Satan: from Judaism to Christianity

[Me Myself]

Yes, the familiar "Satan" of the NT is inferred in the OT, good post.

I dont see it. I see a Satan, yes, but I dont read the part where God dislikes him or he dislikes God. Or being a "fallen"angel or anything similar.

Unless you count th snake you saidnyou didnt count as Satan.

 

[Desert Snake]

I dont see it. I see a Satan, yes, but I dont read the part where God dislikes him or he dislikes God. Or being a "fallen"angel or anything similar.

Unless you count th snake you saidnyou didnt count as Satan.

where in the NT are the major character differences?

 

[Desert Snake]

I deal with facts, not opinions or unprovable theories.

My question remains: how did the NT writers come to the conclusion that Satan = the Devil, and is responsible for sin/evil?

It doesn't. The NT is consistent that humans are responsible for sin, not Satan.

 

[Levite]

Ah, okay. So who or what is Satan to you?

I discussed the satan in Judaism in these posts here, and would be glad to expand on anything you wish.

 

[Ingledsva]

Where is the name HaSatan given to this Angel? Is that by tradition?


From this part of the passage:

He wasn't just there to accuse Balaam, but to mete out some justice too.

Where it is translated "an adversary," it is actually HaSatan in the Hebrew.

H7854 in a Strong's.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Thanks, Jay. And my follow-up question to Levite as well. My Christian upbringing led me to believe that Satan and the devil were synonomous, so I'm just curious what the distinction is.

Not either of those guys - - but - Satan of the OT is basically a servant of God that tests people, and stands beside God to accuse them.

The NT Satan/Devil/Lucifer is the OT Satan with a lot of additions from other religions. The NT was written much later and misunderstandings crept in.

If you notice - in the NT meeting with Jesus story, he is doing his Job - testing Jesus by tempting him - to see if he is ready for his mission.

 

[Desert Snake]

The NT Satan/Devil/Lucifer is the OT Satan with a lot of additions from other religions. The NT was written much later and misunderstandings crept in.

Mostly 'additions' from Judaic belief, AFAIK.

This is why Rabbis will agree with the "Christian perspective on certain subjects, I think. Don't forget that we're not dealing with a monolithic Judaism in Israel at the time, Even Nazarenes, Essenes had different beliefs before Jesus came along.

 

[Ingledsva]

The NT Satan/Devil/Lucifer is the OT Satan with a lot of additions from other religions. The NT was written much later and misunderstandings crept in.

Mostly 'additions' from Judaic belief, AFAIK.

This is why Rabbis will agree with the "Christian perspective on certain subjects, I think. Don't forget that we're not dealing with a monolithic Judaism in Israel at the time, Even Nazarenes, Essenes had different beliefs before Jesus came along.

Which is saying exactly the same thing - the influence of other religions crept in.

 

[CG Didymus]

It's true that there is a vast difference between Satan in the Old Testament and Satan in the New Testament, as in the latter case Satan takes a central role as God's nemesis. However, often I've seen that entire stages of diffusion of ideas and literary stages within the Second Temple Period are left unexplored in this discussion.
While Satan in the OT is largely known to us as the trickster of the Lord's own court in the Book of Job. The New Testament inherited material from Jewish sects and literature which believed in strong dualism and the war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness. In addition, ancient Jewish Enochic literature and lore did indeed endorse the concept of fallen and rebel angels as they were described in their fall and their corruption of men.
It is possible to see an evolution of ideas within Jewish thought, and there is still some debate as to the origin of duality in Jewish and Persian thought and the circulation of such ideas. In Iran and later Zoroastrianism we recognize religious duality in the cosmic battle between the good Lord Ahura Mazda, and the Persian devil Ahriman together with entire hosts of angelic and demonic beings.
We can then see Christianity inheriting Near Eastern and Second Temple Period Jewish beliefs regarding duality and the rise of a Christian 'Sitra Ahra'.

