The following is an examination of satan figures in the Old Testament that I recently wrote for an Old Testament Class.
When one hears the word “Satan”
images of red horns and pitch forks automatically comes to one’s mind. Even before such imagery was introduced to
Western popular culture, Satan was known to be the embodiment of evil and the
antithesis of the Holy God of Judaism and Christianity. Satan as an individual being that works
against the purposes of God is one of the most well known aspects of Christian
theism by both believers and non-believers.
Being such a prominent aspect of Christian theism one would be justified
in assuming that Satan and his work is equally as prominent in the Scriptures. To be sure, the New Testament contains a fair
amount of mention of Satan and his opposition to God, and there is not any
reason why one would not expect the same presentation of Satan in the Old
Testament. However, in reading through
the Old Testament one finds that Satan is largely absent. In fact, it is not immediately clear that
Satan as presented in the New Testament emerges at all.
The focus of
this paper is to examine the three passages in the Old Testament that includes
the noun form of the Hebrew word satan
in the context of a heavenly being that is often seen to be in opposition to
God and his purposes. Through this
examination it will be demonstrated that a single Satan figure is not found in
the Old Testament, and the satans
that are present are not presented as the embodiment of evil the name carries
today. In order to make this
demonstration this paper will briefly describe the meaning and use of the
Hebrew term satan in the Old
Testament, examine the satan figures in Job, Zechariah, and 1 Chronicles.
Meaning and Use of satan
The
Hebrew noun satan can mean
“adversary”[1]
or “accuser”[2],
which is often used in a legal sense.
Each meaning for satan is used
to refer to both humans and spiritual beings various times in the Old Testament. In reference to humans, satan is used in five contexts (1 Samuel 29, 2 Samuel 19, 1 Kings 5
and 11, Psalms 109). Likewise, the term
is used in reference to spiritual beings in Numbers 22, Job 1-2, Zechariah 3,
and 1 Chronicles 21.
In
1 Samuel 29:4 satan refers to David,
as the Philistines are worried that he may become an adversary if they go into
battle together. In Numbers 22:22 the
term is used in reference to the “angel of the Lord” who is clearly acting on
God’s orders. These are both important
examples of the use of the term satan,
because they demonstrate that the term is used with no evil connotation, nor do
they suggest any opposition to God. It
is important to discard such a unimplied connotation as other satan passages are examined. Though the passage in Numbers 22 is discussed
above it will not be examined below since the Numbers satan is clearly not in opposition to God and is most often not
suggested as an example of Satan in the Old Testament.
Satan in Job
Job
contains the most substantial depiction of a satan in the Old Testament, and sets the framework for
understanding the use of spiritual satans
in the passages in Zechariah and 1 Chronicles discussed below. The familiar story begins with the assembly of
the “sons of God”, seemingly some sort of heavenly court. Immediately, the satan enters the scene and states that he has just come from
roaming the earth in response to God’s question of his whereabouts. Without prompting from the satan God asks him to consider Job. The satan
answers that Job is faithful because God has places a “hedge” around him and if
that hedge was removed Job would curse God.
So God lifts the hedge around all that Job has, and puts it all under
the power of the satan. The next verses describe Job’s loss of all
his wealth and posterity, yet Job continues to bless the Lord. At the beginning of Job 2, the heavenly
assembly meets again and God tells the satan that Job remains faithful, in
spite of the satan enticing God to
act against Job for no reason. The satan answers that Job will surely curse
God if his life was in jeopardy, and is given permission to take Job’s health,
but to spare his life. The satan then inflicts Job with “loathsome
sores from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head”(Job 2:7), and leaves
the story line.
These
first two chapters of Job are often taken to show that the satan figure is secluded and in opposition to God and the rest of
the sons of God. Gregory Boyd points out
that the satan is said to have “also”
come among the gathered, which he reads to mean that the satan is not a normal participant in the assembly and therefore
distinct from the other members of the assembly. Additionally, Boyd reads God’s question of
“Where have you come from?”(Job1:7) to suggest that God was not expecting the satan and reveals that the activity of
the satan was not entirely controlled
by God, although he admits that this is not demanded by the text.[3] Boyd also suggests that there is “something
sinister” about the satan’s desire to
destroy Job, and that the satan is
not merely an neutral figure carrying out his role as the “accuser”.[4]
Though
Boyd’s reading of the satan in Job is
similar to the popular understanding of the figure, not all scholars agree that
the satan in Job is actually
presented in that way. The satan in Job can be viewed as a regular
member of the heveanly, but also a member with a special purpose. Wray and Mobley read the satan as just such a member with the special purpose of auditing
human virtue. They note that there is no
indication that the satan is causing
any trouble during his time on earth.[5] When faced with Job’s piety the satan simply questions the sincerity of
a man who is receiving special protection from God.[6] The satan
essentially asks, “Who wouldn’t be righteous if they were rich and healthy as a
result?” With that question, something of a wager is made between God and the satan.
