C.S. Lewis wrote, "There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them." This is true, which is why the topic of Satan's origins should be approached carefully. We don't really want to talk about Satan when we can declare the glories of God instead. But in recent times Satan has actually been portrayed as a sympathetic character, misunderstood and even persecuted unjustly. So we think the author does well to remind us of the unrighteous being Satan is.
The author spends most of his time discussing the OT references, but very little in the NT, mentioning in passing Matthew 4:1-11 for example. However, the parallel account in Luke adds a noteworthy detail not mentioned in Matthew, that the devil has authority:
Luke 4:5-6 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to.
The author also does not mention this very important detail:
Luke 10:18 He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.
Jesus was an eyewitness to the devil being cast down. As one of the morning stars (Job 38:7, c.f. Isaiah 14:12) his fall from heaven would look exactly like lightning, wouldn't it?
Also, Revelation 9:1:
The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. The star was given the key to the shaft of the Abyss.
This is clearly a reference to the morning star cast out of heaven.
Last one:
2 Peter 2:11 yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord.
We can now put the story together satisfactorily. Satan was a glorious morning star. He obviously was beautiful and important, anointed as guardian, and the greatest of the heavenly host.
Until iniquity was found in him. We would surmise that as one of the morning stars that celebrated the creation of the earth (Job 38:7), he had a change of heart when man was created and made "a little lower than the angels" (Psalm 8:5. The Hebrew word for "angels" is Elohim). He was cast down like lightning to the lowest of places in the form of a dirt-dwelling serpent.
He has no access to heaven now, yet he retains some measure of his former glory:
2Co. 11:14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
This glory, in whatever amount he still possesses, is sufficient for him to deceive men. He also has the power to give earthly pleasures in exchange for worship. And with his hatred of men, his ire is directed to them.
And this is probably the key. He envied God for the worship He received, and was jealous of man because of the high place he was given. Angels weren't made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27,) didn't receive dominion over creation (Genesis 1:28), and weren't given the charge to guard the Garden (Genesis 2:15).
It's a sad story, to be sure. To have such position and glory in the very presence of the living God only to fall has to be one of the great tragedies of all time.
Satan's ultimate end will be the lake of fire (Revelation 20:10).
In recent years, interest has resurged in the role of heavenly beings in the Bible, including the “backstory” of God’s adversary (variously known as the Devil, Satan, and the Evil One). Much of what is said and written alludes to a series of key Old Testament texts—but what do those passages actually say?
Let’s examine five key texts: Genesis 3, Job 1–2, Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28, and Zechariah 3. As we do this, it’s important to acknowledge three realities:
1. The Old Testament has no clear “origin story” of the Evil One. Various figures appear unannounced (generally to oppose God), but we aren’t given an explanation of who they are or where they come from.
2. In trying to piece together an understanding of the Evil One, we’re dealing with a small number of difficult texts. There isn’t always agreement on the identity of the various figures referred to or how they relate to Satan in the New Testament. This should encourage humility in our conclusions.
3. Alongside the Old Testament, we do have other ancient documents and Jewish Second Temple literature that touch on these issues. But we should use them with great care. Their view of the world isn’t always the same as that of the inspired Old Testament writers. Of course, the New Testament in particular adds to and sharpens what we know, but even here, no definitive account is given.
Genesis 3
Genesis 3 opens with one of the most famous exchanges in all literature: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, ‘Did God actually say, “You shall not eat of any tree in the garden”?’’’ (v. 1).
Several points jump straight out of the text. First, God created “the serpent,” along with everything else. Second, “the serpent” talks, and this doesn’t appear to be remarkable. Given that no other animal talks in the Bible (with the notable exception of Balaam’s donkey in Numbers 22), it’s reasonable to assume the first readers of Genesis understood this “serpent” to be something other than a normal animal.
In addition, God charges the man to “keep” or “guard” the garden (2:15), suggesting that even before the fall, there is some source of threat external to Eden. But how that threat was born or precisely what it constituted, the text doesn’t say.
