Belief in the devil is persistent in the Bible, writes Fr Fintan Lyons OSB
The existence of evil in the world is an inescapable fact. This raises such questions as how its nature may be understood and its origin established. The issue of its nature are discussed in Chapters 1 and 2 of my book The Persistence of Evil; that of its origin will be discussed below.
As previously noted, what was traditionally a theodicy discussion has become a debate between theism and atheism, with the issue of evil itself left somewhat to one side. If atheism becomes dominant in intellectual debate, there is in fact little logical basis for discussion of evil. If theism is dominant, as in the past, then it is very much a live issue, and opposition to God, especially when evidence from Scripture is taken into account, can be envisaged as some kind of being representing evil.
For theists it is hard to ignore the existence of a created being – discussion of an uncreated one has always found to be fruitless – ‘embodying’, so to speak, evil. The presence of such a being in the world has been recognised since the era of pagan and Jewish cultures, including evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls, and has been attributed to the existence of gods and demons of various kinds at the centre of cultic life.
As there was extensive influence of pagan practices on Israel’s life and worship, there was continuous need for purification from the evil endemic to them. Old Testament writers showed familiarity with the pagan gods of the Canaanite religion and its Baal worship.
In Leviticus 17, God gives detailed instructions for Israelite worship, “so that they may no longer offer their sacrifices for goat-demons to whom they prostrate themselves” (17.7). The Book of Judges condemned Israel when it “lusted after other gods and bowed down before them” (Judg. 2.17).
Isaiah prophesied that God “will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent … and will kill the dragon that is in the sea” (Isa. 27.1), a reference to the two monsters guarding the Ugaritic shrine of Baal, Tnn (the dragon) and Ltn (Leviathan), the serpent with seven heads.
The evil forces thus described ranged from gods to beasts, with no sense of personal existence. In the Psalms, apart from frequent reference to local enemies, there is also the presence of “the pestilence that stalks in darkness or the destruction that wastes at noonday” (Ps. 91.6), a reference, it seems, to natural evils, though underlying it there may be reference to the Mesopotamian demon-god Pazuzu, who controlled the west and south-west winds, which brought famine and malaria during the dry season and, in the rainy season, storms and locusts.
It is worth noting that the prayer book of the Hebrews, the Psalter, contains only one specific reference to demons, while there are eight or nine (depending on the translation) psalms containing references to angels.
Satan in the Old Testament
These forces lack personal characteristics, and it is difficult to give a chronology of the references in the mid-sixth-century texts to a spirit that came to be called a satan (a common not a proper name), with the meaning of an accuser or prosecutor.
Originally, it could be used of humans as well as of spirits. Its earliest use for a spirit occurs in the Book of Numbers (22.32) where the angel or messenger said he had come out as an ‘adversary’ against Balaam because his way was perverse. It could therefore date from the early settlement in Canaan.
One author claims that “it can be argued that the full-blown concept of Satan had already appeared in the Second Temple period prior to the rise of apocalypticism”, when Satan came to be presented in the context of a future final struggle. There is evidence in that Second Temple period of the activities of spirits predating the later identification of the Satan of the New Testament.
For example, from the time of Saul in 1 Samuel to Ahab in 1 Kings there are references to spirits with an evil purpose. In 1 Samuel (19.9) “an evil spirit from the Lord” came upon Saul and he endeavoured to kill David. In 1 Kgs 22.19-22, the prophet Micaiah had a vision of heaven. He saw the Lord seated on his throne with the hosts of heaven standing beside him to the right and to the left of him.
I will go out and be a lying sprit in the mouth of all his prophets”
“And the Lord said: ‘Who will entice Ahab so that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead?’. Then one said one thing and another said another, until a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying: ‘I will entice him’. ‘How?’ the Lord asked him. He replied, ‘I will go out and be a lying sprit in the mouth of all his prophets’. And the Lord said: ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do it’.”
In the early strata of the biblical texts and in the story of Ahab and later, God is responsible for both the good and the bad things that happen to humans. In Deut. 32.39, God says: “See now that I, even I, am he; there is no god besides me. I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and no one can deliver from my hand.”
