Speak of the Devil

[TheLuckyOne]

Welcome, fellow enlightened thinkers! Before we start, let's preface what this thread is NOT about, because the old axiom about never discussing politics or religion with friends is not entirely without merit. So, to clarify- this thread is not a license to proselytize, nor an excuse to put down the religious beliefs of other. Rather, it's an attempt to discuss one particular aspect of religion, an aspect people tend to be slightly less defensive about than discussions of the Big Guy Himself... namely (in keeping with the spirit of the season... and sure, you can argue it's past midnight and Halloween is officially over, but since I worked 8 hours at my regular job and then 6 more clerkin', thus missing out on the entire day, screw you, it's over when I say it's over and not one damn second before) His opposite number. So let's all try very hard to keep things civil and respectful, even as individual beliefs differ. Otherwise I'll sacrifice a goat to bring down the Wrath of Justin, and oh, woe betide ye then.

So... Satan. The Evil One. Ol' Scratch. Perhaps due to a human tendency to sympathize with the underdog (I mean, taking on God?! Sure, sounds like a winner...), by far the most interesting character in Milton's Paradise Lost. So fascinating and popular in Neil Gaiman's Sandman that the character was spun off into his own ongoing (and quite awesome) series. Yet interestingly, polls indicate that a number of people who claim to believe in God don't believe in Satan or any kind of devil or hell. Interesting, but maybe not surprising- perhaps because of his non-divine nature, in contrast to God, the nature of Satan has been fairly mutable over centuries of religious belief.

Thanks to Milton and others, most of us today are familiar with the concept that Lucifer Morningstar, first and brightest of all angels, eventually led a rebellion against God and was cast down into Hell with the other fallen angels, being given a monstrous form and renamed Satan- meaning, literally, "Adversary." He is associated with the serpent in the Garden of Eden and is depicted as the enemy of God. But as mentioned, the concept of Satan has changed a lot over the years, combining and splitting off from multiple other entities. Until Milton, the serpent was presented as an autonomous tempter in the Garden, not as Satan himself. Likewise, Lucifer ("Lightbringer") was for a time thought to be a beautiful angel cast down after the rebellion, but was entirely independent of Satan, the main adversary. And in some Hebrew texts, Satan is not an enemy at all but a loyal servant of God, assigned to try to lead mankind astray in order to force us to exercise free will... sort of a cosmic prosecutor in God's court.

Plus, lots of the imagery we associate with Satan -- the seven-headed dragon, the Mark of the Beast (666) -- was most likely references to Romans at the time of the New Testament's writing, rather than truly divinely inspired. Likewise, visions of Hell itself have altered drastically throughout history- from the Jewish "Sheol," an afterlife of more loneliness and boredom than outright suffering, to Dante's famous version of Hell (complete with 9 circles, purgatory, limbo for the virtuous pagans, and Cocytus, the lake of ice in the center with Satan embedded in it waist-deep).

I'm realizing I don't really have a point to all this, other than just expressing curiosity about what other people believe about the whole concept of "the Devil." While I hold fairly firm beliefs about the nature of God, I find that my concept of Satan is a lot more fluid, and I'm curious about what everybody else thinks. Any takers?

Lucifer: "Still. 'Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven.' Eh, little brother-killer?"
Cain: "Suh- certainly, Lord Lucifer. Whatever you say, Lord Lucifer."
Lucifer: "We didn't say it. Milton said it. And he was blind."

Verbal Kint: "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

-D

[Head Mutant]

My first thought about all this -- and it is an interesting topic -- is that people in general typically follow one of two approaches when it comes to dealing with Satan and hell:

1. Osterich head in the sand; rather ignore it than face the possibility.

2. Wrap Satan up into pop culture and belittle his stature by giving him a comical appearance, obvious faults, and very little power -- like the South Park Satan, or Faust, or what have you.

And the follow-up thought to that is:

It's always so interesting that we as people are more easily able to envision, imagine and create scenes of hell and Satan more than we can of God and heaven -- almost like we're intimately familiar (or even drawn to) with the worst of the supernatural than the best. Heck, everyone knows Dante's Inferno, but he lost a lot of readers once you moved on to Purgatory and Paradise.

