Ask Me Help Desk - Does Satan really exist?

Does Satan really exist?

Remember the end of Genesis 2? Adam and Eve were both naked and yet felt no shame. Innocence and purity. No guilt or embarrassment. Total harmony with God and with each other. God didn’t want them to be His robots so He gave them free will. Next is Chapter 3. EVERYTHING changed and the universe opened up to endless possibilities.

According to the story, the serpent (i.e., Satan) asked Eve a simple but provocative question, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” Satan put a tiny bit of doubt in Eve’s mind -- could she really trust God?

When she responded, she embroidered God’s command a bit, “Well, God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.'” (Umm, God hadn’t actually said anything about touching the fruit – just eating it.)

When God confronted them, the blame-shifting began. Adam blame-shifted twice! — he blamed God and Eve (“The woman you put here with me — she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it”). Eve blamed the serpent (“The serpent beguiled me and I did eat”). From that day on, the tendency of humans, when confronted with their sins, is to find someone else to blame — God, Satan (“The devil made me do it!”), or some other person (“Bobby made me do it!” or “She started it!”).

Eating the forbidden fruit, an act of their own free will, was what gave Adam and Eve the knowledge of evil. Was there really a serpent (Is Satan real?) or was that merely Eve’s blame-shifting?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Eating the forbidden fruit, an act of their own free will, was what gave Adam and Eve the knowledge of evil. Was there really a serpent (Is Satan real?) or was that merely Eve’s blame-shifting?

The Adam and Eve story is one of the most well-known in the Bible with the theme of Eve's blame-shifting a common explanation of her actions. It's hard not to believe it represents a patriarchal society who generally saw women as something less than men who were confused about women. Over time, woman as mother yields to woman as temptress. Or vice-versa. That one is best left to the Freudians.

Is Satan real? A talking serpent is certainly not real, and later Satan enters the myth as an explanation of the serpent. Satan is not originally called by name probably because Satan has not yet entered the worldview of the writers, Genesis being earlier in time than the Satan character.

Satan is one of the many names of the devil which, in turn, is the representation of evil. Is Satan a person? No, but he is the personification of evil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

Satan is the representation of evil...the personification of evil.

But not an actual being, is just the name (excuse?) that humans have given to the evil (anti-goodness) inside them? Then how has Satan become such a major figure in Christianity?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

But not an actual being, is just the name (excuse?) that humans have given to the evil (anti-goodness) inside them? Then how has Satan become such a major figure in Christianity?

For the same reason any mythical figure has become a major figure. In the case of Satan, as a scapegoat or, as you put it, an excuse for the anti-goodness inside people.

What is more interesting - How does Satan get inside the Gospels testing Jesus in the desert?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

What is more interesting - How does Satan get inside the Gospels testing Jesus in the desert?

Maybe that was Jesus' human nature leaning toward the Dark Side?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Maybe that was Jesus' human nature leaning toward the Dark Side?

Or maybe it was simply a story made up to make a point.

For instance, since there were only Jesus and the tempter there, how did the writer know about it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

Or maybe it was simply a story made up to make a point.

For instance, since there were only Jesus and the tempter there, how did the writer know about it?

As you stated in your first paragraph, maybe it's simply a story, an allegory, to make a point, to teach a truth. And that could be what was intended when the story of the Fall was written, that man can be -- and too often is -- his own worst enemy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

As you stated in your first paragraph, maybe it's simply a story, an allegory, to make a point, to teach a truth. And that could be what was intended when the story of the Fall was written, that man can be -- and too often is -- his own worst enemy.

Does this suggest that the Gospel story of Jesus being tempted is not literally true?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

Does this suggest that the Gospel story of Jesus being tempted is not literally true?

Good question! Matthew 4 starts out: "1After this, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil. 2After fasting for 40 days and 40 nights, he finally became hungry."

Jesus finally got hungry after not eating for over a month??? Seems like the writer whipped up this story to make several points -- one of which was that Jesus was famished yet still refused Satan's suggestion to turn a stone into bread (which he could have done any time during those forty days).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Good question! Matthew 4 starts out: "1After this, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil. 2After fasting for 40 days and 40 nights, he finally became hungry."

Jesus finally got hungry after not eating for over a month??? Seems like the writer whipped up this story to make several points -- one of which was that Jesus was famished yet still refused Satan's suggestion to turn a stone into bread (which he could have done any time during those forty days).

