Where did the Christian meaning of Satan originate?

[meltzerboy]

I have described in other threads the ways in which the Jewish meaning of Satan differs from the Christian meaning. In Judaism, Satan is not regarded as the fallen-angel, arch-enemy of G-d but is still an angel, with the primary mission given by G-d of testing Man’s free will. Satan also serves other purposes, which I won’t elaborate upon in this thread.

My question here is, if Satan, as Christians conceive of him, did not originate in the teachings of Judaism, where did he originate? Was the person of Satan depicted as a fallen angel something new that began in Christianity or does Satan, as he is known in Christianity, have his origins in other, older religions or elsewhere? If the latter, why did Christianity adopt this meaning of Satan rather than that found in Judaism?

 

[ApologiaSophia]

I have described in other threads the ways in which the Jewish meaning of Satan differs from the Christian meaning. In Judaism, Satan is not regarded as the fallen-angel, arch-enemy of G-d but is still an angel, with the primary mission given by G-d of testing Man’s free will. Satan also serves other purposes, which I won’t elaborate upon in this thread.

My question here is, if Satan, as Christians conceive of him, did not originate in the teachings of Judaism, where did he originate? Was the person of Satan depicted as a fallen angel something new that began in Christianity or does Satan, as he is known in Christianity, have his origins in other, older religions or elsewhere? If the latter, why did Christianity adopt this meaning of Satan rather than that found in Judaism?

To say it is not Jewish because of the beliefs and teachings of Rabbinic Jews is unfair. It is most certainly a Jewish concept, though it depends on the kind of Jew. To say where exactly it came from is not something we could pin point nor is it a clear cut lineage. I would say you should look into the beliefs of Essenes. Also, look in the book of Tolbit and Aporyphal writings, as well as the book of Enoch. These are all instances of what Jews of different sects at different times have written. Even the Pharisees, the forerunners of Rabbinic Judaism, believed in demons. I would not say that the Christian understanding of Satan is “un-Jewish.” Christians get their beliefs from Yeshua and his talmidim. They were all Jewish. It is simply rejected by most modern Jews.

 

[JerryZ]

I have described in other threads the ways in which the Jewish meaning of Satan differs from the Christian meaning. In Judaism, Satan is not regarded as the fallen-angel, arch-enemy of G-d but is still an angel, with the primary mission given by G-d of testing Man’s free will. Satan also serves other purposes, which I won’t elaborate upon in this thread.

My question here is, if Satan, as Christians conceive of him, did not originate in the teachings of Judaism, where did he originate? Was the person of Satan depicted as a fallen angel something new that began in Christianity or does Satan, as he is known in Christianity, have his origins in other, older religions or elsewhere? If the latter, why did Christianity adopt this meaning of Satan rather than that found in Judaism?

I believe we have obtained most of it from the Old Testament

I Chronicles 21: 1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel.
(Tempter?)

**Job **
1:9 Then Satan answered Jehovah, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 1:10 Hast not thou made a hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath, on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.
1:11 But put forth thy hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will renounce thee to thy face.
(Accuser?)

Zechariah
3:1 And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of Jehovah, and Satan standing at his right hand to be his adversary.
3:2 And Jehovah said unto Satan, Jehovah rebuke thee, O Satan; yea, Jehovah that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
(The Great Adversay?)

Pretty much the qualities that describe our version of the guy

But surely the transition to our guy must have come through the experience of the Apostles when they encounter Jesus. The presence of the great enemy was spoken of and shown to them and we have ample evidence of that in the New Testament. Which of course the modern jews totally reject.

 

[Sam_777]

Satan (aka Lucifer) mentioned in the OT where he wanted to make himself like GOD: (Isaiah 14:12-14) KJV:
*“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.”

 

[Pilgrim2012]

I have described in other threads the ways in which the Jewish meaning of Satan differs from the Christian meaning. In Judaism, Satan is not regarded as the fallen-angel, arch-enemy of G-d but is still an angel, with the primary mission given by G-d of testing Man’s free will. Satan also serves other purposes, which I won’t elaborate upon in this thread.

My question here is, if Satan, as Christians conceive of him, did not originate in the teachings of Judaism, where did he originate? Was the person of Satan depicted as a fallen angel something new that began in Christianity or does Satan, as he is known in Christianity, have his origins in other, older religions or elsewhere? If the latter, why did Christianity adopt this meaning of Satan rather than that found in Judaism?

Christianity is different from Judaism, no?