Infidelities
In the Psalms, Israel acknowledges God’s goodness to his people, his justice, and his forgiveness of their infidelities. Overall, he is on their side, turning his face against their enemies, his eyes to the just, his ears to their appeal (cf. Ps. 34). But the total lordship of God goes beyond concepts of good and evil; in his plan that they should displace other nations, they angered him when they failed to destroy the peoples as he had given command (cf. Ps. 106.32, 34).
The situation is rather different in the Book of Job, where the Lord in the end vindicates Job, even though he yields to the promptings of Satan to allow great evils to befall Job. Still, a clearer distinction between good and evil emerges, and evil now has its origin in “one of the heavenly beings”: “One day the heavenly beings came to present themselves before the Lord, and ‘Satan’ also came among them”(Job 1.6).
Originally, these heavenly beings were “sons of Elohim”, lesser divinities, but in this anthropomorphic representation of God on his throne they are God’s ministers tasked with carrying out his commands. Satan is singled out, but is nonetheless one of them, with the role of a prosecutor or accuser, the translation of the Hebrew name.
The account of creation in the Book of Genesis adds flesh, so to speak, to the character of Satan by his appearing there in the form of a serpent”
The story need not be read as assuming the tradition of the fall of some angels, as there is no account in the Old Testament of such a cataclysm. The dialogue between God and Satan reflects the anthropomorphic character of much of the narrative, though Satan’s wandering around the world takes away from the human imagery, while retaining the suggestion of personality.
The account of creation in the Book of Genesis adds flesh, so to speak, to the character of Satan by his appearing there in the form of a serpent; Milton’s Paradise Lost will see Satan in the form of a mist entering a reptile’s body.
The incident concludes with the prediction of the future conflict between the ‘adversary’ and the human race. In Job and in Zech. 3.1-2, Satan is not presented as God’s enemy but in Wis. 2.24 he appears as the enemy of God’s plan for humankind because of envy, only to be defeated in the future by Michael and his angels in the Apocalypse (12.7).
The final combat and defeat of Satan is by the angel Michael and is not presented there as a combat with God, despite the classic statement in Milton’s Paradise Lost describing Satan as one “who durst defy the omnipotent to arms”.
Christian culture added a profile or ‘history’ to this figure by regarding it as part of the creation process, the creation of non-corporeal or pure spirits, some of whom by the exercise of free will sinned against God through pride and disobedience.
This belief in the origin of Satan and of evil became part of the mainstream of Christian tradition, through relying on some references in Scripture that in fact give little support in relation to the origin of Satan.
The devil in the New Testament and New Testament times
In the Old Testament, Satan had already been seen as God’s enemy, and consequently appears in the New as the enemy of Christ and subsequently of the members of the Ephesian community who have to “stand against the wiles of the devil” (6.11). The Church Father, Irenaeus (202AD), quoted Justin Martyr (160AD) to the effect that before the advent of Christ, Satan did not dare to blaspheme God as he did not know of his own condemnation, because it was concealed in “parables and allegories”, but he learned clearly from the words of Christ and his apostles that eternal fire had been prepared for him.
The term ‘devil’ is a Latinised version of the Greek, ho diabolos, used in the Greek version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, to translate Satan wherever it occurred in the Hebrew text”
Hence, if any other explanation were needed, the adversarial nature of all references to Satan in the Gospels is clear. Mark, in the earliest of the Gospel texts, gives an account of Jesus’ baptism and goes on to speak of his temptation by the devil. This is the first naming of Satan as the devil and includes the forceful words that Jesus was ‘driven’ by the devil into the desert.
The term ‘devil’ is a Latinised version of the Greek, ho diabolos, used in the Greek version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, to translate Satan wherever it occurred in the Hebrew text, for example in the Book of Job. In Wis. 2.24, a book not found in the Hebrew, it says that “through the devil’s envy death entered the world”, a possible reference to the serpent of Gen. 3.1-5.
Opposition
Having arrived in the New Testament text, the name devil will continue to be used to describe the opposition to Jesus, and will be used by Jesus himself to name opposition to him. In Mark’s text, the temptation is presented simply as a fact, unlike the accounts of a triple temptation by the other two Synoptic Gospels, Matthew and Luke. These latter provide a lively dialogue between the tempter and Jesus, though what source or sources there could be for such details cannot be established, except perhaps by analogy with Israel’s forty years in the desert, especially as all three of Jesus’ quotations are from Deuteronomy.
