied that sufficient grace and room for repentance were in fact refused, nor can they see any good ground for thinking this likely, or for regarding it as in harmony with all that we know of the Divine mercy and goodness. In the absence of any certain decision on this subject, we may be allowed to hold, with Suarez, that, however brief it may have been, there was enough delay to leave an opportunity for repentance, and that the necessary grace was not wholly withheld. If none actually repented, this may be explained in some measure by saying that their strength of will and fixity of purpose made repentance exceedingly difficult, though not impossible; that the time, though sufficient, was short; and that grace was not given in such abundance as to overcome these difficulties.The language of the prophets (Isaiah 14; Ezekiel 28) would seem to show that Lucifer held a very high rank in the heavenly hierarchy. And, accordingly, we find many theologians maintaining that before his fall he was the foremost of all the angels. Suarez is disposed to admit that he was the highest negatively, i.e. that no one was higher, though many may have been his equals. But here again we are in the region of pious opinions, for some divines maintain that, far from being first of all, he did not belong to one of the highest choirs--Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thrones--but to one of the lower orders of angels. In any case it appears that he holds a certain sovereignty over those who followed him in his rebellion. For we read of "the Devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), "the dragon and his angels" (Apocalypse 12:7), "Beelzebub, the prince of devils"--which, whatever be the interpretation of the name, clearly refers to Satan, as appears from the context: "And if Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? Because you say that through Beelzebub I cast out devils" (Luke 11:15, 18), and "the prince of the Powers of this air" (Ephesians 2:2). At first sight it may seem strange that there should be any order or subordination amongst those rebellious spirits, and that those who rose against their Maker should obey one of their own fellows who had led them to destruction. And the analogy of similar movements among men might suggest that the rebellion would be likely to issue in anarchy and division. But it must be remembered that the fall of the angels did not impair their natural powers, that Lucifer still retained the gifts that enabled him to influence his brethren before their fall, and that their superior intelligence would show them that they could achieve more success and do more harm to others by unity and organization than by independence and division.Besides exercising this authority over those who were called "his angels", Satan has extended his empire over the minds of evil men. Thus, in the passage just cited from St. Paul, we read, "And you, when you were dead in your offenses and sins, wherein in times past you walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of this air, of the spirit that now worketh on the children of unbelief" (Ephesians 2:1-2). In the same way Christ in the Gospel calls him "the prince of this world". For when His enemies are coming to take Him, He looks beyond the instruments of evil to the master who moves them, and says: "I will not now speak many things to you, for the prince of this world cometh, and in me he hath not anything" (John 14:30). There is no need to discuss the view of some theologians who surmise that Lucifer was one of the angels who ruled and administered the heavenly bodies, and that this planet was committed to his care. For in any case the sovereignty with which these texts are primarily concerned is but the rude right of conquest and the power of evil influence. His sway began by his victory over our first parents, who, yielding to his suggestions, were brought under his bondage. All sinners who do his will become in so far his servants. For, as St. Gregory says, he is the head of all the wicked--"Surely the Devil is the head of all the wicked; and of this head all the wicked are members" (Certe iniquorum omnium caput diabolus est; et hujus capitis membra sunt omnes iniqui.--Hom. 16, in Evangel.). This headship over the wicked, as St. Thomas is careful to explain, differs widely from Christ’s headship over the Church, inasmuch as Satan is only head by outward government and not also, as Christ is, by inward, life-giving influence (Summa III:8:7). With the growing wickedness of the world and the spreading of paganism and false religions and magic rites, the rule of Satan was extended and strengthened till his power was broken by the victory of Christ, who for this reason said, on the eve of His Passion: "Now is the judgment of the world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out" (John 12:31). By the victory of the Cross Christ delivered men from the bondage of Satan and at the same time paid the debt due to Divine justice by shedding His blood in atonement for our sins. In their endeavours to explain this great mystery, some old theologians, misled by the metaphor of a ransom for captives made in war, came to the strange conclusion that the price of Redemption was paid to Satan. But this error was effectively refuted by St. Anselm, who showed that Satan had no rights over his captives and that the great price wherewith we were bought was paid to God alone (cf. ATONEMENT).What has been said so far may suffice to show the part played by the Devil in human history, whether in regard to the individual soul or the whole race of Adam. It is indicated, indeed, in his name of Satan, the adversary, the opposer, the accuser, as well as by his headship of the wicked ranged