This is the important stuff to me. Several Christian concepts didn't come out of the blue, but they didn't come out of Judaism either--and the devil is one of them. What is the historical evolution of who "the adversary" is and what is his purpose? He's not only not the same in Judaism, but he was taken from other religions and from non-canonical writings? There is very good History Channel show called God versus Satan that covers this material (I'm going to go watch it again).

However, regardless if he's real or not, an evil spirit being seems possible. There seems to be a dark mysterious evil in the air. Why would God allow him to exist? I don't know? To test us and tempt us? Gee, thanks, God. So for a very short amount of time God created an evil-being, then will cast him into hell, and then release him? And then, finally, destroy him for good? So for the greater part of eternity, God doesn't need him? For the rest of eternity we won't do evil and won't be tempted to do evil? Why now? That's just mean. I don't know, but I hope there's no reality to the Christian devil. I don't even like the idea of the Jewish HaSatan. I don't need help screwing up and making bad decisions.

 

[crossfire]

This post reminded me of Mastema, which is also a moth genus:

Ramses is clearly a transliteration of an Egyptian name, because it does not conform to any Hebrew roots. <....>would mean "evil moth."

(shows how my mind works)

How does the Hebrew mastema fit in with the possible development of the Christian idea of Satan?
wiki article excerpt:

Mastema is an angel who persecutes evil in Hebrew folklore. He carries out punishments for God. He tempts humans and tests their faith. He asked God to permit him to have demons as his subordinates. In the Zadokite Fragments and the Dead Sea Scrolls, he is the angel of disaster, the father of all evil, and a flatterer of God. His name is that of an arch-demon who first appears in the literature of Israel's Second Temple Period, as a personification of the Hebrew word "mastemah" (&#1502;&#1513;&#1496;&#1502;&#1492, meaning "hatred", "hostility", "enmity" or "persecution".​

His being a "flatterer of God" parallels Buddhist Mara.

 

[arcanum]

It's true that there is a vast difference between Satan in the Old Testament and Satan in the New Testament, as in the latter case Satan takes a central role as God's nemesis. However, often I've seen that entire stages of diffusion of ideas and literary stages within the Second Temple Period are left unexplored in this discussion.
While Satan in the OT is largely known to us as the trickster of the Lord's own court in the Book of Job. The New Testament inherited material from Jewish sects and literature which believed in strong dualism and the war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness. In addition, ancient Jewish Enochic literature and lore did indeed endorse the concept of fallen and rebel angels as they were described in their fall and their corruption of men.
It is possible to see an evolution of ideas within Jewish thought, and there is still some debate as to the origin of duality in Jewish and Persian thought and the circulation of such ideas. In Iran and later Zoroastrianism we recognize religious duality in the cosmic battle between the good Lord Ahura Mazda, and the Persian devil Ahriman together with entire hosts of angelic and demonic beings.
We can then see Christianity inheriting Near Eastern and Second Temple Period Jewish beliefs regarding duality and the rise of a Christian 'Sitra Ahra'.

yes, it was after the exile and exposure to Persian dualism that gave rise to all the ideas that would give rise to such variations in Jewish thought which eventually resulted in Christianity. Post exile you had all the different sects and apocalyptic literature. I would go so far as to say if the exile never happened neither would Christianity.

 

[gnostic]

However, regardless if he's real or not, an evil spirit being seems possible. There seems to be a dark mysterious evil in the air. Why would God allow him to exist? I don't know? To test us and tempt us? Gee, thanks, God. So for a very short amount of time God created an evil-being, then will cast him into hell, and then release him?

In pre-exile Judaism, evil spirits supposedly exist but angels, including Satan, are not among them.

If you'll recall in 1 Samuel, God sent evil spirit at King Saul, not to possess him, but to cause insanity, obsessive jealousy and paranoia. Saul's jealousy against young David, actually set the path, which led to Saul's destruction, but David rises. This spirit was under God's control, not working against him. If this is true (but I'm not saying that is true or that I believe in the story), then basically all spirits, good or evil, are doing his bidding, and not working against him (God).