Commentators generally hold that the text was taken from the hypothetical document Q, on which Matthew and Luke, but not Mark, are said to have relied. There were however, literary parallels in some writings of the time. The exegete Raymond Brown suggested that, though they preceded John’s text:
“the parallels between the scene of the three temptation in Mt-Lk and … individual passages of Jn 6-7 are interesting. They raise the question of whether or not the Mt-Lk common source has not filled in Mk’s vague ‘he was tempted by Satan’ with a dramatic synopsis of the type of temptations Jesus actually faced during his life.”
The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God has come near; repent and believe in the good news”
Matthew’s account ends with the devil departing from Jesus and angels coming to minister to him (4.11) before he begins his ministry in Galilee (one of the infrequent references to angels in the Gospels), while Luke’s account of the temptation concludes with “the devil left him, to return at the appointed time” (Lk. 4.1-13), namely at the start of the Passion narrative (Lk. 22.3).
At the climax of the story Luke will say that “Satan entered Judas Iscariot” to finish his work by initiating Jesus’ betrayal, arrest, torture and execution. But at the beginning, Luke has him entering on his mission filled with the power of the Spirit (4.14). Mark also records the beginning of his ministry and quotes Jesus saying, “The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God has come near; repent and believe in the good news” (1.15).
That the kingdom of God had come near meant that this was the reality within which people would live from then on, it would govern people’s lives.
Existence
“The remainder of Mark’s gospel will deal with Jesus’ announcement of this new existence, with continuing resistance and the crisis into which it places those who hear the good news. … Mark sees the exorcisms as a testimony to the authority of Jesus to announce God’s reign; the unclean spirits recognise Jesus and his intent and cry out in an attempt at self-defence.”
But as John P. Meir pointed out: “What made Jesus unusual, if not unique, was not simply his role as exorcist, but rather his integration of the roles of exorcist, moral teacher, gatherer of disciples, and eschatological prophet all into one person.”
This means that Jesus’ role as exorcist must not dominate the perception of his ministry; other aspects of his ministry include miracles that add credibility to his identity as the Messiah, for example his miraculous feeding of large crowds. However, the exorcisms bear dramatic witness to his fundamental task of defeating the power of evil in which humanity was held and have a high profile in all three Synoptic Gospels.
In the case of a man in the Capernaum synagogue who had an “unclean spirit” (Mk 1.24) and testified to Jesus’ identity as the “Holy One of God” (1.24), Jesus ordered the spirit to be quiet and come out of the man. After the temptations in the desert, which had no human witnesses, conflict with the devil, or demons – Mark uses the words interchangeably – will involve humans who are said to be possessed, and this type of incident will recur.
The term ‘holy’ in the Scriptures has implications of perfection and completeness, while ‘unclean’ indicates defect, so that the cry of the man, “What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth?” makes the opposition more pointed.
This incident, at the beginning of a Gospel deemed the earliest of the records of Jesus’ life and ministry, introduces the description of Jesus as an exorcist. It sets him apart from John the Baptist, his forerunner and from the preceding prophets, though there is evidence in the Gospels that there were other exorcists operating in the region.
When Jesus exorcises, it is not always clear whether a healing from physical or psychotic illness is in question rather than demonic possession”
His exorcisms differed from those of his contemporaries by his use of single commands, rather than repeated incantations, and cannot always be distinguished from healings, but his ministry distinguished him from other healers by the obvious miraculous nature of some healings, rather than being the exercise of a natural gift, which the human Jesus may have possessed.
When Jesus exorcises, it is not always clear whether a healing from physical or psychotic illness is in question rather than demonic possession; however, the fact that there is no instance in the Gospels of his words of command being unsuccessful, obviously because of his divinity, points to possession by a demon in some instances.
Unusual
The unusual case in Mk 8.24 of Jesus healing a blind man gradually by spitting on his eyes and putting his hands on them seems an example of the use of a power of healing. However, as the chapter continues with accounts of incidents that distinguish between the casting out of devils and healing of diseases, the cure of the blind man does fit into the general pattern of the bringing of good news, the advancement of the reign of God.