 

[Wandile]

From Judaism… Just not modern Rabbinic Judaism…More like Temple Judaism

 

[TimeEntrance]

To say it is not Jewish because of the beliefs and teachings of Rabbinic Jews is unfair. It is most certainly a Jewish concept, though it depends on the kind of Jew. To say where exactly it came from is not something we could pin point nor is it a clear cut lineage. I would say you should look into the beliefs of Essenes. Also, look in the book of Tolbit and Aporyphal writings, as well as the book of Enoch. These are all instances of what Jews of different sects at different times have written. Even the Pharisees, the forerunners of Rabbinic Judaism, believed in demons. I would not say that the Christian understanding of Satan is “un-Jewish.” Christians get their beliefs from Yeshua and his talmidim. They were all Jewish. It is simply rejected by most modern Jews.

Yeah… Jesus and the Apostles were Jewish I thought. Hebrew Jews more exactly.

The priestly Jews of the Old Testament seem more akin the Catholic and Orthodox priests today - with alters and presiding over the sacrifice of the Mass - than the Jewish Rabbis of today to me. Or maybe I just don’t know enough [shrugs] .

 

[Michael19682]

I have described in other threads the ways in which the Jewish meaning of Satan differs from the Christian meaning. In Judaism, Satan is not regarded as the fallen-angel, arch-enemy of G-d but is still an angel, with the primary mission given by G-d of testing Man’s free will. Satan also serves other purposes, which I won’t elaborate upon in this thread.

My question here is, if Satan, as Christians conceive of him, did not originate in the teachings of Judaism, where did he originate? Was the person of Satan depicted as a fallen angel something new that began in Christianity or does Satan, as he is known in Christianity, have his origins in other, older religions or elsewhere? If the latter, why did Christianity adopt this meaning of Satan rather than that found in Judaism?

Before I begin, I just wanted to say that I don’t think Satan serves “other purposes”, if by that you mean Ideals of conduct or reason. He serves no one, except maybe himself. God might very well bend Satan’s actions of evil to serve a higher good; but that is not truly accomplished with Satan’s ‘complicity’, as I would call it.

In Judaism, Satan is not regarded as the fallen-angel, arch-enemy of G-d but is still an angel, with the primary mission given by G-d of testing Man’s free will.

The difference it looks like you are alluding to is that between terrible, intentional evil, vs those acts of testing man, like in Job – where God gives a nod, not of approval, but of "see if you can destroy him, 'cause you can’t.

1. Matthew documents Satan’s attempt to tempt Jesus with the glamorous ‘rewards’ of defying God. He says he will give him all the kingdoms of the world.
2. Before Christ, in what we call the OT, there is a sense that man has an enduring soul; but this idea was not as fully developed with regard to its destiny as in the teachings of Jesus. Satan mainly gives people trouble on the earthly level of existence. He fouls up God’s plan for a harmonious earthly kingdom (still fouls it up, if you ask me). But when Jesus preached the kingdom and its glory beyond what the scriptures attested (the miracles show some of this glory), he essentially made far more sinister any attempt to lead a man into sin. He exposed the folly of sin, which can be the loss of one’s soul and joy thereof, for what it is. In mathematical terms, he exposed the flip side, negative infinity, if you will. This “number” was far greater than ever imagined; and in Jesus’ theology is tantamount to complete annihilation of being. Therefore, anyone who urges action toward that end must be totally and inherently corrupt, evil, and an agent of the most maliciouos kind. Since hell is permanent in his teaching, God doesn’t (or possibly can’t???) reverse things like he did in Job’s case. There is no longer any reversal of fortune once you find yourself in hell. (Dante, the famous poet; also a man who knew life in exile; attempted to rectify this reality by scaling hell into imagined circles, with the outermost rim looking somewhat livable, but till exiled from God. Obviously, he is not scripture.)

 

[Aelred_Minor]

The four Gospels seem to take for granted the idea of Satan, and of the demons in general, as evil enemies of God. I would therefore suggest perhaps the current Jewish and current Christian interpretations are alternate takes on the somewhat more vague or variable beliefs of early first century Jews on this subject. Of course I believe the Christian interpretation is the correct one. God and his obedient angels do not tempt anyone.

The Jewish interpretation could perhaps be incorporated into the wider view in which God allows evil in order to bring about a greater good, and so even the rebellion of Satan ultimately works out in the plan of God to accomplish something good. But to regard the demons as servants of God for this reason would obscure the fact of their personal rebellion and of God’s detesting evil as such.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Yeah… Jesus and the Apostles were Jewish I thought. Hebrew Jews more exactly.

The priestly Jews of the Old Testament seem more akin the Catholic and Orthodox priests today - with alters and presiding over the sacrifice of the Mass - than the Jewish Rabbis of today to me. Or maybe I just don’t know enough [shrugs] .

