Satan as we know him today was never mentioned in the whole of the Old Testament

[StTruth]

Your "explanation" is nothing more than a denial of the scriptures, and is an opinion whose source is not from God.


JLB

How is my explanation a "denial of the scriptures" as you put it? Look at my post #39 for a summary of all my answers on teh various biblical verses. On the contrary, I think I have been FAITHFUL to the word of God. Dare I say that it's people who misread the verses or who add on to the clear meaning of the passage who are going against Scriptures?

 

[brinny]

How is my explanation a "denial of the scriptures" as you put it? Look at my post #39 for a summary of all my answers on teh various biblical verses. On the contrary, I think I have been FAITHFUL to the word of God. Dare I say that it's people who misread the verses or who add on to the clear meaning of the passage who are going against Scriptures?

You have not read the entire Old Testament.

What qualifies you to come to any definitive conclusions regarding anything in or not in the Old Testament, if you have not read it in its entirety?

 

[StTruth]

You have not read the entire Old Testament.

What qualifies you to come to any definitive conclusions regarding anything in or not in the Old Testament, if you have not read it in its entirety?

That is why I'm asking older and wiser people in CF. So far, all the verses they have come up with are verses that I've read and am familiar with. And I have shown quite clearly that they do support what I have said in the title of the OP.

 

[brinny]

That is why I'm asking older and wiser people in CF. So far, all the verses they have come up with are verses that I've read and am familiar with. And I have shown quite clearly that they do support what I have said in the title of the OP.

Older and wiser?

Wisdom comes from God only.

He and His wisdom is found in His Word.

For instance, today, the 22nd, is a timely time to read Proverbs 22.

Regarding the verses that you read and are familiar with, perhaps it is time to venture out of your comfort zone and read those verses you are not familiar with.

If you are seeking answers, THAT is where you will find them.

Amen?

 

[toLiJC]

This comes under apologetics because it's one defence of our faith that we can use against people who argue against it. One argument that I have always heard is why didn't God destroy Satan?

If I were an apologist, my reply would be simple. Satan does not exist. Nowhere in the Old Testament is Satan (as we know him today) ever mentioned. If you want to show me to be wrong, please post one verse at a time and let me deal with each. Otherwise it can lead to a lot of confusion.

My stand is simple - Satan does not exist. He is never mentioned in the OT. Satan is only mentioned in the NT but I believe it's allegorical. But that's a different topic. We'll just confine Satan to the Old Testament.

Because Satan is not even mentioned in the Old Testament, it is reasonable to say that there is no such entity as Satan. It cannot be that the OT totally failed to mention such an important character.

And those who feel inclined to insult me because of my age, I appeal to your sense of justice. If I'm wrong in my argument, show me where I'm wrong. Don't dismiss everything I say as wrong or make derogatory remarks about my age or state later in the thread that you have just discovered to your horror what my age is and you would not have stooped so low as to argue with someone my age (as someone did on another thread). I believe I can hold my ground. Let's cross swords on an even footing.

in this regard there has really been some heresy in the beliefs of some worshipers, and it is for example the fact that satan himself has been thought to be a fallen(ex-) heavenly holy angel of God, which is not quite so; satan himself is a manifestation of the "darkness", which is why he is described/represented as a "serpent" from the beginning of the scripture, as he is presented in Genesis 3 where we can't see any angel or cherub when we read the verses relative to satan, but only in the end of the chapter there is talk of some cherubim that God placed to keep the way of the "tree" of life, so in the same chapter there is talk of "serpent" and "cherubim", but it is not said that satan was an angel or cherub, moreover, God asked adam why he sinned, then He also asked the woman, eve, why she sinned, but when God turned to the "serpent" He didn't ask it why it sinned, but just cursed it, which indicates satan is not a (be)souled being, otherwise, if he was, God would spare his life as He did with adam and eve, on the other hand, it is not possible for satan to enter into and act in the world if there are no spiritual servants/workers of the unrighteousness among the humans(Romans 5:12-14), from this perspective, whenever satan acted in the world he did it through some humans committing spiritual lawlessness/wickedness even to the extent of being similar to the angels and having/exercising angelic abilities(Colossians 2:18), that is why such humans are called "angels" in the scripture, as in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6

Blessings

 

[SnowyMacie]

Personally, my understanding of Satan has become the Old Testament understanding of Satan. The most accurate way to describe it is that he acts as sort of "God's District Attorney". It is also entirely probable that Satan did rebel and was cast down to Earth, banished from Heaven, however this must fit into the timeline of Job, where there seems to be no evidence that Satan is a fallen angel. This is why even to this day, there is no concept of "the devil" in Judaism, as Satan is only a fallen angel in New Testament writing.