I think one of the best portrayals of Satan in a movie was Al Pacino in Devil's Advocate. He's spot on as a very Biblical devil: father of lies, an adversary of good, eager to see souls join him than to be redeemed.

But yes, Drew, you made a good point on behalf of most people who even believe in God -- that Satan is a lot more of a murky force. My personal beliefs is that he truly wishes it that way ("the greatest trick" and whatnot). Having studied the Bible quite a bit, the scriptures aren't murky at all when it comes to painting a picture of a very literal, very real Satan, who isn't the cause of all that is bad, but is a definite force working to corrupt God's creation. Jesus deals with him directly, on more than one occasion; Jesus also spends quite a bit of time spreading the word that there is a hell and a real enemy of those who love God (quick Bible fact: Jesus spoke more on hell than he did on heaven).

Depending on the religion, Satan can be real, a vague threat, or non-existent (same with hell). For some religions, Satan -- or something similar -- is necessary as a focal point to visualize pure evil in some form. Although Satan is referenced numerous times in the Old Testament, Jews typically look to see him as a figurative reference; whereas Muslims almost believe in a real Satan more than most Christians.

In pop culture, Satan usually appears just so the characters can reference the stale "God and Satan made a wager for all of manknid" bit, like they're two old war buddies making a bar bet and seeing how things turn out.

It is true that most of our perception of Satan comes more from Catholic tradition, mythology and other various literary works than any background that's presented in the Bible. Sometimes he's painted in a sympathetic light -- one of the guys, someone like us who made a little mistake and he's been spanked for it ever since, or someone who shares our rebellious spirit against a holy God and is, as you say, the underdog.

It's interesting that although Satan can appear in movies (usually in human form) quite often, in those same movies God isn't usually around for a counterpoint (The Prophecy, etc.).

I have some notes from my Reformation Study Bible that I liked... just for thought-chewing, not for sermonizing:

"The picture [of Satan] is one of unimaginable malice, fury and cruelty directed against God, against God's truth and against those to whom God has extended his saving love... Despite the fact that we do not know a great deal about Satan, the Scriptures caution us to take his opposition seriously, to note his strategies, and to keep in mind that we are at war with him. We know that Satan is deceptive and cunning... His destructive ferocity comes out in the descriptions of him as a roaring, devouring lion and as a dragon. As he was Christ's sworn foe, so now he is the Christian's, always probing for weaknesses; misdirecting strengths; and undermining faith, hope and character... Satan is a creature, superior to humans for the time being but not divine; he has much knowledge and power but he is not omniscient, omnipotent or omnipresent."

Nasty fellow; wouldn't want to meet him in a dark alley.

[Magill]

I was taught Satan meant "accuser."

admin said:

In pop culture, Satan usually appears just so the characters can reference the stale "God and Satan made a wager for all of manknid" bit, like they're two old war buddies making a bar bet and seeing how things turn out.

But don't Satan and God make a wager over Job? I just reread the beginning to make sure I had my facts straight, but the essense of it is that Satan said "Job only worships you because good things happen to him. If you take away everything he has, I bet he'll curse you." And God says, "Okay, you can do anything so long as you don't touch Job himself." Later, Satan is allowed to actually make Job ill.

This always seemed like a crappy thing to me. All of Job's children are killed just to satisfy this bet. Yes, Job has children again, but does that make up for the ones who died earlier? I know God speaks later in the book with "Where were you when I made the world, etc.?", but it always seemed really capricious. Since God and Satan do bet over Job, I can see why some people think they bet over all humanity.

[Spiderdancer]

Interestingly enough, I'm reading the book of Job right now. And that's a complaint lots of people have with this book. The book itself is about God's sovereignty versus our need to know - to whit, he is, and we don't. In fact, the "Why does he..." or "How can he let...happen" argument is a very popular one throughout history and certainly the present day is no exception. (I even read it in fairly long detail in a recent Batman graphic novel called "Absolution.")