The existence of real and “personal” opposition to God seems confirmed by the way in which God curses the Serpent in 3:14–15. God’s consigning the serpent to its “belly” might be understood as a simple explanation of the movement of a snake, but 3:15 lifts the curse to an entirely different level. From the beginning, there’s conflict between God’s creation and the Serpent.
In the context of Genesis (and the rest of the Old Testament), this can only mean the Serpent is the instigator and encourager of enmity against God himself and against the creatures he has made. Though some scholars disagree, the text of Genesis and the New Testament firmly steer us in the direction of a being who spearheads opposition against Yahweh as redemptive history unfolds (e.g., John 8:44; 2 Cor. 11:3; Rev. 12:9).
Job 1–2
The provenance of the book of Job is much discussed. Equally, the nature and role of the figure introduced as “the Satan/Adversary/Accuser” in 1:6 has provoked significant debate:
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. The LORD said to Satan, “From where have you come?” Satan answered the LORD and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.” And the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil?” (vv. 6–8)
Notice two striking features in this little scene. First, there’s clearly already tension or enmity between Satan (literally “the accuser”) and God that’s at odds with God’s relationship with the others in this scene. God’s question in verse 7 isn’t a neutral enquiry but a demand that he account for his “accusatory” activity. God presents Job as an example of someone who can stand up to Satan’s scrutiny and challenge.
Satan has company: He’s introduced to us as approaching God along with the “sons of God.” These “sons of God” (including Satan) are answerable to God. So who are they? It seems reasonable to view these as lesser heavenly (but not divine) beings created by God to serve him.
Second, the parallel scene at the beginning of chapter 2 fills out the picture of Satan:
The LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job. . . . He still holds fast his integrity, although you incited me against him to destroy him without reason.” Then Satan answered the LORD and said, “Skin for skin! All that a man has he will give for his life. But stretch out your hand and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse you to your face.” And the LORD said to Satan, “Behold, he is in your hand; only spare his life.” So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD and struck Job with loathsome sores from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head. (vv. 3–7)
The book of Job depicts Satan not only as Accuser but also as Destroyer—one who wants to provoke, one intent on introducing enmity between God and his creatures, and one whom God allows a degree of power in service of the Lord’s long-term plans.
Job’s early chapters then show there’s significant similarity between the figures of the Serpent and Satan (or “the satan”): both are malevolent outsiders bent on destruction and division. Both appear to be created beings operating under God’s authority. It seems reasonable to connect them. However, we’re still none the wiser as to their backstory.
Isaiah 14
Isaiah 14 is part of an oracle challenging the King of Babylon’s hubris:
How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!
You said in your heart,
“I will ascend to heaven;
above the stars of God
I will set my throne on high;
I will sit on the mount of assembly
in the far reaches of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.”
But you are brought down to Sheol,
to the far reaches of the pit.
Those who see you will stare at you
and ponder over you:
“Is this the man who made the earth tremble,
who shook kingdoms . . . ?” (vv. 12–16)
This Babylonian ruler is being compared to an earlier figure, the “Day Star, son of Dawn,” who similarly attempted to secure world domination but experienced a crashing fall. The ancient Near East has several stories of gods trying to gain supremacy over other gods and failing, and Isaiah may well be drawing on that pool of ideas, which contains echoes of the real, original rebellion of the heavenly being we know as Satan.
Although nothing explicit in the text demands we see the Evil One here, Jesus appears to allude to verse 12 in Luke 10:18 when discussing Satan.
Ezekiel 28
As in Isaiah 14, the issue addressed in Ezekiel 28 is the arrogance of a king—in this case, the King of Tyre:
The word of the LORD came to [Ezekiel]: “Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre, Thus says the LORD God:
“Because your heart is proud,
and you have said, ‘I am a god,
I sit in the seat of the gods,
in the heart of the seas,’
yet you are but a man, and no god,
though you make your heart like the heart of a god.’” (vv. 1–2)
His particular brand of self-aggrandizement is compared to an earlier example, which is where things become fascinating.