Good point. I'm surprised to discover that most major Christian denominations treat this story of Jesus in the desert as literally true when it seems so clearly to be an example of making a moral comment. After all, how could Jesus see all the kingdoms of the world from the temple mount? And I never could find out who would have been there with Jesus and Satan in order to write the "true" story down. Then there's the difficulty with Satan who wasn't real to begin with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

Good point. I'm surprised to discover that most major Christian denominations treat this story of Jesus in the desert as literally true when it seems so clearly to be an example of making a moral comment.

And why would the Spirit lead Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil?! (We pray, "Lead us NOT into temptation.") Sounds like a moral story, a sort of parable, is being told.

I wonder what else, if anything, has been edited in the Gospels to conform to the belief that was current by the time of the earliest copies being available which was a few centuries later - more than enough time to make changes to suit the then powers-that-be.

The first 2 chapters of Job suggest that Satan was considered a real being well before NT times.

And his main job isn't to tempt. It's accusing and deceiving.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwashbur

The first 2 chapters of Job suggest that Satan was considered a real being well before NT times.

And his main job isn't to tempt. It's accusing and deceiving.

Not sure why you bring up those points. No one here has denied anything you wrote in your reply. As far as Satan being considered a real being well before NT times, I agree with that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwashbur

The first 2 chapters of Job suggest that Satan was considered a real being well before NT times.

And his main job isn't to tempt. It's accusing and deceiving.

I got stuck on "was considered a real being." Does that mean humans used (and still use) Satan, like Eve did, as an excuse for their own sins? -- "the devil made me do it!"

Athos,
My point in bringing that up is partly to reaffirm that the biblical writers understood Satan to be a real critter before NT times, thanks for clarifying your thoughts on that. But more important, the main thing those chapters tell us - and so does Revelation when it gets to Satan - is that this being accuses people before God and calls for...something other than what God is currently doing with them. Revelation calls him the "accuser of the brothers."
So the whole "the devil made me do it" thing is pure cop-out. That's not what the devil does.
Hope that clears it up.

WG, quite the opposite. See my reply to Athos.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwashbur

So the whole "the devil made me do it" thing is pure cop-out. That's not what the devil does.
Hope that clears it up.

WG, quite the opposite. See my reply to Athos.

WG doesn't need me to defend her, but her comment referred to what the people believe, not what the devil does. She also made a valid point of the devil as tempter in the story of Eve in the Garden.

I have more to write on your good answer above, but I'm rushed for time at the moment so it will have to wait.

Btw, I TOTALLY agree with the ideas expressed on your Facebook page.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Athos,
My point in bringing that up is partly to reaffirm that the biblical writers understood Satan to be a real critter before NT times, thanks for clarifying your thoughts on that. But more important, the main thing those chapters tell us - and so does Revelation when it gets to Satan - is that this being accuses people before God and calls for...something other than what God is currently doing with them. Revelation calls him the "accuser of the brothers."
So the whole "the devil made me do it" thing is pure cop-out. That's not what the devil does.
Hope that clears it up.

WG, quite the opposite. See my reply to Athos.

All this is well and good. But I think we're getting off the original topic here.

"DOES SATAN REALLY EXIST?"

My answer is NO. Does anyone else have a yes or no answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

"DOES SATAN REALLY EXIST?"

My answer is NO. Does anyone else have a yes or no answer?

If he exists, where did he come from? Is he like God and has always existed, the antithesis of Good, or did God create him (a fallen angel? cf. Ezekiel 28)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

If he exists, where did he come from? Is he like God and has always existed, the antithesis of Good, or did God create him (a fallen angel? cf. Ezekiel 28)?

Satan is a myth.

In Job, he acts as a prosecuting attorney. Later, the Hebrews picked up Satan from the Persians (Zoroastrianism) who developed dualism - a universe divided into good and evil. Satan becomes the personification of this evil - opposed to a good God.

Lucifer arrives as another name for the devil - primarily in the Christian world. More names are clearly mythological or literary. Dante, especially, gives life to the myth and his picture of Satan/Lucifer/devil is the modern one.

Both Satan and Lucifer have long pedigrees in several cultures - ancient and modern.

The myth is an answer to the most perplexing question in religious worldviews - the existence of evil in a world created by a loving God. The best answer, although essentially a non-answer, is in the Book of Job.