Today’s Jewish rabbis are the successors so to speak of the Pharisees of Jesus time, who were already called rabbis even back then. Jesus seems to confirm that the Pharisees had real authority at that time when he speaks of them having taken their place on the seat of Moses and tells people to observe their teachings. Perhaps they might best be considered the first century AD equivalent of the judges Moses set up, as opposed to Aaron and his sons who were the priests. After the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem the kohenim (priests) of Judaism have had very little to do (and nothing outside of Orthodox Judaism I think) but they still exist, a hereditary status entirely separate from the rabbis.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

From Judaism… Just not modern Rabbinic Judaism…More like Temple Judaism

I’m confused by this distinction between Rabbinic Judaism and “Temple Judaism”. In the first century the Temple was dominated by Sadducees for the most part, whose beliefs were much farther from our own than those of the Pharisees for the most part. Meanwhile all kinds of Jews worshiped in the Temple, except a few small breakaway sects like at least some of the Essenes.

 

[Wandile]

I’m confused by this distinction between Rabbinic Judaism and “Temple Judaism”. In the first century the Temple was dominated by Sadducees for the most part, whose beliefs were much farther from our own than those of the Pharisees for the most part. Meanwhile all kinds of Jews worshiped in the Temple, except a few small breakaway sects like at least some of the Essenes.

The temple was dominated by the Sadducees but the Pharisees had a far greater influence on the population. The Sadducees were supported by the richer aristocracy who were in the supreme minority, whilst the poor. , who were the majority, found favour with the party of the Pharisees. Hence many times the Sadducees allowed pharisaic practices in the temple and pharisaic teaching.
The New Testament even accounts for the fear that the Sadducees had of the Pharisees
due to their influence.
Notice also that ,although the Sadducees had comprised most of the temple priesthood, Jesus said the Pharisees hold the seat of Moses.

Since ,for the most part, the jewish people of the time followed pharisaic Judaism, they believed in demons , Satan, God and the angels much like Christians do. As evident in the New Testament when the Pharisees accuse Jesus of being Beelzebub and working with the power of demons to gain control of demons (exorcism). Jesus as we know proved to them how nonsensical this reasoning was

In simple :

Modern Rabbinic Judaism (successors of the Pharisees) has since dropped the belief in demons that Temple Judaism (which was dominated by pharisaic theology) had.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

The temple was dominated by the Sadducees but the Pharisees had a far greater influence on the population. The Sadducees were supported by the richer aristocracy who were in the supreme minority, whilst the poor. , who were the majority, found favour with the party of the Pharisees. Hence many times the Sadducees allowed pharisaic practices in the temple and pharisaic teaching.
The New Testament even accounts for the fear that the Sadducees had of the Pharisees
due to their influence.
Notice also that ,although the Sadducees had comprised most of the temple priesthood, Jesus said the Pharisees hold the seat of Moses.

Since ,for the most part, the jewish people of the time followed pharisaic Judaism, they believed in demons , Satan, God and the angels much like Christians do. As evident in the New Testament when the Pharisees accuse Jesus of being Beelzebub and working with the power of demons to gain control of demons (exorcism). Jesus as we know proved to them how nonsensical this reasoning was

In simple :

Modern Rabbinic Judaism (successors of the Pharisees) has since dropped the belief in demons that Temple Judaism (which was dominated by pharisaic theology) had.

I see what you mean. You are using the term “Temple Judaism” to mean Judaism as a whole at the time of the Second Temple, not a special kind of Judaism more associated with the Temple at that time than Pharisaic Judaism was. Now that I think about it I think I’ve heard that term before.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I realize my posts are dominating this thread, but I had another thought regarding the original question.

Once in a while you will encounter the claim that Judaism adopted the idea of demons, and perhaps Satan himself as the archenemy of God so to speak, from Zoroastrianism during the Babylonian Exile and/or the period of return under the Persians.

In Zoroastrianism you have the good deity Ahura Mazda and his servants opposed by the evil deity Angra Mainyu and his servants. This has inspired obvious comparisons to God and his angels vs. Satan and his lesser demons.

The Zoroastrian mythology is ultimately just one example of the common theme of rival sets of deities waging war against each other in Indo-European religions. Other examples would be the Devas and Asuras in Hindu mythology, the primeval fight between the first Olympian gods and the Titans in Greek mythology, and the various wars between the Aesir, Vanir, and Jotnar in Norse mythology. It’s unclear to what degree similarities between Indo-European mythologies reflect a common origin and to what degree they were independently derived. Also of course there were rivalries of various kinds in many non-Indo-European religions, such as that between Il and Ba’al Hadad for some Semitic cultures.

Anyway, a Christian (or a Jew, I assume) would not likely accept that a part of their religion was simply borrowed from a pagan religion at some point. Nevertheless God does seem to have taken culture into account in his revelations. Some stories in Genesis and elsewhere in the Bible seem to reflect earlier Semitic or Sumerian myths. The victory of God over Leviathan seems meant to co-opt or subvert the Canaanite story of Ba’al Hadad’s victory over Yam, for example, proclaiming God rather than Ba’al to be the bringer of order out of chaos. It may be then that God chose a time when the Jews were in contact with a people with this kind of dualistic mythology to introduce the idea of demons in a serious way. Or maybe even the idea providentially entered Jewish culture through folklore influenced by Zoroastrianism and perhaps later by Greek mythology/religion, and was then purified and supplemented through further revelation.