under his banner in continual warfare with the kingdom of Christ. The two cities whose struggle is described by St. Augustine are already indicated in the words of the Apostle, "In this the children of God are manifest and the children of the devil: for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God appeared, that He might destroy the works of the devil" (1 John 3:8). Whether or not the foreknowledge of the Incarnation was the occasion of his own fall, his subsequent course has certainly shown him the relentless enemy of mankind and the determined opponent of the Divine economy of redemption. And since he lured our first parents to their fall he has ceased not to tempt their children in order to involve them in his own ruin. There is no reason, indeed, for thinking that all sins and all temptations must needs come directly from the Devil or one of his ministers of evil. For it is certain that if, after the first fall of Adam, or at the time of the coming of Christ, Satan and his angels had been bound so fast that they might tempt no more, the world would still have been filled with evils. For men would have had enough of temptation in the weakness and waywardness of their hearts. But in that case the evil would clearly have been far less than it is now, for the activity of Satan does much more than merely add a further source of temptation to the weakness of the world and the flesh; it means a combination and an intelligent direction of all the elements of evil. The whole Church and each one of her children are beset by dangers, the fire of persecution, the enervation of ease, the dangers of wealth and of poverty, heresies and errors of opposite characters, rationalism and superstition, fanaticism and indifference. It would be bad enough if all these forces were acting apart and without any definite purpose, but the perils of the situation are incalculably increased when all may be organized and directed by vigilant and hostile intelligences. It is this that makes the Apostle, though he well knew the perils of the world and the weakness of the flesh, lay special stress on the greater dangers that come from the assaults of those mighty spirits of evil in whom he recognized our real and most formidable foes--"Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places . . . Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, having on the breastplate of justice, and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; in all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one" (Ephesians 6:11, 16).-----------------------------------W.H. KENT Transcribed by Rick McCarty The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IVCopyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, CensorImprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York
I. DEFINITION
II. SCRIPTURAL FACTS CONCERNING SATAN
1. Names of Satan
2. Character of Satan
3. Works of Satan
4. History of Satan
III. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. Scripture Doctrine of Satan Not Systematized
2. Satan and God
3. Satan Essentially Limited
4. Conclusions
LITERATURE
I. Definition.
A created but superhuman, personal, evil, world-power, represented in Scripture as the adversary both of God and men.
II. Scriptural Facts Concerning Satan.
1. Names of Satan:
The most important of these are the Hebrew and Greek equivalents noticed above. These words are used in the general sense justified by their etymological significance. It is applied even to Yahweh Himself (Num 22:22, Num 22:32; compare 1Sa 29:4; 2Sa 19:22; Psa 109:6, etc.). The word “Satan” is used 24 times in the Old Testament. In Job (Job 1:6 f) and Zec (Job 3:1 f) it has the prefixed definite article. In all cases but one when the article is omitted it is used in a general sense. This one exception is 1Ch 21:1 (compare 2Sa 24:1), where the word is generally conceded to be used as a proper name. This meaning is fixed in New Testament times. We are thus enabled to note in the term “Satan” (and Devil) the growth of a word from a general term to an appellation and later to a proper name. All the other names of Satan save only these two are descriptive titles. In addition to these two principal names a number of others deserve specific enumeration. Tempter (Mat 4:5; 1Th 3:5); Beelzebub (Mat 12:24); Enemy (Mat 13:39); Evil One (Mat 13:19, Mat 13:38; 1Jn 2:13, 1Jn 2:14; 1Jn 3:12, and particularly 1Jn 5:18); Belial (2Co 6:15); Adversary (
2. Character of Satan:
Satan is consistently represented in the New Testament as the enemy both of God and man. The popular notion is that Satan is the enemy of man and active in misleading and cursing humanity because of his intense hatred and opposition to God. Mat 13:39 would seem to point in this direction, but if one were to venture an opinion in a region where there are not enough facts to warrant a conviction, it would be that the general tenor of Scripture indicates quite the contrary, namely, that Satan’s jealousy and hatred of men has led him into antagonism to God and, consequently, to goodness. The fundamental moral description of Satan is given by our Lord when He describes Satan as the “evil one” (Mat 13:19, Mat 13:38; compare Isaiah’s description of Yahweh as the “Holy One,” Isa 1:4 and often); that is, the one whose nature and will are given to evil. Moral evil is his controlling attribute. It is evident that this description could not be applied to Satan as originally created. Ethical evil cannot be concreated. It is the creation of each free will for itself. We are not told in definite terms how Satan became the evil one, but certainly it could be by no other process than a fall, whereby, in the mystery of free personality, an evil will takes the place of a good one.
