Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The Satan: How God’s Executioner Became the Enemy

2020; Eisenbrauns; Volume: 30; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.5325/bullbiblrese.30.4.0603

2576-0998

Douglas Nykolaishen,

Archaeology and Historical Studies

In recent years, there have been a significant number of scholarly studies on the topic of Satan and evil superhuman beings as they appear in biblical and related literature. Ryan E. Stokes has made an important contribution to this body of research with his careful study of the depiction of “satan” figures in the HB, Second Temple Jewish literature, and the NT. He makes no ontological or theological claims about Satan and no assessments of the validity of the claims made in the writings he examines. He simply traces the diachronic evolution of the portrayal of figures connected with the concept of a “satan.” As the subtitle of his book suggests, he concludes that, over time, the literature transformed an erstwhile agent of Yahweh into God’s principal enemy.The book begins with an orienting foreword by John J. Collins, followed by Stokes’s preface, in which he lays out the plan of his study. Stokes first discusses the passages from the HB that mention a superhuman “satan” figure. While finding evidence of differing notions of such “satans,” he concludes that in each case they were divine executioners. He takes Job as providing the most developed depiction of a “satan” in this literature, with the novelty that this figure attacks a righteous person.Stokes then investigates the Second Temple literature, calling attention to how the writers of these texts modify and extend the portrayals they inherited. He observes that the Book of the Watchers (1 En. 1–36) depicts evil spirits and the sons of God from Gen 6 as cooperating in leading humans to worship demons, an association not found in the HB itself. Jubilees subsequently describes deceiving evil spirits as led by the Prince of Mastema (a “satan” figure), who is there characterized as using deception to punish idolatrous nations in cooperation with God’s plan, but also as opposing God’s plan for his people. The Epistle of Enoch (1 En. 91–108), although not referring directly to a “satan” figure, is understood by Stokes as representative of texts from the second century BC and later. These texts disagree with the teaching that humans are led into sin by evil superhuman beings, placing full responsibility for disobedience on humans themselves. Finally, Belial of the Dead Sea Scrolls is seen primarily as a wicked character who leads humans into sin. In the Damascus Document, he deceives Gentiles and those Jews who disagree with the Damascus sect over how to observe the torah. In the War Scroll, he is the enemy of God and of Israel. In the Treatise on the Two Spirits (1QS 3:13–4:26), the Angel of Darkness is responsible for the sins of all humankind, including those of the Sons of Light. Along the way Stokes also includes many other Second Temple texts in his discussion.In the NT, Stokes finds that writers treat the Satan as a theologically important figure who leads humans into sin and stirs opposition to Christ and the church. However, he finds evidence that some NT writers retain the idea that the Satan physically attacks sinners as God’s agent.In a brief conclusion, Stokes summarizes the process of transformation he has described throughout the book. The Satan was originally an agent of God, an executioner of those deserving death. Progressively, he came to be seen more as a troubler of the righteous than a punisher of the wicked, deceiving, testing, and opposing God’s people, and ultimately opposing God himself. The volume includes a bibliography and indexes of authors, subjects, and ancient sources.Stokes’s explanations of how the various ancient authors’ thinking developed are consistently insightful and plausible. However, a couple of factors may deserve further consideration. First, one of the innovative aspects of the book is the assertion that superhuman “satan” figures in the HB were conceived of primarily as executioners or physical attackers, rather than as accusers or adversaries. Stokes argues for this on semantic grounds. He appropriately points out that in the passage first using the term śāṭān (Num 22:22, 32), the angel of the lord has a drawn sword in his hand and tells Balaam he was prepared to kill (hrg) him. This early text appears to support the role of an executioner. Yet in v. 34, Balaam describes the angel’s purpose with the verb qr’, still implying a hostile encounter, but not necessarily carrying all the semantic freight of “executioner” (cf. Num 20:18, 20; 21:23, 33). As Stokes continues through the HB, he rightly considers the meaning of the verb śṭn. He finds several instances where the context could support the meanings “to execute” or “to attack (physically).” However, his insistence that it always has such meanings, to the exclusion of “accuser,” seems difficult to maintain in Ps 109:4, 20. Verses 2–4 focus on negative speech, and the parallelism in v. 20 seems to point in the same direction. He refers the reader to his 2014 JBL article, but many will not find the connection he makes there with Ps 71:13 decisive. Given that śṭn has traditionally been understood to denote an adversarial stance, the claim that it refers precisely to “physical attack” seems an overspecification, and this element of his argument appears less certain.Second, Stokes identifies the superhuman “satans” in the HB as “employees” of God (p. 27). The “satan” of Numbers is clearly an agent of God, but the status of the “satans” of Zechariah, Chronicles, and Job is somewhat ambiguous, and their relationship to God may be complex. Thus, both components of his characterization of the Satan in the HB as (1) God’s agent (2) to execute the wicked, may be less secure than Stokes represents them to be.Stokes has done a real service by bringing together so much information in one place and arranging it so helpfully. His presentation is certainly thought-provoking. This book will be one of the most useful to consult when studying the portrayal of “satan” figures in Jewish literature up to the first century AD.