I've always found it interesting that people have such a clear idea of what demons and Satan should LOOK like, given that the Bible never describes them. Where do the horns/wings/hooves descriptions come from? It can't JUST be ALL from the god Pan. I mean, scripture DOES describe Lucifer as an angel of light, and there is never any change in that description other than those which are obviously metaphorical (the dragon in Revelation).

This is actually sort of why I wrote my "Apocalypse" article - I'm fascinated by the 20/21st century idea that God is so weak he lets Keanu Reeves do all his work, and Satan is so weak he can easily be defeated by ditto.

[Head Mutant]

magill said:

But don't Satan and God make a wager over Job? I just reread the beginning to make sure I had my facts straight, but the essense of it is that Satan said "Job only worships you because good things happen to him. If you take away everything he has, I bet he'll curse you." And God says, "Okay, you can do anything so long as you don't touch Job himself." Later, Satan is allowed to actually make Job ill.

This always seemed like a crappy thing to me. All of Job's children are killed just to satisfy this bet. Yes, Job has children again, but does that make up for the ones who died earlier? I know God speaks later in the book with "Where were you when I made the world, etc.?", but it always seemed really capricious. Since God and Satan do bet over Job, I can see why some people think they bet over all humanity.

Well, as per Drew's request, I'm trying not to go off-topic or go into in-depth sermons here. I will say that the account of Job is often (mistakenly) understood as you put it -- some sort of sick wager between God and Satan using the misery of a guy for the game. The key to understanding Job is that it is not Job who's on trial, but God. Satan comes to accuse Job, yes, but in such a way to undermine God's sovereignty and honor -- there's no real bet here, just Satan saying "Well, of COURSE people will follow you if you're giving them the good life, they have no real faith in you" and God responding, "No, my faithful children love me with a real, testable faith". Job is likewise chosen by God to be tested of his love and devotion for God; God does not will or wish for Job to be put in harm's way, but he allows it because (a) it's a corrupt, sinful world that affects all of his creation according to the rules of free will, and (b) Job's test will end in vindication for both Job's faith and God's authority.

The finale of the book is God effectively trying to tell Job that while being tested, Job might not have been able to see what God was trying to do, but in the end God created good from the evil that Satan whipped up, and Job's faith ended up strengthening far more. Yes, it's horrible that Satan killed Job's family members, but keep in mind that it was Satan who did so, and although God could've stopped it, it would've won Satan's argument (that God knows that Job would fold if his family was killed). It is hard, it is seemingly harsh, but there's a loving God hard at work in this book to bring redemption out of the evil that Satan causes. Not to mention that Job has become essential reading for God's followers who are going through their own tests and misery -- they want to know where God is, they need to know that they are under very real attack, and they need to trust in God's ultimate sovereignty.

A few years ago I was going through an extremely rough time and was about at a breaking point. I read through the first couple chapters of Job, looking for a comrade to share in misery, and it just popped out at me that Job's first, immediate response to Satan's attacks is to fall on his knees and worship God. That verse got me in tears the way few others ever have.

Back to Satan, we see a figure who is not merely interested in scoring some sort of point on God, but to destroy God and hurt his creation. Satan has the same intelligent, mocking attitude that he used when he confronted Jesus in the desert, eager to see God trip up as he had. Job might not've known what was going on that brough this about, but his vibrant faith spits in the eye of Satan again and again, holding tight to God and entrusting that God had a greater purpose, a greater good that could be brought out of his misery.

Anyway, enough of Job... I really don't want to derail the topic, because it's fascinating in and of itself. Santa = Satan. There ya go.

[Big T]

I think the main reason Satan is proteyed as a big evil guy with horns or even as a human person period is that it is far easier too resist evil and temptation when it is personified. It is a lot easier to fight something when you can see it and study it. Of course it also serves to scare people away from doing bad things since the devil is a pretty scary looking guy when seen in his "true form", of course hell also serves this purpose.