The story of David and Saul reminds me of Sophocles' Oedipus Rex. Oedipus had no control over his fate, just like Saul.

 

[CG Didymus]

Hey Gnostic, I assume you've read several of the non-canonical Jewish writings. What concepts of the Hasatan character have you found in them? And, in which time period do they start appearing?

 

[Desert Snake]

In pre-exile Judaism, evil spirits supposedly exist but angels, including Satan, are not among them.

This is not true, just because something isn't explicitly spelled out in the Torah does not mean the inferences are not there, the religion was for people who already knew the background of Judaism, not for people with only knowledge of the Torah/Tanakh to figure out.
There are many things in the Bible that are not spelled out yet if someone is aware of the Judaic belief it doesn't have to be. Midrash is probably one of the better ways to figure these things out then relying on your own interpretations IMO.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Midrash is probably one of the better ways to figure these things out then relying on your own interpretations IMO.

Why would that be the case?

 

[Desert Snake]

Why would that be the case?

I explained why that would be the case in my post.

BTW seems there are more pressing issues with this thread than that, if you are aware of 'pre' or 'post' exile influences on Judaism, or perhaps you were getting to that on your next comment.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I explained why that would be the case in my post.

Nonsense.

 

[gnostic]

This is not true, just because something isn't explicitly spelled out in the Torah does not mean the inferences are not there, the religion was for people who already knew the background of Judaism, not for people with only knowledge of the Torah/Tanakh to figure out.
There are many things in the Bible that are not spelled out yet if someone is aware of the Judaic belief it doesn't have to be. Midrash is probably one of the better ways to figure these things out then relying on your own interpretations IMO.

You do realize that the Midrash didn't begin until post 70 CE, and span over number of centuries, don't you?

By then, stories in the Midrash were already influenced by many different cultures and religions, which included the Zoroastrianism, the Hellenistic Greek religions and Christianity. The people who wrote the Midrash, would have by then known of stories of Satan being a fallen angel and the rebellion of heaven.

The Midrash is some interpretations by the rabbis, as well as expanding and embellishing some narratives, which even they themselves would not taken seriously or literally, which you are apparently doing.

Nevertheless, Judaism don't accept that angels could disobey and rebel against god, nor do they believe Satan is God's enemy.

Any Jew here, would point that out to you.

In fact, they have already done so, but you just refused to see or hear.

 

[Shermana]

Nevertheless, Judaism don't accept that angels could disobey and rebel against god, nor do they believe Satan is God's enemy.

I do wonder how they reconcile the part where it says God will punish even the host of heaven if they can't disobey.

Isaiah 24:21
New International Version (©1984)
In that day the LORD will punish the powers in the heavens above and the kings on the earth below.

JPS

IS 24:21 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the LORD will punish the host of the high heaven on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth.

 

[Desert Snake]

You do realize that the Midrash didn't begin until post 70 CE, and span over number of centuries, don't you?

By then, stories in the Midrash were already influenced by many different cultures and religions, which included the Zoroastrianism, the Hellenistic Greek religions and Christianity. The people who wrote the Midrash, would have by then known of stories of Satan being a fallen angel and the rebellion of heaven.

Judaism was itself influenced by Hellenic thought, and Rabbinical Judaism was different from pre-Rabbinical Judaism, this doesn't prove, or really mean anything.

The Midrash is some interpretations by the rabbis, as well as expanding and embellishing some narratives, which even they themselves would not taken seriously or literally, which you are apparently doing.

That's sort of a funny way of explaining Midrash away that doesn't suit your opinions.

Nevertheless, Judaism don't accept that angels could disobey and rebel against god, nor do they believe Satan is God's enemy.

Any Jew here, would point that out to you.

Judaism is not monolithic in belief.