The theme of conflict between different orders of spiritual beings would have also, of course, have appealed to the minds of converts from Persian, Greco-Roman, or Germanic cultures for example, but this does not mean it’s any kind of organic continuation of those mythologies.

In any case, I think comparisons are often overblown, ignoring the infinite difference between God and Satan in Christian thought which makes the “rivalry” between them extremely different from those found in Indo-European religions.

 

[meltzerboy]

The four Gospels seem to take for granted the idea of Satan, and of the demons in general, as evil enemies of God. I would therefore suggest perhaps the current Jewish and current Christian interpretations are alternate takes on the somewhat more vague or variable beliefs of early first century Jews on this subject. Of course I believe the Christian interpretation is the correct one. God and his obedient angels do not tempt anyone.

The Jewish interpretation could perhaps be incorporated into the wider view in which God allows evil in order to bring about a greater good, and so even the rebellion of Satan ultimately works out in the plan of God to accomplish something good. But to regard the demons as servants of God for this reason would obscure the fact of their personal rebellion and of God’s detesting evil as such.

Here is another difference between Judaism and Christianity, which is related to the difference regarding Satan. Judaism does not believe in the rebellion of angels against G-d because it does not believe that angels–including Lucifer, become Satan–have free will. The Jewish teaching is only humans have free will, not the angels nor the beasts, and that the free will granted by G-d to humans places them in a “higher” or, at least, different category compared to the angels, who cannot be tempted by sin.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Here is another difference between Judaism and Christianity, which is related to the difference regarding Satan. Judaism does not believe in the rebellion of angels against G-d because it does not believe that angels–including Lucifer, become Satan–have free will. The Jewish teaching is only humans have free will, not the angels nor the beasts, and that the free will granted by G-d to humans places them in a “higher” or, at least, different category compared to the angels, who cannot be tempted by sin.

Really? That I was not aware of. I know Muslims believe something similar about angels, while their equivalent of demons are evil jinn, which do have free will.

I suppose if you believe the angels don’t have free will it follows logically that whatever Satan is doing must have been set in motion by God. Or conversely if you believe all the angels are 100% faithful to God it follows intuitively (though not necessarily) that they probably don’t have free wills.

Are angels conceived of as personal, rational creatures in Rabbinic Judaism? If so, is there any explanation for why God would not grant them free will?

 

[Michael19682]

Here is another difference between Judaism and Christianity, which is related to the difference regarding Satan. Judaism does not believe in the rebellion of angels against G-d because it does not believe that angels–including Lucifer, become Satan–have free will. The Jewish teaching is only humans have free will, not the angels nor the beasts, and that the free will granted by G-d to humans places them in a “higher” or, at least, different category compared to the angels, who cannot be tempted by sin.

Can’t be ‘tempted’, but can they ‘commit’ sin?

 

[ApologiaSophia]

Ive never heard of Sadducees referred to as Temple Jews before. Second Temple Judaism refers to the period, not a sect. Also, i learned that some Orthodox Jews do have some kind of belief in demons. There are references to demons in the Talmud and apparently there’s is a elaborate demonology in Kabbalah.

 

[meltzerboy]

Ive never heard of Sadducees referred to as Temple Jews before. Second Temple Judaism refers to the period, not a sect. Also, i learned that some Orthodox Jews do have some kind of belief in demons. There are references to demons in the Talmud and apparently there’s is a elaborate demonology in Kabbalah.

Yes, demons do appear in Jewish folklore and the mystical Kabbalah. However, the latter work does not constitute official Jewish doctrine although it is used by some Orthodox Jews to interpret the Torah. Demons are not the same as Satan, and belief in either is not essential to Judaism. The idea that there is a supernatural being who, with respect to power, may rival G-d rather than do His bidding is considered close to idolatry in Judaism.

 

[ApologiaSophia]

Yes, demons do appear in Jewish folklore and the mystical Kabbalah. However, the latter work does not constitute official Jewish doctrine although it is used by some Orthodox Jews to interpret the Torah. Demons are not the same as Satan, and belief in either is not essential to Judaism. The idea that there is a supernatural being who, with respect to power, may rival G-d rather than do His bidding is considered close to idolatry in Judaism.

I understand, but in Hebrew the word Satan means “adversary” so its not exactly inaccurate. I also just want to state that the Christian view of Satan is not that He rivals God in power, though he opposes Him (thus adversary). There are a number of Christians (usually of the liberal sort, but not always) do not actually believe in literal demons or demons as actual beings. I agree though, orthodox Christians “should” have a literal understanding of demons.