As far as what I think on this subject; Satan is just a representation of all the bad feelings and desires and actions that reside in every single person. I don't think Satan is and actual being hanging out in fiery pit of doom but more a result of our free will, "Satan" is in everyone because everyone is, at one point or another, tempted to do something wrong. Thankfully, there are always the other forces (God, conscience, the little angel on your shoulder, whatever you want to call it) that "does battle" with the little devil inside of us.

And I'd say my favorite depiction of the devil in film would have to be Peter Stormare in Constantine. A grimy, filthy man in a sparkling white suit, so cool.

[TheLuckyOne]

Some very interesting thoughts so far, exactly what I was hoping for from this thread... keep 'em coming, everyone!

I'm noticing that there are two main... call them camps, I suppose, in terms of how the Devil tends to be portrayed in different mediums in modern times. The first is, as Justin so well described, the Satan we're presented with in the Bible- foul, destructive, cruel, completely irredeemable and irreversibly evil. Dedicated to gathering souls about him and making everyone else as miserable as he is. This is the Satan of Devil's Advocate, of Rosemary's Baby, of The Exorcist... for comic fans, it's the Satan of Hellblazer and Preacher. He is the far more scripturally-accurate Satan.

(On an interesting sidenote, an early Christian thinker, Origen, postulated that Jesus died for not just our sins but those of the damned as well, and so at the Last Judgment, even Satan will be allowed to return to Heaven... a theory that saw him posthumously excommunicated and pronounced damned himself by Church officials a century later. Whoops!)

And then we have the other camp, where dwells the romanticized, more-misunderstood-than-evil Satan. This is the Satan of Paradise Lost, whose sin was pride in not accepting the creation of Man. It is Neil Gaiman's Lucifer, a fascinating creature who is not so much evil as bored and entirely apathetic. Monstrously egotistical, quite arrogant, but also extremely clever and witty, and absolutely amoral. His evil lies in that he will not lift a finger to help someone unless there's a gain in it for him; but at the same time, nor will he consciously attempt to destroy someone unless, again, he himself will benefit from it. Some of his actions would even seem benevolent (making his own universe outside of Creation and allowing people in it total freedom to do whatever they wish, etc.), but the critical element is that none of it is out of any kind of actual desire to do good- it's all to spite God, just a less direct, less actively "evil" manner of doing so than his more stereotypical portrayal. Nonetheless, people tend to identify with the "misunderstood loner" James Dean-esque aspect of this portrayal, and perhaps even admire the fallen nobility aspect a bit.

"They come to our palace and say, 'We have battled: there will be a coalition.' We say, very well. And they oust each other, and destroy each other, and it matters not. Or they say, 'Lucifer, you are deposed, you are no longer king of Hell,' as if merely saying something were enough to make it true. They believe themselves Lucifer's equals, Cain, all these pitiful little gnats. But there is only one that we have ever owned to be our superior. There is but one greater than us. And to him... to him we no longer speak."

More and more, it seems to me that most portrayals of the Devil fall into one of those two camps. And I realize I'm getting philosophical as all hell and probably just need some sleep, but do you think we need both of those portrayals, as a people, to feel better about ourselves? Does our guilty side need to feel like there's someone tempting us, someone leading us astray (again, not making any judgments on whether there is or isn't such a being, just questioning whether we need to feel like there is), like there's a natural balance to God's good? And does our hopeful, optimistic side need to feel like no one is beyond redemption, that there's good in everyone, even the Devil himself? Do certain parts of our minds feel the need to accept, to some extent or another, both of these portrayals? And do I need to lay off the late-night pizza or what?

"Why do they blame me for all their little failings? They use my name as if I spend my entire day sitting on their shoulders, forcing them to commit acts they would otherwise find repulsive. 'The Devil made me do it.' I have never made one of them do anything. Never. They live their own tiny lives. I do not live their lives for them.