There is a broader context in which to consider Jesus’ ministry. In a society that had no hospitals, people with psychiatric illnesses – and who manifestly had no control over themselves – wandered aimlessly about and were believed to be possessed by demons. The more disruptive individuals were bound with chains, as Mk 5.4 testifies, and in that particular case the individual’s extraordinary strength points to, but from a psychiatric perspective does not prove, demonic possession.
In Judaism, the demons were regarded predominantly – but not exclusively (Mk 3.22b) as individual beings. They were named and known one by one, as the countless names for demons show”
Whatever might be true in particular instances, Jesus in his ministry did not make a distinction between what would now be recognised as mental illness and the demonic influence or possession people rightly or wrongly believed to be involved:
“In one respect, Jesus seems to have transformed contemporary ideas. In Judaism, the demons were regarded predominantly – but not exclusively (Mk 3.22b) as individual beings. They were named and known one by one, as the countless names for demons show.
Jesus, however, stressed the connection between the appearance of demons and Satan. He expressed this connection with a variety of pictures. Satan appears as a commander of a military force (Lk. 10.19) or even rules over a kingdom (Mt. 12.26); the demons are his soldiers.”
There is a dramatic example in Mk 5.1-20 of an encounter with “a man with an unclean spirit”, which Mark says occurred on “the other side of the sea, the country of the Gerasenes”. Matthew’s account of the incident describes it as occurring at a different location “on the other side of the lake … the country of the Gadarenes” (Mt. 8.28).
Difficulties
Both locations present difficulties for the narrative. The man identifies Jesus as Son of the Most High God and begs not to be tortured by Jesus, “What is your name?”, the reply comes in the singular and plural: “My name is Legion, for we are many”, and he begs Jesus not to drive him out of the district.
Jesus gives permission and the spirits migrate into a herd of pigs, which forthwith charge down a cliff and are drowned in the lake. The man is then restored to his right mind, clothed, and wishes to become a disciple. Apart from location, this incident in the Gospels of Matthew (8.28-34) and Luke (8.36-39) has other variations: it is shortened, there are two men in Matthew’s account and in Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts the local population panics and they ask Jesus to leave the area.
It is difficult in the circumstances to reach the historical core of the event, given the diverse locations, both distant from the sea, and other elements in the accounts, but “the sheer oddity of the geographical location … may reflect a singular historical event”.
“It could be that the unique connection of one of Jesus’ miracles with a particular pagan city in the Decapolis, at a good distance from the Sea of Galilee and Jesus’ customary area of activity, may have stuck in the collective memory of Jesus’ disciples precisely because of the exorcism’s venue.”
In Mark, the story follows the pattern of exorcisms performed by exorcists of that time; establishing the name of the demon was considered the critical stage as it was believed to give power to the exorcist over the demon. Here, the answer ‘Legion’ may indicate that the man believed himself possessed by many demons – ‘for we are many’; it was well known that a Roman legion consisted of 6,000 men and it was also believed demons numbered in their thousands.
The suggestion by some commentators that the man may have become deranged through being illtreated by Roman soldiers is less likely as both Gerasa and Gadara were largely Greek cities in the Decapolis and would not have considered the Roman military presence as oppressive as many Jews did.
In Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts, the naming of the demons is lacking, but there is the same request from them to be sent into the pigs. In all three, there is the highly dramatic event of the pigs suddenly rushing down into the lake and being drowned, and while commentators link this with the Jewish revulsion towards pigs, such an extraordinary occurrence would be difficult to explain as a consequence of psychiatric illness.
Explanation
It seems easier to find an explanation for the incident recorded in Mt. 17.14-20, when Jesus cured a boy from whom the disciples had failed to “cast out a demon”. The NRSV version says that the father described the boy as an epileptic, while the Greek text has “a lunatic and in a wretched state”, testifying to the belief that the moon could be responsible for mental illness.
The symptoms of the boy’s condition were in fact the same as those of an epileptic. Nevertheless, in answer to the disciples’ subsequent questioning, according to Mk 9.29, Jesus says that “this kind can only come out by prayer”.