In inflicting havoc on Job’s life the satan always acts within the boundaries set by God. There is no sense in which the satan defies God or even opposes his
purposes.
Peggy
Day purposes that the question of Job’s righteousness is not simply a side
issue that the divine council stumbled upon, but the reason for assembly in the
first place.[7] God’s presentation of Job then is not out of
place, but the central issue. However,
the satan has an objection that has
less to do with Job, and more to do with the world order God has set up. The satan’s
objection is a “moral order in which the righteous unfailingly prosper.” In order to prove that God has not sustained
such a world where the righteous always prosper the hedges around Job must be
dropped so that the satan can be
proved wrong. [8]
Day
reminds the reader that Job is a story of folklore which enables the book to
make its point more clearly. The reader
is first brought into a fanciful setting of a heavenly court where the supposed
world order is that the righteous prosper and the wicked do not, which was
exactly the mindset of the original audience.
Then the reader is dropped into a setting much more recognizable, but
where the righteous, even the most righteous, do suffer. This would have been a disturbing scenario,
but it serves to make the point of the book.
The world order Job experiences, is the world that the readers live
in. The righteous do sometimes suffer.[9] With this perspective in mind, the satan is not pushing for the torture of
Job, but for a moral world. The world in
which the author of Job suggests the reader finds themselves.
In
assessing the various readings of the satan
in Job it seems the more straightforward reading is that the satan is a regular member of the divine
council, with no particular malicious quality.
Even Boyd admits that text does not demand that Satan was off after his
own purposes while roaming the earth.[10] Then the only reason to read the satan’s independent and, by extension,
less than upright actions into the story is importing associations from other
texts. If, then, the satan was not working his own purposes
he must have been under God’s instruction.
Furthermore, Day makes a convincing argument for the satan’s concern being a just moral order
rather than the harassment of a righteous man.
Satan in Zechariah
The brief
mention of the satan occurs in
chapter 3 of Zechariah. In this passage
Zechariah is having a vision concerning Joshua, Zechariah’s preferred candidate
to be the high priest of Israel after the remnant returned from Babylon. Zechariah sees Joshua in the midst of the
divine council, standing before the angel of the Lord and the satan that is ready to “accuse him”(Zech.
3:1). Before any accusation is heard
from the satan, he is rebuked by the
Lord saying, “Is this not a brand plucked from the fire?”(Zech. 3:2). Joshua’s filthy clothes are then exchanged
for “rich apparel” as a symbol his iniquities being taken away.
The
book of Zechariah is often dated to the late 6th century B.C.E.
which makes it very close to the writing of Job.[11] As a result, the examination of Job above
will be helpful in discerning the satan
in Zechariah. The imagery of the divine
council is very similar to that found in Job.
The council has clearly assembled to determine if Joshua is fit to serve
as the high priest. Again, there is a
dissenter, the satan, in the council
that objects to Joshua. We are not privy
to the objections, but the fact that the angel of the Lord declares the
iniquities of Joshua are taken away suggest that there were issues that needed
to be resolved. Day suggests that Joshua’s ancestry may have been an
issue. If Joshua was a direct descendent
of the priesthood that desecrated the office and temple before the exile, is it
appropriate for Joshua to assume the role as high priest?[12]
In
any case, the divine council has saw Joshua to be fit for the office of high
priest. As a result, the satan, was rebuked. Boyd makes the point that the satan’s rebuke is a sign that God and
the satan are at odds. “It is
clear that, once again, God and the satan
are not on the same side. God is for
mercy, and for Joshua’s high priesthood; Satan wants only comdemnation.”[13] However, God’s rejection of the objections
brought by the satan does not
indicate that the satan is anything
like a devil figure that lives in opposition to God’s purposes. Marvin Tate makes the point that people
favorable to God may be rebuked as in Proverbs 17:10 and Ecclesiastes 7:5.[14]
Boyd
also objects to the satan being seen
as a normal member of the divine council.
He notes that the text does not specifically demand that the satan was supposed to be in attendance
or not, but that it certainly does not demand that the satan be viewed as a “member in good standing”.[15] It seems to be a stretch to entertain the
idea that someone present at the divine council was not intended to be there
when there is no evidence in the text to suggest it. Again, the only reason to make such a claim
is due to imported assumptions about the nature of the satan. Additionally, if
considered in light of the presentation of the satan in Job, there is more reason to conclude that the satan in Zechariah is a member of the
divine council who either has a dissenting opinion or has been charged with
task of pointing out objections.