3. Works of Satan:
The world-wide and age-long works of Satan are to be traced to one predominant motive. He hates both God and man and does all that in him lies to defeat God’s plan of grace and to establish and maintain a kingdom of evil, in the seduction and ruin of mankind. The balance and sanity of the Bible is nowhere more strikingly exhibited than in its treatment of the work of Satan. Not only is the Bible entirely free from the extravagances of popular Satanology, which is full of absurd stories concerning the appearances, tricks, and transformations of Satan among men, but it exhibits a dependable accuracy and consistency, of statement which is most reassuring. Almost nothing is said concerning Satanic agency other than wicked men who mislead other men. In the controversy with His opponents concerning exorcism (Mar 3:22 f and parallel’s) our Lord rebuts their slanderous assertion that He is in league with Satan by the simple proposition that Satan does not work against himself. But in so saying He does far more than refute this slander. He definitely aligns the Bible against the popular idea that a man may make a definite and conscious personal alliance with Satan for any purpose whatever. The agent of Satan is always a victim. Also the hint contained in this discussion that Satan has a kingdom, together with a few other not very definite allusions, are all that we have to go upon in this direction. Nor are we taught anywhere that Satan is able to any extent to introduce disorder into the physical universe or directly operate in the lives of men. It is true that in Luk 13:16 our Lord speaks of the woman who was bowed over as one “whom Satan has bound, lo, these eighteen years,” and that in 2Co 12:7 Paul speaks of his infirmity as a “messenger of Satan sent to buffet him.” Paul also speaks (1Th 2:18) of Satan’s hindering him from visiting the church at Thessalonica. A careful study of these related passages (together with the prologue of Job) will reveal the fact that Satan’s direct agency in the physical world is very limited. Satan may be said to be implicated in all the disasters and woes of human life, in so far as they are more or less directly contingent upon sin (see particularly Heb 2:14) On the contrary, it is perfectly evident that Satan’s power consists principally in his ability to deceive. It is interesting and characteristic that according to the Bible Satan is fundamentally a liar and his kingdom is a kingdom founded upon lies and deceit. The doctrine of Satan therefore corresponds in every important particular to the general Biblical emphasis upon truth. “The truth shall make you free” (Joh 8:32) - this is the way of deliverance from the power of Satan.
Now it would seem that to make Satan pre-eminently the deceiver would make man an innocent victim and thus relax the moral issue. But according to the Bible man is particeps criminis in the process of his own deception. He is deceived only because he ceases to love the truth and comes first to love and then to believe a lie (2Co 1:10). This really goes to the very bottom of the problem of temptation. Men are not tempted by evil, per se, but by a good which can be obtained only at the cost of doing wrong. The whole power of sin, at least in its beginnings, consists in the sway of the fundamental falsehood that any good is really attainable by wrongdoing. Since temptation consists in this attack upon the moral sense, man is constitutionally guarded against deceit, and is morally culpable in allowing himself to be deceived. The temptation of our Lord Himself throws the clearest possible light upon the methods ascribed to Satan and The temptation was addressed to Christ’s consciousness of divine sonship; it was a deceitful attack emphasizing the good, minimizing or covering up the evil; indeed, twisting evil into good. It was a deliberate, malignant attempt to obscure the truth and induce to evil through the acceptance of falsehood. The attack broke against a loyalty to truth which made self-deceit, and consequently deceit from without, impossible. The lie was punctured by the truth and the temptation lost its power (see TEMPTATION OF CHRIST). This incident reveals one of the methods of Satan - by immediate suggestion as in the case of Judas (Luk 22:3; Joh 13:2, Joh 13:27). Sometimes, however, and, perhaps, most frequently, Satan’s devices (2Co 2:11) include human agents. Those who are given over to evil and who persuade others to evil are children and servants of Satan (See Mat 16:23; Mar 8:33; Luk 4:8; Joh 6:70; Joh 8:44; Act 13:10; 1Jn 3:8). Satan also works through persons and institutions supposed to be on the side of right but really evil. Here the same ever-present and active falseness and deceit are exhibited. When he is called “the god of this world” (2Co 4:4) it would seem to be intimated that he has the power to clothe himself in apparently divine attributes. He also makes himself an angel of light by presenting advocates of falsehood in the guise of apostles of truth (2Co 11:13, 2Co 11:15; 1Jn 4:1; 2Th 2:9; Rev 12:9; Rev 19:20). In the combination of passages here brought together, it is clearly indicated that Satan is the instigator and fomenter of that spirit of lawlessness which exhibits itself as hatred both of truth and right, and which has operated so widely and so disastrously in human life.