WG: Where did he come from? Here's my definitive answer based on 50 years of scholarship:

Idunno.

The Lucifer passage - which is really Latin and was never a name for anybody or anything in Isaiah's time - is about the king of Babylon, not a supernatural being. It even says it right in the context, yet we've abused it for millennia.

Ditto the Ezekiel passage. Not about Satan. The only mentions in the Hebrew Bible are in Job.

Does that make him a myth? Not really. But it does suggest that we who acknowledge his/her/its existence have been asking the wrong questions and barking up the wrong trees.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwashbur

WG: Where did he come from? Here's my definitive answer based on 50 years of scholarship:

Idunno.

The answer doesn't take 50 years of scholarship. I certainly hope you haven't spent all those years on Satan. Any library will do.

Quote:

The Lucifer passage - which is really Latin and was never a name for anybody or anything in Isaiah's time - is about the king of Babylon, not a supernatural being. It even says it right in the context, yet we've abused it for millennia.

Lucifer has been explained and discarded as follows: (by me)

Lucifer arrives as another name for the devil - primarily in the Christian world. More names are clearly mythological or literary. Dante, especially, gives life to the myth and his picture of Satan/Lucifer/devil is the modern one.

Quote:

The only mentions in the Hebrew Bible are in Job. Does that make him a myth? Not really.

Yes, really. I respect your opinion, but I must disagree. A story with a God talking to Satan about the faith of Job is clearly a myth. It is intended to teach a lesson. We can argue about the lesson, but not about the story's mythological nature. I understand you approach it from an unquestioning belief basis, but that's not enough to declare that it is NOT a myth.

Quote:

But it does suggest that we who acknowledge his/her/its existence have been asking the wrong questions and barking up the wrong trees.

I don't understand your meaning. Could you expand on the "wrong questions" and "barking up the wrong trees".

Thank you for responding. I'm a few days behind in replying (yes, I know you addressed your reply to WG - but this is an open forum). I had given you up for no longer interested. Or something worse - perish the thought. Your input is always welcome and I hope you won't take so long to reply again.

I'm still thinking that, once we realized we have free will and the power to make choices, we decided we really didn't want the guilt and shame that came after making a BAD choice. Not wanting to blame ourselves, we decided to blame it on the "other". That other might be another human or the cat (never the dog!) or the neighbor or a stranger -- or hey! Satan! "The devil made me do it!"

And that's where Satan came from, our effort to soothe our own guilty consciences.

Hi Athos,
Sorry about that. My wife has been pretty ill with chronic pericarditis. She has had it for over a year and doctors can't figure out what's causing it. She has to be on an experimental drug as part of a research study and it's the only way she gets to have a life. I often get a little focused on her and my videos to the exclusion of all else. Me, I'm as fat and sassy as ever (literal on both points).

I get what you and WG are saying, but I can't go there. I do agree that we like to blame the devil for a lot of our own screw-ups, and that was what I meant by asking the wrong questions and barking up the wrong tree.

The Bible never says that the devil made anybody do anything. The reason the name/title means "adversary" is because according to both Job and Revelation, his thing is accusing, not tempting or messing with. When James says to resist the devil, we have to take that in the context of everything else. When he accuses me of something, my resistance is "Jesus covered that" and the accusations cease. For now.

That's the short version.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Hi Athos,
Sorry about that. My wife has been pretty ill with chronic pericarditis. She has had it for over a year and doctors can't figure out what's causing it. She has to be on an experimental drug as part of a research study and it's the only way she gets to have a life.

No apology necessary. The illness of your wife dwarfs anything going on at this website/thread. The apology is all mine for insisting you spend time here engaging in the dialogue. It was done out of respect for your expertise in Christianity and your scholarship, but I now see that my request was wholly inappropriate, and whatever time you have to spend here is totally acceptable to me.

I will pray that your wife responds favorably to the experimental medical treatment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

I do agree that we like to blame the devil for a lot of our own screw-ups, and that was what I meant by asking the wrong questions and barking up the wrong tree.

The Bible never says that the devil made anybody do anything. The reason the name/title means "adversary" is because according to both Job and Revelation, his thing is accusing, not tempting

Your point about the devil as adversary, not tempter, in Job and Revelation is noted. But he is described as tempting Jesus in the Gospels where he is referred to both as the devil and as Satan indicating the two are the same.