 

[Strong in Him]

This comes under apologetics because it's one defence of our faith that we can use against people who argue against it. One argument that I have always heard is why didn't God destroy Satan?

If I were an apologist, my reply would be simple. Satan does not exist. Nowhere in the Old Testament is Satan (as we know him today) ever mentioned. If you want to show me to be wrong, please post one verse at a time and let me deal with each. Otherwise it can lead to a lot of confusion.

My stand is simple - Satan does not exist. He is never mentioned in the OT.

He is, in Job chapters 1&2.
There may be other occasions; I'll need to do some study.

Because Satan is not even mentioned in the Old Testament, it is reasonable to say that there is no such entity as Satan. It cannot be that the OT totally failed to mention such an important character.

It didn't.
And even if it had not used the word Satan, that is not a reason to believe that he doesn't exist.

And those who feel inclined to insult me because of my age, I appeal to your sense of justice. If I'm wrong in my argument, show me where I'm wrong. Don't dismiss everything I say as wrong or make derogatory remarks about my age or state later in the thread that you have just discovered to your horror what my age is and you would not have stooped so low as to argue with someone my age

I'm not quite sure why you feel the need to keep mentioning your age - seems that either you feel insecure, or you want to show that you are capable of maturity and writing knowledgeable posts. I'm not sure it worked in the other thread.

 

[Strong in Him]

I just saw that you made two other posts quoting from Job. I have answered in post #11 why Job is totally irrelevant. It's a different Satan there - one who's an angel who's obedient to God and takes God's orders and not the Satan we know him to be today.

"Satan doesn't exist because he's not mentioned in the OT"
"Yes he is, in Job"
"Job is irrelevant; it's a different Satan."

In the Bible the devil is called Lucifer, Satan, the Accuser, the serpent, the evil one, the prince of this world and prince of darkness - it all refers to the devil. He, Lucifer, was once an angel, created by God, who rebelled against God and was thrown out of heaven. Ever since he has been trying to destroy our relationship with God. Sickness, death and destruction are from the devil. He inflicted Job and took away his children; that is what he does. Jesus called him a liar and a murderer from the beginning and that he is the thief who comes to kill and destroy.

The devil IS under God's authority - because no one is higher than God. So Satan has to ask God for permission before he wants to do anything. I find this very reassuring - no one can get one over on God or get anything past him.

 

[brinny]

Personally, my understanding of Satan has become the Old Testament understanding of Satan. The most accurate way to describe it is that he acts as sort of "God's District Attorney". It is also entirely probable that Satan did rebel and was cast down to Earth, banished from Heaven, however this must fit into the timeline of Job, where there seems to be no evidence that Satan is a fallen angel. This is why even to this day, there is no concept of "the devil" in Judaism, as Satan is only a fallen angel in New Testament writing.

Please elaborate if you don't mind, on what Jesus' view of Satan is.

Thank you kindly.

 

[StTruth]

He is, in Job chapters 1&2.
There may be other occasions; I'll need to do some study.



It didn't.
And even if it had not used the word Satan, that is not a reason to believe that he doesn't exist.

Please look at post #39. I have addressed all the verses on Satan and in post #39 I gave the post numbers where I've dealt with them. This is to avoid my having to repeat the same points over and over again.

I'm not quite sure why you feel the need to keep mentioning your age - seems that either you feel insecure, or you want to show that you are capable of maturity and writing knowledgeable posts. I'm not sure it worked in the other thread.

In the other post, someone reacted quite strongly when he claimed he just discovered my age. He said he'd never have argued with me if he had known. He behaved as if he had been deceived.

The fact that he thought I was much older is ample testimony to the maturity of my posts. But it's very unfair for someone to react in this way. If he had known my age from the start he said he would not have bothered to argue. That's not rational. In fact he was being childish.

I don't want a repeat of that on this thread. I don't want people to argue with me and when they can't take my thrust and parry, they exclaim they've just discovered my age and they're too old and respectable to argue with me.