4. History of Satan:
The history of Satan, including that phase of it which remains to be realized, can be set forth only along the most general lines. He belongs to the angelic order of beings. He is by nature one of the sons of
According to synoptic tradition, our Lord in the crisis of temptation immediately following the baptism (Mt 4 and parallel) met and for the time conquered Satan as His own personal adversary. This preliminary contest did not close the matter, but was the earnest of a complete victory. According to Luke (Luk 10:18), when the Seventy returned from their mission flushed with victory over the powers of evil, Jesus said: ’I saw Satan fall (not “fallen”; see Plummer, “Luke,” ICC, in the place cited.) as lightning from heaven.’ In every triumph over the powers of evil Christ beheld in vision the downfall of Satan. In connection with the coming of the Hellenists who wished to see Him, Jesus asserted (Joh 12:31), “Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.” In view of His approaching passion He says again (Joh 14:30), “The prince of the world cometh: and he hath nothing in me.” Once again in connection with the promised advent of the Spirit, Jesus asserted (Joh 16:11) that the Spirit would convict the world of judgment, “because the prince of this world hath been judged.” In Hebrews (Heb 2:14, Heb 2:15) it is said that Christ took upon Himself human nature in order “that through death he might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the Devil.” In 1Jn 3:8 it is said, “To this end was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil.” In Rev 12:9 it is asserted, in connection with Christ’s ascension, that Satan was cast down to the earth and his angels with him. According to the passage immediately following (Rev 12:10-12), this casting down was not complete or final in the sense of extinguishing his activities altogether, but it involves the potential and certain triumph of God and His saints and the equally certain defeat of Satan. In 1Jn 2:13 the young men are addressed as those who “have overcome the evil one.” In Rev 20:1-15 the field of the future is covered in the assertion that Satan is “bound a thousand years”; then loosed “for a little time,” and then finally “cast into the lake of fire.”
A comparison of these passages will convince the careful student that while we cannot construct a definite chronological program for the career of Satan, we are clear in the chief points. He is limited, judged, condemned, imprisoned, reserved for judgment from the beginning. The outcome is certain though the process may be tedious and slow. The victory of Christ is the defeat of Satan; first, for Himself as Leader and Saviour of men (Joh 14:30); then, for believers (Luk 22:31; Act 26:18; Rom 16:20; Jas 4:7; 1Jn 2:13; 1Jn 5:4, 1Jn 5:18); and, finally, for the whole world (Rev 20:10). The work of Christ has already destroyed the empire of Satan.
III. General Considerations.
There are, no doubt, serious difficulties in the way of accepting the doctrine of a personal, superhuman, evil power as Satan is described to be. It is doubtful, however, whether these diffificulties may not be due, at least in part, to a misunderstanding of the doctrine and certain of its implications. In addition, it must be acknowledged, that whatever difficulties there may be in the teaching, they are exaggerated and, at the same time, not fairly met by the vague and irrational skepticism which denies without investigation. There are difficulties involved in any view of the world. To say the least, some problems are met by the view of a superhuman, evil world-power. In this section certain general considerations are urged with a view to lessening difficulties keenly felt by some minds. Necessarily, certain items gathered in the foregoing section are here emphasized again.