I understand your answer to the question, "Is Satan a myth?" is no, that you believe Satan is an actual entity. I find it difficult to grasp why you think so, but I won't quiz you any further on the topic so we will have to remain in disagreement on the issue.

Athos,
Yes, Satan did tempt Jesus in the wilderness. But Jesus is the only person he's ever described as tempting.
Yes, I do accept that Satan is real. Depictions of him/her/it are ridiculous in the extreme, and lead to stuff like we see in South Park. With the exception of his time with Jesus, he's essentially described as a non-corporeal being. Non-corporeal beings don't usually have horns, pointed ears, and a pitchfork.
The other myth is that Satan lives in, or rules over, hell/hades/the underworld/that place one doesn't want to go. All indications in the New Testament are that this being is right here on this planet, accusing people day and night.
I also believe demonic possession is real, mainly because I've seen it twice. I don't ever want to see it again.

YMMV, as always.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Athos,
Yes, Satan did tempt Jesus in the wilderness. But Jesus is the only person he's ever described as tempting.
Yes, I do accept that Satan is real.

All indications in the New Testament are that this being is right here on this planet, accusing people day and night.
I also believe demonic possession is real, mainly because I've seen it twice. I don't ever want to see it again. .

You surprised me with your having seen demonic possession twice. What did you see that couldn't be explained by modern psychology? The more specific, the better.

Also, you say that people are being accused day and night. How does that work, and what exactly are people being accused of?

A devil figure occurs in most of the world's religions and cultures. Do you believe that is the same Satan/devil that occurs in Christianity?

Finally, WHY do you believe in the devil? Did witnessing the demonic possession cause you to believe? If before that, why did you believe then?

Sorry all these questions, but I'm trying to understand. I'm genuinely interested.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos

I'm trying to understand. I'm genuinely interested.

I agree with you. I too am genuinely interested.

As for "this being is right here on this planet, accusing people day and night," I've read (from reliable Christian writers) that hell is here on Earth. I believe that to be true, especially now in 2020; the evidence is overwhelming.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

I agree with you. I too am genuinely interested.

As for "this being is right here on this planet, accusing people day and night," I've read (from reliable Christian writers) that hell is here on Earth. I believe that to be true, especially now in 2020; the evidence is overwhelming.

Hell is another idea that needs to be examined. But first, Satan. I look forward with an open mind to DW's responses to the questions/comment posed.

Who tempted (or "tested", if you prefer) Jesus?

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2 And after He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He [a]then became hungry. 3 And the tempter came and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”

Quote:

the evidence is overwhelming.

For hell being on earth? Are you referring to scriptural evidence?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Who tempted (or "tested", if you prefer) Jesus?

See posts 6-11, 25, and 26 where this is answered and discussed.

My point simply concerned the issue of why we should believe there was (is) a real Jesus, but then do not believe there was (is) a real devil? If there is not a devil, then it would seem that Jesus was being tested/tempted by...nothing? An idea? That doesn't seem very compelling. Even worse, he conversed with an idea?

BTW, I did look at the posts you listed and thank you for the references.

I often think that the devil, being a master at deceit and lying, determines first to convince people that there is no devil.

I was especially interested in the "overwhelming" evidence that hell is on the earth, and if any of that evidence is scriptural.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

My point simply concerned the issue of why we should believe there was (is) a real Jesus, but then do not believe there was (is) a real devil? If there is not a devil, then it would seem that Jesus was being tested/tempted by...nothing? An idea? That doesn't seem very compelling. Even worse, he conversed with an idea?

A myth is a story that can contain a real person and a fictional person in the same myth. In this story, Jesus is the real person and the devil is mythical.

Quote:

I often think that the devil, being a master at deceit and lying, determines first to convince people that there is no devil.

This is a common notion that has been around for at least 200 years.

Quote:

I was especially interested in the "overwhelming" evidence that hell is on the earth, and if any of that evidence is scriptural.

The person who posted this will have to answer you.

Quote:

A myth is a story that can contain a real person and a fictional person in the same myth. In this story, Jesus is the real person and the devil is mythical.

Except that you would need a reason to believe that. I can't imagine finding that reason in the Bible. It certainly does not refer to the devil as mythical. Even worse, a myth is basically a made up story, and in this particular instance, it would be hard to imagine the devil becoming mythical in a mere thirty or so years between the event and Matthew writing. In addition, only thirty years later, Paul rather clearly regarded him as real. "For we wanted to come to you--certainly I, Paul, did, again and again--but Satan blocked our way."