According to verse 13, God says to the ruler of Tyre, “You were in Eden, the garden of God”. His behaviour has precedent. But to whom is this dictator being compared: Adam or another heavenly being? The exalted language pushes us toward the latter:
Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the LORD God:
“You were the signet of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
You were in Eden, the garden of God;
every precious stone was your covering,
sardius, topaz, and diamond,
beryl, onyx, and jasper,
sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle;
and crafted in gold were your settings
and your engravings.
On the day that you were created
they were prepared.
You were an anointed guardian cherub.
I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God;
in the midst of the stones of fire you walked.
You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created,
till unrighteousness was found in you.” (vv. 12–15)
God charged Adam, as the pinnacle of creation, with both guarding the garden and acting as his priestly representative. This could explain the list of precious stones. Yet the king is compared to a “guardian cherub” not once but twice (vv. 14, 16).
The dramatic language describing both the initial and final downfall of this figure (vv. 16–19) suggests the comparison is with an exalted heavenly figure who openly rebels against God and who will, one day, be utterly destroyed.
Although it’s hard to be certain, Ezekiel 28 is the strongest evidence for a pre-fall rebellion of a heavenly being in a position of significant responsibility. This is the clearest picture we have in the Old Testament of the origin story of the one we know as Satan.
What Does This All Mean?
We mustn’t be afraid to admit some issues aren’t clearly or definitively addressed in Scripture (and in the Old Testament in particular). When we step into these areas, our conclusions should be couched in suitably humble language. The Devil’s origin is one such area.
We don’t have a detailed blow-by-blow account of his backstory in the Old Testament. But that isn’t the same as saying the Old Testament knows nothing of this figure. From the beginning, the text gives a consistent picture of a heavenly being who is created, is limited, operates under the sovereign permission of Yahweh, and yet displays consistent enmity toward God.
Ezekiel 28 is the strongest evidence for a pre-fall rebellion of a heavenly being in a position of significant responsibility.
This provides a solid foundation for the New Testament’s greater clarity, when Satan emerges from the shadows to mount a full-frontal attack on God’s purposes in Christ. What’s implied across the Old Testament becomes crystal clear in the New Testament as the writers draw on these foundational texts, exposing and explaining how Satan seeks to divert Jesus from his ministry from the beginning (e.g., Matt. 4:1–11).
Of course, we know the outcome of these efforts. In particular, we know that Satan is in view when Paul writes, “He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in [Christ]” (Col. 2:15).
Even though Satan continues to prowl around “like a roaring lion” (1 Pet. 5:8), the damage he can cause has already been severely limited, and his ultimate fate is already sealed (Rev. 20:7–10). Thanks be to God.
Gary Millar (PhD, University of Aberdeen) is principal of Queensland Theological College. He previously served as a pastor for 17 years. His dissertation was published as Now Choose Life in the New Studies in Biblical Theology series. He has written many other books, including a commentary on Deuteronomy in the Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary series.
Let’s examine five key texts: Genesis 3, Job 1–2, Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28, and Zechariah 3. As we do this, it’s important to acknowledge three realities:
1. The Old Testament has no clear “origin story” of the Evil One. Various figures appear unannounced (generally to oppose God), but we aren’t given an explanation of who they are or where they come from.
2. In trying to piece together an understanding of the Evil One, we’re dealing with a small number of difficult texts. There isn’t always agreement on the identity of the various figures referred to or how they relate to Satan in the New Testament. This should encourage humility in our conclusions.
3. Alongside the Old Testament, we do have other ancient documents and Jewish Second Temple literature that touch on these issues. But we should use them with great care. Their view of the world isn’t always the same as that of the inspired Old Testament writers. Of course, the New Testament in particular adds to and sharpens what we know, but even here, no definitive account is given.
Genesis 3
Genesis 3 opens with one of the most famous exchanges in all literature: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, ‘Did God actually say, “You shall not eat of any tree in the garden”?’’’ (v. 1).
Several points jump straight out of the text. First, God created “the serpent,” along with everything else. Second, “the serpent” talks, and this doesn’t appear to be remarkable. Given that no other animal talks in the Bible (with the notable exception of Balaam’s donkey in Numbers 22), it’s reasonable to assume the first readers of Genesis understood this “serpent” to be something other than a normal animal.