1. Scripture Doctrine of Satan Not Systematized:
The Scriptural doctrine of Satan is nowhere systematically developed. For materials in this field we are shut up to scattered and incidental references. These passages, which even in the aggregate are not numerous, tell us what we need to know concerning the nature, history, kingdom and works of Satan, but offer scant satisfaction to the merely speculative temper. The comparative lack of development in this field is due partly to the fact that the Biblical writers are primarily interested in God, and only secondarily in the powers of darkness; and partly to the fact that in the Bible doctrine waits upon fact. Hence, the malign and sinister figure of the Adversary is gradually outlined against the light of God’s holiness as progressively revealed in the providential world-process which centers in Christ. It is a significant fact that the statements concerning Satan become numerous and definite only in the New Testament. The daylight of the Christian revelation was necessary in order to uncover the lurking foe, dimly disclosed but by no means fully known in the earlier revelation. The disclosure of Satan is, in form at least, historical, not dogmatic.
2. Satan and God:
In the second place, the relationship of Satan to God, already emphasized, must be kept constantly in mind. The doctrine of Satan merges in the general doctrine concerning angels (see ANGEL). It has often been pointed out that the personal characteristics of angels are very little insisted upon. They are known chiefly by their functions: merged, on the one hand, in their own offices, and, on the other, in the activities of God Himself.
In the Old Testament Satan is not represented as a fallen and malignant spirit, but as a servant of Yahweh, performing a divine function and having his place in the heavenly train. In the parallel accounts of David’s numbering of Israel (1Sa 24:1; 1Ch 21:1) the tempting of David is attributed both to Yahweh and Satan. The reason for this is either that ’the temptation of men is also a part of his providence,’ or that in the interval between the documents the personality of the tempter has more clearly emerged. In this case the account in Chronicles would nearly approximate the New Testament teaching. In the Book of Job (Job 1:6), however, Satan is among the Sons of God and his assaults upon Job are divinely permitted. In Zec (Job 3:1, Job 3:2) Satan is also a servant of Yahweh. In both these passages there is the hint of opposition between Yahweh and Satan. In the former instance Satan assails unsuccessfully the character of one whom Yahweh honors; while in the latter Yahweh explicitly rebukes Satan for his attitude toward Israel (see G. A. Smith, BTP, II, 316 f). The unveiling of Satan as a rebellious world-power is reserved for the New Testament, and with this fuller teaching the symbolic treatment of temptation in Gen is to be connected. There is a sound pedagogical reason, from the viewpoint of revelation, for this earlier withholding of the whole truth concerning Satan. In the early stages of religious thinking it would seem to be difficult, if not impossible, to hold the sovereignty of God without attributing to His agency those evils in the world which are more or less directly connected with judgment and punishment (compare Isa 45:7; Amo 3:6). The Old Testament sufficiently emphasizes man’s responsibility for his own evil deeds, but super-human evil is brought upon him from above. “When willful souls have to be misled, the spirit who does so, as in Ahab’s case, comes from above” (G. A. Smith, op. cit., 317). The progressive revelation of God’s character and purpose, which more and more imperatively demands that the origin of moral evil, and consequently natural evil, must be traced to the created will in opposition to the divine will, leads to the ultimate declaration that Satan is a morally fallen being to whose conquest the Divine Power in history is pledged. There is, also, the distinct possibility that in the significant transition from the Satan of the Old Testament to that of the New Testament we have the outlines of a biography and an indication of the way by which the angels fell.
3. Satan Essentially Limited:
A third general consideration, based upon data given in the earlier section, should be urged in the same connection. In the New Testament delineation of Satan, his limitations are clearly set forth. He is superhuman, but not in any sense divine. His activities are cosmic, but not universal or transcendent. He is a created being. His power is definitely circumscribed. He is doomed to final destruction as a world-power. His entire career is that of a secondary and dependent being who is permitted a certain limited scope of power - a time-lease of activity (Luk 4:6).
4. Conclusions:
These three general considerations have been grouped in this way because they dispose of three objections which are current against the doctrine of Satan.