"And then they die, and they come here (having transgressed against what they believed to be right), and expect us to fulfill their desire for pain and retribution. I don't make them come here. They talk of me going around and buying souls, like a fishwife come market day, never stopping to ask themselves why. I need no souls. And how can anyone own a soul? No. They belong to themselves... they just hate to have to face up to it."

Okay, without wanting to halt discussion on the present topic, let me add a slight off-shoot: the reason for the Devil's rebellion. Justin can (and should) correct me where I'm wrong here, but my memory is that the Bible doesn't go into great specifics about why he chose to rebel, aside from perhaps simply a power-hungry desire to set himself above God. But that's not enough for many writers, who have attempted to explore possible reasons in more detail and, in so doing, added a whole plethora of ideas to think about. Just off the top of my head, possible reasons for his rebellion and expulsion that we're told about include:

-Just wanted to be above God
-Loved God too much, didn't want to share Him with humans
-Refused to bow down and acknowledge superiority of humans
-Resented that angels were born into a life of adoration and (at least in his mind) servitude, while humans were given free will, ability to believe or not believe in God as they so choose

And perhaps the most noble, "misunderstood voice of reason" stance of them all, if I'm recalling correctly the viewpoint written by Anne Rice in Memnoch the Devil:

-Knew that being away from the constant presence of God (unlike angels) would inevitably lead Man to evil behavior and warfare, and felt this was unfair for us

Thoughts on this? Think long and hard- if you're of the Christian faith or were raised that way, what were you taught growing up about the reason for the rebellion and fall? What do you believe now?

"I thought I was rebelling. I thought I was defying His rule. No... I was merely fulfilling another tiny segment of His great and powerful plan. If I had not rebelled, another would have, in my stead."


.....

...Lord, I'm rambling. Okay, definitely bedtime for Bonzo, but I continue to be deeply interested in people's thoughts on this subject matter, so please share. Also, thanks for keeping it respectful, gang, please keep it up!

-D

[DTH]

Let me just add my £0.02p.

I was raised Church of England (I attended a C of E primary school, elementary for you yanks) and have had exposure to most of the major religions.

Nowadays, I have my own beliefs (which I can share if people are interested) but as this is a discussion about the devil, I won't digress here.

I am not a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Scientologist or anything like that. I do not believe in God or Gods and conversely, I don't not believe in the devil.

Drew raises Vertigo's "Lucifer" as a good reference as to why some might perceive Satan as sympathetic character.

That title actually brings forth a good argument as to why the devil does not exist, in my opinion, to whit: if God gave free will to humanity and not to angels and orchestrates everything due to His plan, then the devil must be a part of this equation.

This means that the devil is as much a part of God's Will as ecoli or icecream.

What say you?

[Head Mutant]

Again, when it comes to the Biblical Satan (which I'm more familiar with than other versions), it's important to separate the actual information given in the Bible from all of the literary imagination that's sprung up over the centuries (similar to angels, in that respect).

In 1 Timothy 3:6, it directly implies that Satan's main sin was that of pride (conceit). The main assumption of Satan's backstory typically comes from Isaiah 14:12 ("How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of dawn!"), but most biblical scholars and theologians correctly and strictly attribute this passage to the wicked King of Assyria whom Isaiah was prophecying against.

So, although the Bible doesn't spend a lot of time drawing a picture of the history of Satan, it does tell us quite a bit about his character to draw our own conclusions. Jesus said that Satan was "a murderer from the beginning... he is a liar and the father of lies." (John 8:44) He also mentioned in Luke 10:18 that "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven."

He is obviously one of God's creations, and like all angels and mankind was given the ability to choose God or to rebel against him by sinning (DTH, 2 Peter 2:4 makes a specific point about the angels having the ability to sin if they chose: "For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment..."; also read Jude 6). Many verses point out that Satan/Lucifer/"god of this age" has been given dominion over this world, ever since he tempted Adam and Eve into sinning and brought corruption into God's creation. The Bible paints the picture that this is very much Satan's world, where good has been corrupted by evil, where death and destruction are now more the normal order of things instead of life and creation. This is why Jesus' arrival, to bring about the "kingdom of God", is such a revolutionary stroke; God is effectively waging war to bring his lost people back to him, while not negating any of the free will that he's given to his children. Jesus' followers were given power and authority over Satan and his minions (Ephesians 6:10-18), and Satan has been losing the battle ever since Jesus conquered death and sin on the cross.