Satan in 1 Chronicles
The
text that contains a satan reference
is 1 Chronicles 21:1, “Satan stood up against Israel and incited David to
number Israel.” This text is a
modification 2 Samuel 24:1 which reads, “Again the anger of the Lord was
kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them saying, ‘Go count the
people of Israel.’” 1 Chronicles
contains the only use of satan as a
noun without a definite article. As a
result, many scholars see this passage as portraying satan as a distinct personality.[16] The modification is seen to be designed clean
up the depiction of Yahweh by removing God from the instigation of David’s
sin. It is also seen as an indication
that Judaism is progressing towards a more dualistic metaphysic where Satan is operating
in direct opposition to God.[17]
Day,
again, has a very convincing alternate view of the depiction of satan in 1 Chronicles. She argues that satan is not used as a proper noun in 1 Chronicles due to the fact
that whichever of the two suggested dates for 1 Chronicles, the book is at
least 200 years older than the first clear use of satan as a proper name.
During the 200 year gap, specific names for demonic figures are found,
but satan is not used as a proper
name. As a result the text should be
read as, “and a satan took a stand
against Israel.”[18]
Secondly, Day argues for different
motives for the changes the Chronicler made.
The problem with the original passage was not that God was connected to
sinful actions. If this were the case,
then it makes little sense for the Chronicler to include God’s sanctioning of a
“lying spirit”(2 Chr. 18:18-22), or for causing Rehoboam to reject the advice
of his older advisors, which led to the splitting of the kingdom. The goal of the Chronicler was to depict a
strong relationship between God and David, and the original text clearly does
not depict a cozy relationship. The
revision has the twofold result of not depicting a strained relationship
between God and David as well as shifting the blame to Joab for not completing
the census.[19]
In light of the above arguments Day
suggests that the satan in 1 Chronicles
should be understood as an “accuser” from an implied divine council in order to
replace the “anger(wrath) of the Lord” contained in the 2 Samuel passage. The announcement of God’s anger is a legal
expression, so it is fitting that satan
be taken as an “accuser” in order to maintain the context of the 2 Samuel
passage as well as refer to an unidentified heavenly accuser.[20] Additionally, this usage meets the goal of
the Chronicler to soften the tension between God and David by including a
middle man, so to speak.
Considering Days argument above
which she convincingly submits as a closer, better reading of the text one
finds a very different view of satan. As in the other examined passages, the satan figure is not presented as an evil
being opposed to God, nor as a recurring entity that has been presented
elsewhere. However, the function of a
heavenly accuser does potentially occur again as it clearly does in the Job and
Zechariah passages.
Conclusion
This paper is not meant to argue
that no Satan figure exists in reality, as it has not dealt with the figure of
Satan that appears in the Intertestamental Period or the New Testament
Scriptures, and it is not a theological pursuit. There are also several other passages that
traditionally are read to refer to Satan that are not addressed. These passages are worthy of study, but space
did not allow for such a study here. However,
this paper does demonstrate that a reasonable argument can be made for the absence
of the Satan figure as presented in the New Testament and believed by most
Christians today. It has been shown that
the satans in the Job, Zechariah, and
1 Chronicles are not portrayed as evil beings working in opposition to the will
of God, rather that they are more likely working on the behalf of God. Maliciousness on behalf of the satans seems to be derived from an
import of traditional assumptions rather than by a plain reading of the
text. Additionally, it has been shown
that though the satans may perform
similar roles, there is no indication that the figures represent a single
being. There is much more to be examined
pertaining to Satan, including influences from other Near East Cultures and
development of Satan as a prominent figure in Judaism and Christianity. However, it can be said with confidence that
Satan is not included in the Old Testament Scriptures.
[1]
Peggy L. Day, An Adversary in Heaven: Satan in the Hebrew Bible (Atlanta:
Scholars Press, 1988), 25
[2]
Ibid, 26
[3]
Gregory A. Boyd, God at War: The Bible
and Spiritual Conflict (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1997), 146-7
[4]
Ibid, 147
[5]
T.J. Wray and Gregory Mobley, The Birth
of Satan: Tracing the Devil’s Biblical Roots (New York: Palgrave
Macmillian), 60
[6]
Ibid, 60
[7]
Day, An Adversary in Heaven, 80
[8]
Ibid, 81
[9]
For a well developed formulation of this perspective on Job see Day’s chapter
on Job. Day, An Adversary in Heaven, 69-106
[10]
Boyd, God at War, 147
[11]
Wray and Mobley, The Birth of Satan,
65
[12]
Day, An Adversary in Heaven, 120
[13]
Boyd, God at War, 153
[14]
Marvin E. Tate, “Satan in the Old Testament”, Review & Expositor, 89 (1992): 464
[15]
Boyd, God at War, 153
[16]
Johnny Awwad, “Satan in Biblical Imagination”, Theological Review 26 Vol.1 (2005): 115
[17]
Marvin E. Tate, “Satan in the Old Testament”, 465
[18]
Day, An Adversary in Heaven, 130-4
[19]
Day, An Adversary in Heaven, 136-42
[20]
Ibid, 144
No comments:
Post a Comment