 

[mmksparbud]

OK---you did not answer my questions, sooooo---I personally do not see the benefit of having a discussion about Satan when you do not wish to use the whole bible and just the OT. As I said, that is all Jesus had and He certainly had things to say about him and give the whole picture. To decide you're only going to believe what one part of the bible says and not another makes no sense and is not conducive to gaining a full knowledge of any subject. It seems that you are not interested in the truth about him as stated in the bible but are wanting verification of preconceived ideas. It is not the whole picture and if you ae only interested in a half picture, then I will unwatch this thread--no need to keep going on a 1/2 understanding of something.

 

[JacksBratt]

Hi and thanks for the post. In reply to both your posts, I have explained these two verses in my post #11. Thanks.

EDIT: I just saw that you made two other posts quoting from Job. I have answered in post #11 why Job is totally irrelevant. It's a different Satan there - one who's an angel who's obedient to God and takes God's orders and not the Satan we know him to be today.

I think you fail to understand that Satan is still under God's rule. He, Satan, still takes orders from God. He cannot do anything without God's allowing him to do so.

Satan is, and always will be, an angel. Is and always will be subservient to God. Did and always will follow the orders God gives him.

 

[Strong in Him]

Please look at post #39. I have addressed all the verses on Satan and in post #39 I gave the post numbers where I've dealt with them. This is to avoid my having to repeat the same points over and over again.

So you maintain that Satan is not mentioned at all in the OT, but when you find that he is, you explain those verses away or come up with other explanations for them.

In the other post, someone reacted quite strongly when he claimed he just discovered my age. He said he'd never have argued with me if he had known. He behaved as if he had been deceived.

That was the other thread, not this one.
I doubt anyone would even think about your age if you didn't keep bringing it up.

The fact that he thought I was much older is ample testimony to the maturity of my posts.

It's not so mature to keep going on about how mature you are. It suggests the opposite - that you feel paranoid about being thought of as immature.

I don't want a repeat of that on this thread. I don't want people to argue with me and when they can't take my thrust and parry, they exclaim they've just discovered my age and they're too old and respectable to argue with me.

I don't care if you're 7, 17 or 97; I argue with you because the things you present are not Scriptural or orthodox. And if you are "so mature", how about engaging in some discussion of the Scriptures instead of explaining them away or dismissing them and then saying "I am 100% right"?

 

[46AND2]

So you maintain that Satan is not mentioned at all in the OT, but when you find that he is, you explain those verses away or come up with other explanations for them.



That was the other thread, not this one.
I doubt anyone would even think about your age if you didn't keep bringing it up.



It's not so mature to keep going on about how mature you are. It suggests the opposite - that you feel paranoid about being thought of as immature.



I don't care if you're 7, 17 or 97; I argue with you because the things you present are not Scriptural or orthodox. And if you are "so mature", how about engaging in some discussion of the Scriptures instead of explaining them away or dismissing them and then saying "I am 100% right"?

But he didn't just explain them away or dismiss them. He gave his reasons for why he believes the references to satan in the OT are not about satan "as we know him today." He described context which showed, in a couple places, where satan was referring to specific HUMANS, and in other places as an angel. And I've seen little in the form of actually correcting these interpretations.

Was God talking about the king of Babylon in Isaiah 14? The Prince of Tyre in Ezekiel 28?

I do think his explanation of Daniel 10 is a little weak, but I haven't really studied the topic much. I've heard that many, even some Christians, argue that satan as an actual being is not supported by the OT, and find this thread interesting.

 

[JacksBratt]

I really don't understand the main point of this post. So, Satan is not mentioned, to the satisfaction of the OP, in the OT.

Do you, St. Truth, believe that Satan is a real entity?
Do you believe that he is the head of all the fallen angels as their leader who initiated the rebellion in heaven?
Do you believe that Satan has existed from before the garden of Eden?
Do you believe that he was the serpent that tempted Eve, the being that tempted Christ in the wilderness?
Do you think that the "Satan" mentioned in the NT is a different being than the entity that is a present evil force in the OT, even if not mentioned by the name "Satan", to your satisfaction?

 

[Hawkins]

Satan is long time concept developed by the Jews. It's a common story about how Satan had a dispute with Archangel Michael over Moses' body.