Quote:

The person who posted this will have to answer you.

Completely agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I was especially interested in the "overwhelming" evidence that hell is on the earth...

Where have you been hiding during this horrendous and hellacious year, 2020?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Even worse, a myth is basically a made up story

Please google for the definition of myth.

Please google for directions on how to simply answer a question. Maybe these folks can help. Never heard of them, but it is a help line about answering questions.

https://www.frankly.ch/en/faq.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Except that you would need a reason to believe that.{that the devil is a myth}

Some reasons -- In post # 6 I wondered how the writer knew about the story since only Jesus and the devil were there.

In post # 9, WG notes that the story has Jesus without food for 40 days, far too long for survival but clearly designed to make the devil's temptation of stone being turned into bread a part of the myth/story.

In post # 10, I ask how Jesus could have been brought to the top of the temple mount to see "all the kingdoms of the world" - another clear indication we are dealing with a myth here.

Here is post # 11 - "And why would the Spirit lead Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil?! (We pray, "Lead us NOT into temptation.") Sounds like a moral story, a sort of parable, is being told."

Quote:

It {the Bible} certainly does not refer to the devil as mythical.

There is much in the Bible that is mythical that the Bible does not say is mythical.

Quote:

Even worse, a myth is basically a made up story

Why "worse"? A myth is a story with a point. Often with a moral or lesson. Like an allegory or a parable. Jesus told many parables that are stories with a moral lesson.

Quote:

and in this particular instance, it would be hard to imagine the devil becoming mythical in a mere thirty or so years between the event and Matthew writing.

The devil did not BECOME mythical, he was mythical to begin with. What the author of Matthew intended or what Paul intended is unknown. Myths are handed down without explanation since the obvious truth in a myth is apparent to most hearing it. Over long periods of time, some myths become hardened into literal truth by later generations.

Quote:

Some reasons -- In post # 6 I wondered how the writer knew about the story since only Jesus and the devil were there.

Simple explanation. He told His disciples.

Quote:

In post # 9, WG notes that the story has Jesus without food for 40 days, far too long for survival but clearly designed to make the devil's temptation of stone being turned into bread a part of the myth/story.

And feeding thousands with a few loaves of bread is similarly impossible outside of the power of God. I don't find it hard to believe at all that the Son of God could go forty days without food.

Quote:

In post # 10, I ask how Jesus could have been brought to the top of the temple mount to see "all the kingdoms of the world" - another clear indication we are dealing with a myth here.

Refer to the answer above. If you limit the entire Bible to natural causes, you lose the entire story. What would be more difficult, seeing all the kingdoms of the world, or being raised from the dead? Do you similarly discount that story?

Quote:

Here is post # 11 - "And why would the Spirit lead Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil?! (We pray, "Lead us NOT into temptation.") Sounds like a moral story, a sort of parable, is being told."

I think that's actually a pretty good question. But then, why make up a completely false story about a fake devil and then call it a "moral story"? Wouldn't representing such a false story as true simply amount to lying?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

But then, why make up a completely false story about a fake devil and then call it a "moral story"? Wouldn't representing such a false story as true simply amount to lying?

For the same reason the Adam and Eve story was told and the Flood story, to tell a bigger truth, a bigger story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Simple explanation. He told His disciples.

What is your Scriptural evidence for that?

Quote:

I don't find it hard to believe at all that the Son of God could go forty days without food.

If your position is that the son of God can do anything to support your belief, then you should have said that in the beginning before questioning the story. It eliminates any reason for discussion.

Quote:

If you limit the entire Bible to natural causes, you lose the entire story.

No one is limiting the Bible to anything. The issue is the myth of Jesus in the desert. Seeing one story as a myth does not mean the entire Bible story is lost.

Quote:

What would be more difficult, seeing all the kingdoms of the world, or being raised from the dead? similarly discount that story?

If you wish to begin another thread about raising the dead or the Bible, you are free to do so.

Quote:

why make up a completely false story about a fake devil and then call it a "moral story"?

A myth is not a "completely false story" nor is this one about a "fake devil". It is called a moral story because it IS a moral story.

Quote:

Wouldn't representing such a false story as true simply amount to lying?

No. You don't understand what a myth is even though it's now been explained to you. Until you do, I can't help you any further on this issue. I'm sorry.