In addition, God charges the man to “keep” or “guard” the garden (2:15), suggesting that even before the fall, there is some source of threat external to Eden. But how that threat was born or precisely what it constituted, the text doesn’t say.
The existence of real and “personal” opposition to God seems confirmed by the way in which God curses the Serpent in 3:14–15. God’s consigning the serpent to its “belly” might be understood as a simple explanation of the movement of a snake, but 3:15 lifts the curse to an entirely different level. From the beginning, there’s conflict between God’s creation and the Serpent.
In the context of Genesis (and the rest of the Old Testament), this can only mean the Serpent is the instigator and encourager of enmity against God himself and against the creatures he has made. Though some scholars disagree, the text of Genesis and the New Testament firmly steer us in the direction of a being who spearheads opposition against Yahweh as redemptive history unfolds (e.g., John 8:44; 2 Cor. 11:3; Rev. 12:9).
Job 1–2
The provenance of the book of Job is much discussed. Equally, the nature and role of the figure introduced as “the Satan/Adversary/Accuser” in 1:6 has provoked significant debate:
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. The LORD said to Satan, “From where have you come?” Satan answered the LORD and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.” And the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil?” (vv. 6–8)
Notice two striking features in this little scene. First, there’s clearly already tension or enmity between Satan (literally “the accuser”) and God that’s at odds with God’s relationship with the others in this scene. God’s question in verse 7 isn’t a neutral enquiry but a demand that he account for his “accusatory” activity. God presents Job as an example of someone who can stand up to Satan’s scrutiny and challenge.
Satan has company: He’s introduced to us as approaching God along with the “sons of God.” These “sons of God” (including Satan) are answerable to God. So who are they? It seems reasonable to view these as lesser heavenly (but not divine) beings created by God to serve him.
Second, the parallel scene at the beginning of chapter 2 fills out the picture of Satan:
The LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job. . . . He still holds fast his integrity, although you incited me against him to destroy him without reason.” Then Satan answered the LORD and said, “Skin for skin! All that a man has he will give for his life. But stretch out your hand and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse you to your face.” And the LORD said to Satan, “Behold, he is in your hand; only spare his life.” So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD and struck Job with loathsome sores from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head. (vv. 3–7)
The book of Job depicts Satan not only as Accuser but also as Destroyer—one who wants to provoke, one intent on introducing enmity between God and his creatures, and one whom God allows a degree of power in service of the Lord’s long-term plans.
Job’s early chapters then show there’s significant similarity between the figures of the Serpent and Satan (or “the satan”): both are malevolent outsiders bent on destruction and division. Both appear to be created beings operating under God’s authority. It seems reasonable to connect them. However, we’re still none the wiser as to their backstory.
Zechariah 3
Satan makes a cameo appearance in the prophecy of Zechariah:
Then [an angel] showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. And the LORD said to Satan, “The LORD rebuke you, O Satan! The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?” (3:1–2)
The similarities with Job’s opening chapters are undeniable. This time, though, the term “Satan/Accuser” is used by God as a direct address. It’s perfectly reasonable to treat this title as functioning as a name.
Satan makes a cameo appearance in the prophecy of Zechariah:
Then [an angel] showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. And the LORD said to Satan, “The LORD rebuke you, O Satan! The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?” (3:1–2)
The similarities with Job’s opening chapters are undeniable. This time, though, the term “Satan/Accuser” is used by God as a direct address. It’s perfectly reasonable to treat this title as functioning as a name.
Isaiah 14
Isaiah 14 is part of an oracle challenging the King of Babylon’s hubris:
How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!
You said in your heart,
“I will ascend to heaven;
above the stars of God
I will set my throne on high;
I will sit on the mount of assembly
in the far reaches of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.”
But you are brought down to Sheol,
to the far reaches of the pit.