Modern Judaism might have less to say about this figure because today's Judaism is a fabrication after AD 200 ~ 500 by rabbis not from Jerusalem. Thus modern Judaism failed to keep the Pharisaic concept dominating the Jews at Jesus' time. Modern Judaism adapts more of a Sudducee concept instead of Pharisaic concept in terms of immortal souls, hell, angels/demons/spirits and etc.

It's not necessary for books mentioning Satan, angels and etc. to be canonized due to the fact that Sadducees (perhaps also the early Levites) back then dominated Sanhedrin thus they can forbid any documents mentioning these things from being included in the OT Bible Canon, even though they are dominated Jewish concepts.

 

[Strong in Him]

But he didn't just explain them away or dismiss them.

Regarding the reference in Job; yes he did.

The OP stated that we do not see the name of Satan mentioned in the OT. Other references were quoted, which I have not yet studied. The name Satan is given several times in Job 1 & 2, but when this was pointed out, Job is described as "irrelevant".
I did read the point about "Satan not being as we know him today" - I don't know about the OP, but I don't know Satan and have no intention of doing so.

If the OP had said, "why does Satan seem different in the OT; why hen't he mentioned so much; why do we never hear about exorcisms or spiritual warfare? Is this because Satan wasn't around or did people just not know much about him?" That would be a very good question - or series of questions, and we could have an interesting discussion.
But that wasn't the statement that was made.

I think we certainly have more teaching about Satan in the NT. This is not surprising because Jesus teaches us much about him, and we see him interacting with Jesus. The OP has described even this as allegorical.
But just because Satan may not have behaved in quite the same way in the OT as in the New - we don't see exorcisms or read specific teaching - that doesn't mean he wasn't around.

 

[46AND2]

Regarding the reference in Job; yes he did.

No he didn't. He described the entity in Job as a servant of god; an unfallen angel. To be fair, he could have gone into further detail about why that would fit the context better, but there has not been much challenge against his interpretation, yet, so maybe that explanation is forthcoming.

Perhaps you can offer an explanation of why the satan in Job is better explained by your interpretation?

The OP stated that we do not see the name of Satan mentioned in the OT.

He did no such thing. He stated the idea of satan does not appear in the OT. He said nothing about the name.

Other references were quoted, which I have not yet studied. The name Satan is given several times in Job 1 & 2, but when this was pointed out, Job is described as "irrelevant".
I did read the point about "Satan not being as we know him today" - I don't know about the OP, but I don't know Satan and have no intention of doing so.

Your little quip at the end here lends little to the discussion. Clearly he wasn't talking about "knowing" Satan in the sense you imply. He's talking about, essentially, knowing the identity/description/attributes of Satan.

If the OP had said, "why does Satan seem different in the OT; why hen't he mentioned so much; why do we never hear about exorcisms or spiritual warfare? Is this because Satan wasn't around or did people just not know much about him?" That would be a very good question - or series of questions, and we could have an interesting discussion.
But that wasn't the statement that was made.

I think we certainly have more teaching about Satan in the NT. This is not surprising because Jesus teaches us much about him, and we see him interacting with Jesus. The OP has described even this as allegorical.
But just because Satan may not have behaved in quite the same way in the OT as in the New - we don't see exorcisms or read specific teaching - that doesn't mean he wasn't around.

But his point was never about satan acting differently in the OT, he's saying the references to satan in the OT are referring to beings, clearly indicated through context, as someone or something other than the traditional idea of satan; sometimes as a specific human, others as an unfallen angel, and even as god's own anger.

 

[Strong in Him]

I have read Genesis and I'm positive there is not the slightest allusion made to Satan. If you can be more specific about the verse, I can show you why I think I'm right.

So what was the serpent then? Who was it that turned mankind away from God and broke the fellowship between them; a split so serious that it took the death of the Lord Jesus to reconcile us again, and caused sin, decay and death to come into the world?
Jesus called Satan a liar and a murderer from the beginning.
If Satan was not in the OT, where did the evil spirits and the witch at Endor come from?

I should stop reading these "wonderful books" if I were you, and read Scripture instead.

 

[Strong in Him]

This comes under apologetics because it's one defence of our faith that we can use against people who argue against it.

But I've just noticed that this is in the outreach section. And the purpose of this board is for non Christians to ask questions and Christians to answer.

To be honest, if a non Christian were to ask "why doesn't God destroy the devil?" I'm not sure that saying, "the devil doesn't exist" is an answer, or a defence of our faith - because it's not a Scriptural answer.