(1) The first is, that it is mythological in origin. That it is not dogmatic is a priori evidence against this hypothesis. Mythology is primitive dogma. There is no evidence of a theodicy or philosophy of evil in the Biblical treatment of Satan. Moreover, while the Scriptural doctrine is unsystematic in form, it is rigidly limited in scope and everywhere essentially consistent. Even in the Apocalypse, where naturally more scope is allowed to the imagination, the same essential ideas appear. The doctrine of Satan corresponds, item for item, to the intellectual saneness and ethical earnestness of the Biblical world-view as a whole. It is, therefore, not mythological. The restraint of chastened imagination, not the extravagance of mythological fancy, is in evidence throughout the entire Biblical treatment of the subject. Even the use of terms current in mythology (as perhaps Gen 3:1, Gen 3:13, Gen 3:14; Rev 12:7-9; compare 1Pe 5:8) does not imply more than a literary clothing of Satan in attributes commonly ascribed to malignant and disorderly forces.
(2) The second objection is that the doctrine is due to the influence of Persian dualism (see PERSIAN RELIGION; ZOROASTRIANISM). The answer to this is plain, on the basis of facts already adduced. The Biblical doctrine of Satan is not dualistic. Satan’s empire had a beginning, it will have a definite and permanent end. Satan is God’s great enemy in the cosmic sphere, but he is God’s creation, exists by divine will, and his power is relatively no more commensurate with God’s than that of men. Satan awaits his doom. Weiss says (concerning the New Testament representation of conflict between God and the powers of evil): “There lies in this no Manichaean dualism,... but only the deepest experience of the work of redemption as the definite destruction of the power from which all sin in the world of men proceeds” (Biblical Theology New Testament, English tanslations of the Bible, II, 272; compare G.A. Smith, op. cit., II, 318).
(3) The third objection is practically the same as the second, but addressed directly to the doctrine itself, apart from the question of its origin, namely, that it destroys the unity of God. The answer to this also is a simple negative. To some minds the reality of created wills is dualistic and therefore untenable. But a true doctrine of unity makes room for other wills than God’s - namely of those beings upon whom God has bestowed freedom. Herein stands the doctrine of sin and Satan. The doctrine of Satan no more militates against the unity of God than the idea, so necessary to morality and religion alike, of other created wills set in opposition to God’s. Just as the conception of Satan merges, in one direction, in the general doctrine of angels, so, in the other, it blends with the broad and difficult subject of evil (compare “Satan,” HDB, IV, 412a).
Literature.
All standard works on Biblical Theology, as well as Dictionaries, etc., treat with more or less thoroughness the doctrine of Satan. The German theologians of the more evangelical type, such as Weiss, Lange, Martensen (Danish), Dorner, while exhibiting a tendency toward excessive speculation, discern the deeper aspects of the doctrine. Of monographs known to the writer none are to be recommended without qualification. It is a subject on which the Bible is its own best interpreter.
See Devil.
- see Devil, The
Among the angelic spirits of the unseen world there are those that are evil, though the Bible nowhere records how they fell into such a condition. The chief of these evil angelic spirits is one known as the adversary – the adversary of God, his people, and all that is good. The Hebrew word for ‘adversary’ is satan, which later became the name used in the Bible for this leader of evil (Job 1:6). He is also called the devil (Mat 4:1-12; 1Jn 3:8; Rev 12:9), the prince of demons (Mat 9:34; Mat 12:24; see also BEELZEBUL), the prince of this world (Joh 12:31; Joh 14:30; Joh 16:11), the god of this world (2Co 4:4), the prince of the power of the air (Eph 2:2), the evil one (Mat 13:19; Eph 6:16; 1Jn 2:13; 1Jn 3:12) and the accuser of the brethren (Rev 12:10; cf. Job 1:6-12; Zec 3:1).
God’s rebellious servant
We should not think that Satan is in some way the equal of God, one being a good God and the other an evil God. God alone is God (Isa 44:6). Satan is no more than an angelic being created by God. There are good angels and evil angels, Satan being chief of the evil ones (Mat 25:31; Mat 25:41; Eph 6:12; Jud 1:9; Rev 12:7-9; see ANGELS; DEMONS). God, however, is above all and over all.