Those who see you will stare at you
and ponder over you:
“Is this the man who made the earth tremble,
who shook kingdoms . . . ?” (vv. 12–16)
This Babylonian ruler is being compared to an earlier figure, the “Day Star, son of Dawn,” who similarly attempted to secure world domination but experienced a crashing fall. The ancient Near East has several stories of gods trying to gain supremacy over other gods and failing, and Isaiah may well be drawing on that pool of ideas, which contains echoes of the real, original rebellion of the heavenly being we know as Satan.
Although nothing explicit in the text demands we see the Evil One here, Jesus appears to allude to verse 12 in Luke 10:18 when discussing Satan.
Ezekiel 28
As in Isaiah 14, the issue addressed in Ezekiel 28 is the arrogance of a king—in this case, the King of Tyre:
The word of the LORD came to [Ezekiel]: “Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre, Thus says the LORD God:
“Because your heart is proud,
and you have said, ‘I am a god,
I sit in the seat of the gods,
in the heart of the seas,’
yet you are but a man, and no god,
though you make your heart like the heart of a god.’” (vv. 1–2)
His particular brand of self-aggrandizement is compared to an earlier example, which is where things become fascinating.
According to verse 13, God says to the ruler of Tyre, “You were in Eden, the garden of God”. His behaviour has precedent. But to whom is this dictator being compared: Adam or another heavenly being? The exalted language pushes us toward the latter:
Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the LORD God:
“You were the signet of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
You were in Eden, the garden of God;
every precious stone was your covering,
sardius, topaz, and diamond,
beryl, onyx, and jasper,
sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle;
and crafted in gold were your settings
and your engravings.
On the day that you were created
they were prepared.
You were an anointed guardian cherub.
I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God;
in the midst of the stones of fire you walked.
You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created,
till unrighteousness was found in you.” (vv. 12–15)
God charged Adam, as the pinnacle of creation, with both guarding the garden and acting as his priestly representative. This could explain the list of precious stones. Yet the king is compared to a “guardian cherub” not once but twice (vv. 14, 16).
The dramatic language describing both the initial and final downfall of this figure (vv. 16–19) suggests the comparison is with an exalted heavenly figure who openly rebels against God and who will, one day, be utterly destroyed.
Although it’s hard to be certain, Ezekiel 28 is the strongest evidence for a pre-fall rebellion of a heavenly being in a position of significant responsibility. This is the clearest picture we have in the Old Testament of the origin story of the one we know as Satan.
What Does This All Mean?
We mustn’t be afraid to admit some issues aren’t clearly or definitively addressed in Scripture (and in the Old Testament in particular). When we step into these areas, our conclusions should be couched in suitably humble language. The Devil’s origin is one such area.
We don’t have a detailed blow-by-blow account of his backstory in the Old Testament. But that isn’t the same as saying the Old Testament knows nothing of this figure. From the beginning, the text gives a consistent picture of a heavenly being who is created, is limited, operates under the sovereign permission of Yahweh, and yet displays consistent enmity toward God.
Ezekiel 28 is the strongest evidence for a pre-fall rebellion of a heavenly being in a position of significant responsibility.
This provides a solid foundation for the New Testament’s greater clarity, when Satan emerges from the shadows to mount a full-frontal attack on God’s purposes in Christ. What’s implied across the Old Testament becomes crystal clear in the New Testament as the writers draw on these foundational texts, exposing and explaining how Satan seeks to divert Jesus from his ministry from the beginning (e.g., Matt. 4:1–11).
Of course, we know the outcome of these efforts. In particular, we know that Satan is in view when Paul writes, “He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in [Christ]” (Col. 2:15).
Even though Satan continues to prowl around “like a roaring lion” (1 Pet. 5:8), the damage he can cause has already been severely limited, and his ultimate fate is already sealed (Rev. 20:7–10). Thanks be to God.
Gary Millar (PhD, University of Aberdeen) is principal of Queensland Theological College. He previously served as a pastor for 17 years. His dissertation was published as Now Choose Life in the New Studies in Biblical Theology series. He has written many other books, including a commentary on Deuteronomy in the Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary series.
No comments:
Post a Comment