References to the plural, demons, in the case of exorcisms – by Jesus or the disciples – seem to distinguish them from the devil, though these spirits are sometimes called devils also, for example in Mk 3.22, where Beelzebub is called “the prince of devils” or in Lk. 10.17, where the disciples say the devils are subject to them.
Jesus heals illnesses such as leprosy or fever by a touch, with no mention of a demon; even the bystanders did not associate leprosy with demonic possession”
The whole issue of number in relation to demons/devils is a puzzling one in that there is no Scriptural warrant for or against them being considered numberless. In effect, demon in the singular or plural, or devil, all indicate the same dark power of opposition to Jesus and the coming reign of God. Throughout the Gospels there are incidents where what is presented as the casting out of ‘a demon’ or ‘the devil’ may, in the light of modern psychiatric medicine, seem more likely to be a case of extreme psychiatric disorder.
Even though in the case of the boy, the text of Matthew (7.18) says that “Jesus rebuked the demon and it came out”, the case is more like others in which Jesus heals illnesses such as leprosy or fever by a touch, with no mention of a demon; even the bystanders did not associate leprosy with demonic possession.
Authority
When demonic possession was considered by the people to be the case, Jesus did not offer any other explanation, and in answer to the challenge of the Pharisees that he cast out demons by the power of Beelzebub (Mt. 12.24), he asserted his authority to exorcise demons. When he commissioned the 12 to proclaim that the kingdom was at hand, he “gave them authority over unclean spirits and power to cast them out and to cure all kinds of diseases and sickness” (Mt. 10.1).
There were occasions when he implied that people who did not show signs of demonic possession were nevertheless in some way under the influence of Satan. These charges vary in intensity; for example, the noteworthy case in which Jesus says to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan”, concludes with him saying, “the way you think is not God’s way but man’s” (Mt. 16.23).
Given the relationship of Peter to Jesus, this is very different from his saying in John’s Gospel: “Have I not chosen you, you twelve, yet one of you is a devil” (Jn 6.70). He was referring to Judas, the text says, who was going to betray him. Later in this Gospel, at the Last Supper, he says that one of the 12 will betray him. He dips a piece of bread and gives it to Judas. “At that instant, after Judas had taken the bread, Satan entered him” (Jn 13.27).
This opposition is central to John’s narrative, and causes the opponents to assert that Jesus has a demon, a charge already made when he challenged them about their descent from Abraham”
In John’s Gospel, Jesus performs no exorcisms of demons, instead he performs various kind of signs, including the healing of a paralytic (5.5-9) and the man born blind (9.1-7). Both events occurred on the Sabbath and led to his being challenged by the Jews, as John calls Jesus’ opponents (the Pharisees in the latter case).
John
This opposition is central to John’s narrative, and causes the opponents to assert that Jesus has a demon, a charge already made when he challenged them about their descent from Abraham. They replied: “Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?” The attitude towards him on the part of the people in general was divided:
“Many of them were saying: ‘He has a demon and is out of his mind. Why listen to him?’ Others were saying: ‘These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind’?” (Jn 10.2-21)
The entering of Satan into Judas, in John’s and Luke’s Gospels, accords with Jesus’ earlier saying that one of the twelve was ‘a devil’. It strikes a different note from the descriptions of Jesus’ encountering people possessed with demons in the various accounts of exorcisms throughout the Gospel story.
It could of course mean that Judas at that point cast in his lot with the devil. That possibility needs to be borne in mind in discussion today of evil in people’s lives and of reports of possession.
He never attributed natural phenomena such as a storm on the lake to demons, a belief that was in the culture and remained for many centuries”
Overall, it is clear that Jesus accepted the common belief that demons were active in the lives of the people and that he had power over them, while very often he simply healed people who were ill – sometimes at a distance – and he never attributed natural phenomena such as a storm on the lake to demons, a belief that was in the culture and remained for many centuries.
Jesus’ description of his opponents as evil (Mt. 7.11, Lk. 11.13) is a further indication that beneath malicious attitudes and actions, as well as what were in fact psychotic conditions, he shared the belief of the people that a deeper force for evil was at work in their world and it was variously named as demon or devil or Satan.
This is an excerpt from chapter 3 of The Persistence of Evil: A Cultural, Literary and Theological Analysis by Fr Fintan Lyons OSB, published by Bloomsbury.