Revelation paints the most vivid imagry of Satan. I'd disagree with you, Drew, about mentions of Satan being more of a metaphor for the Roman empire (although the "seven kings" mentioned were almost definitely referring to the Roman emperors). Some scholars hold to that, but it is not the majority opinion. Revelation 12 shows the conflict between God and his people (the light-bearing woman) and Satan (the enormous red dragon). "The great dragon was hurled down -- that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him... Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring -- those who obey God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus" It goes on for the next few chapters -- and yes, prophecy is a tricky business to strictly interpret, so I'm just pointing out the Satan references here. In Revelation 13, Satan creates an offspring in his own image (another beast) as a way to mock God and Christ. In chapter 20, Satan is bound for 1,000 years in the Abyss, after which he is released for a short time ("to deceive the nations") and then is finally thrown into a lake of fire for all time.

I agree that to say that to take the biblical Satan as the chief, only tempter in our life ("the devil made me do it!") is a crutch and is faulty according to the Bible. Satan is presented as an opposing force that does deceive and fight against God's people, but we are not excused from our own sins and the temptations that we bring to ourselves as well -- sort of an attack from two fronts.

[Head Mutant]

Of course, we haven't mentioned Little Nicky yet... Satan is Adam Sandler!

[TheLuckyOne]

Mmm... with no offense meant to you, DTH, I'm always leery of that particular argument, as it's just (to my mind) a repackaging of the old "if God exists, why do bad things happen to good people?" quandary. If you accept that God is a force of absolute Good, and by extension the Devil an opposing force of absolute Evil, then his existence is just a proof that God wanted us to have free will to choose one over the other. The Devil can be part of God's Will intentionally, rather than a proof that God Himself can't exist. Also, that argument is predicated on the idea, as you mentioned, that angels do NOT have free will... but that's an awfully big assumption. If Satan rebelled, then by definition, they must.

I don't know, I'm always a bit leery of the major philosophical stances because they tend to have been argued over and disproved so ad nauseum that it's impossible to accept any of them anymore. I was always a big fan of the Watchmaker argument (to whit- if you're walking along a beach of completely random rocks and stones, and then happen upon a fine, perfectly functioning pocket watch -- every intricate little cog working together, every piece flawless, keeping perfect time -- your logical assumption would not be that it randomly arose like the stones around it, but that it was intentionally created... that there's a watchmaker. And the world we live in is infinitely more complex than a pocket watch), but then learned in a college philosophy course that it had been rather successfully refuted. (Though I'd be lying if I claimed I fully understand the argument against.) They're always fun to debate, I just always have a hard time fully accepting any of the major philosophy stances over all of the others, including the "if evil exists in the world, then God must have let it, so by extension He can't exist" theory.

-D

[Spiderdancer]

Yep, Adam Sandler is definitely the devil.

OK, guys, these are some REALLY long posts. But I would like to say that I think talking about philosophical refutation of a stance misses the point. People don't choose a belief system because it's philosophically sound, because any belief system in existence can be "logically" refuted at some level.

I personally wasn't "taught" stances about the Devil, other than "Read the Bible 'cause it's true," and frankly I don't care that much about his motivation. Except that, unlike many people, I don't believe he can be everywhere at once, so I think he must have to delegate a lot. Lots of discussion about Satan. Hardly any about demons.

[Head Mutant]

Or demon spiders.

Just saying.

That avatar is kinda freaking me out.

[TheLuckyOne]

spiderdancer said:

Except that, unlike many people, I don't believe he can be everywhere at once, so I think he must have to delegate a lot.

Well, sure. That's why we have apprentice devils like Wormwood, and middle-level beauraucrats like Screwtape.


-D

[Head Mutant]

And Bob from accounting.