Also there are not, as it were, two kingdoms, a kingdom of good where God is absolute ruler and a kingdom of evil where Satan is absolute ruler. Satan is not a sovereign ruler but a rebel. Like all created beings, he is under the rule and authority of God and he can do his evil work only within the limits God allows (Job 1:12; Job 2:6; cf. Rev 20:2-3; Rev 20:7-8). He is still the servant of God, even though a rebellious one (Job 1:6-7; Job 2:1-2; Zec 3:1-2). In spite of the evil he loves to do, he is still fulfilling God’s purposes, even though unwillingly (Job 1:9-12; 1Ki 22:19-23; cf. Joh 13:2; Joh 13:27; Act 2:23; 1Co 5:5; 2Co 12:7; 1Ti 1:20).
This does not mean that God tempts people to do evil. It is Satan, not God, who is the tempter (Gen 3:1-6; 1Ch 21:1; Mat 4:1-11; 1Co 7:5; Jas 1:13). God desires rather to save people from evil (Mat 6:13; 1Co 10:13). Yet God allows them to suffer the troubles and temptations that Satan brings in life, for through such things he tests and strengthens their faith (Jas 1:2-3; Jas 1:12; cf. Heb 2:18; Heb 5:8-9; see TEMPTATION; TESTING).
Satan is hostile to God and fights against God’s purposes (Mat 4:1-12; Mar 8:31-33). But in the long run Satan cannot be successful, because Jesus Christ, by his life, death and resurrection, has conquered him and delivered believers from his power (Mat 12:28-29; Luk 10:18; Joh 12:31; Joh 16:11; Act 26:18; Col 2:15; Heb 2:14-15; 1Jn 3:8). (Concerning Jesus Christ’s conquest of Satan see KINGDOM OF GOD.)
Enemy of the human race
Although Jesus has conquered Satan, the world at present sees neither Jesus’ conquest nor Satan’s defeat. God allows evil angels to continue to exist just as he allows evil people. He has condemned them but not yet destroyed them. The world will see Jesus’ conquest and Satan’s defeat in the great events at the end of the age, when Christ returns in power and glory (Rev 20:10).
In the meantime Satan continues to operate (Mat 13:24-26; Mat 13:37-39). He opposes all that is good and encourages all that is evil. At times he works with brutality and ferocity (1Pe 5:8; Rev 2:10), at other times with cunning and deceit (2Co 2:11; 2Co 11:14; 1Ti 3:7). He works not only through people who are obviously evil (Act 13:8-10; Eph 2:1-3; 1Jn 3:10; 1Jn 3:12; Rev 2:13), but also through those who appear to be good (Mar 8:33; Joh 8:44; Act 5:3; Rev 2:9; Rev 3:9).
Satan causes people physical suffering through disease (Luk 13:16; 2Co 12:7; see DISEASE), and evil spirits (Mar 3:20-27; Mar 7:25; Act 10:38; see MAGIC; UNCLEAN SPIRITS). He brings mental and spiritual suffering through the cunning of his deceit and temptations (1Co 7:5; 2Th 2:9-10 : 2Ti 2:24-26). Above all, he wants to prevent people from understanding and believing the gospel (Mat 13:19; 2Co 4:4).
Christians, because they have declared themselves on the side of God, may at times experience Satan’s attacks more than others. They have a constant battle against Satan, but they do not fight entirely by their own strength. Certainly, they must make every effort to resist Satan and avoid doing those things that will give Satan an opportunity to tempt them (Eph 4:27; Jas 4:7), but God gives Christians the necessary armour to withstand Satan’s attacks (Eph 6:11-13).
Just as Satan opposed Jesus in his ministry, so he will oppose Jesus’ followers in their ministry (Joh 8:42-44; Act 13:10; 1Th 2:18). But through the victory of Jesus, they too can have victory (Luk 10:17-18; Luk 22:31-32; Rev 12:10-11).
A name for the devil meaning “the
enemy,” or “the accuser.”
A fallen angel who lost his former position as a high-ranking angel in heaven because of his pride his chief aim is to foster rebellion against God in the hearts of men and women. (For further study, turn to "Who Is the Devil?")
—New Believer’s Bible Glossary