04 - Satan the Adversary
CHAPTER 4.
- “Satan indicates any state or condition adverse.
- Adverse to health - adverse in circumstances - adverse in state of mind.
- The “Satan” in the Revelations.
IT was proved in the previous Chapter that the word sathan or satan is applied, in a variety of instances, to human beings, and that the particular feature constituting a human being a satan is that the being is in a state of opposition - that is, in the attitude or relation of an adversary to the individual with whom he is brought into relationship. To be in such a state of opposition is to be an adversary; and that this word is strictly expressive of the meaning of the Hebrew word satan was proved, and many instances the Common Version of the Scriptures, where the word is so translated, were given.
It may be an adversary in temporal matters: thus Hadad, the Edomite, and Rezon, the son of Eliadah, were the political satans or adversaries of Solomon. It may be an adversary in reference to character: to such adversaries or satans David refers in the passages quoted. It may be an adversary in reference to the true worship of God: thus the satan brought forward in the Book of Job, being an idolator, was an adversary to Job, who was a worshipper of the true God. It may be an adversary to any given course of action: in such case Peter was a Satan to Christ.
It was further proved that as the primary meaning of Satan is adversary, the word “satan” may be, and, is, used in a good sense: and hence the word satan is applied to the messenger of God that met and opposed Balaam, in his unjust career.
Such being seen to be the meaning of the word satan, namely, adversary, in connection with the passages previously noticed, it is proposed to consider some other passages in the New Testament in which the same word occurs.
It was shown in Chapter II, that diabolos is applied not only to a human false-accuser, but also to a falsely-accusing, state of mind. So, in regard to the term satan, it will be found that the primary meaning of the word, namely, adversary, makes it applicable to any thing or condition adverse. The application of this word to express an adverse state, if proved, will tend to strengthen the demonstration that Satan, when applied to a being, is applied throughout the Scriptures to a human being in an adversary-al state. And first, in reference to an adverse state of the body. It has been said, “Health is the rule; disease is the exception; health is the standard; disease is the deviation from that standard; health is the offspring of that harmony existing between the life and the organs; disease is the offspring of the discord between the life and the organs. Health is the straight line, beginning and ending in life, and in God, the Author of life; disease is the deviation from the straight line, beginning in sin, which is the violation of the Creator’s law, as recorded in man’s physical constitution, and ending in death.”* To the state adverse to health, the term satan is applied in the following distinct passages. The first passage has relation to Paul. He is defending his dignity as an apostle; and, in so doing, shows the high privileges which he had enjoyed. “It is not expedient for me doubtless to, glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I knew (oida) a man in Christ about fourteen years ago whether in body, I knew (oida) not; or whether out of the body, I knew (oida) not: God knew (oiden): such as one caught up, to the third heaven. And I knew (oida) such a man whether in body, or out of the body,c I knew (oida) not: God knew (oideri): How that he was caught away into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities. For, though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me [to be], or heareth of me. And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure,” 2 Corinthians 12:2-7.
“A messenger of Satan” was given to buffet him. It ought to be “a messenger, satan”; there is no “of” in the original: and even, more correctly still, it ought to be “a messenger, an adversary.” (It may be remarked here, in passing, that the word anggelos, which the translators have rendered rightly “messenger,” is the same as that which they have translated “angel” in other parts, so uncertain has been their proceeding.) It was not then an invisible being, that was a thorn in the flesh: it was an infirmity of the flesh, of which he writes elsewhere, and the term he there uses is astencia, which the Greeks used to express a paralytic affection. And this paralytic affection influenced his speech, as may be inferred from an extract in his letter to the Galatians: “Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first. And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God [even] as Christ Jesus,” Galatians 4:13-14; and, he adds, that his enemies acknowledged that, though in speech weak, in his letters he was powerful. This state of the body, adverse to the healthy performance of its functions, this astheneia, this infirmity of the flesh, called “weakness,” 1 Corinthians 2:3, is “the messenger, the adversary.” Besides, how could buffeting be performed by an invisible being? As a further illustration of the application of the word satan to a state of body adverse to health, the history of the cure of the woman by Christ can be profitably quoted. “And, behold, there was a woman which had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and was bowed together, and could in nowise lift herself up. And when Jesus saw her, he called, and said unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity. And he laid hands on her: and immediately she was made straight and glorified God. And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the Sabbath day, and said unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be healed, and not on the Sabbath day. The Lord then answered him, and said, Hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the Sabbath loose his ox or ass from the stall, and lead away to watering? And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day? And when he had said these things all his adversaries were ashamed: and all the people rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by him,” Luke 13:11-17. “Satan hath bound this woman” - that is, she had been afflicted with a condition adverse to health. That her affliction was a mere bodily disorder is quite apparent from the passage itself, in which it is described as “a spirit of infirmity,” a spirit of asthenceia; but to infer that an invisible being called Satan is this “spirit of infirmity” would be as absurd as to argue that, because the phrases the “spirit of holiness,” the “spirit of truth,” the “spirit of justice” occur, “holiness,” “truth,” and “justice” are invisible, supernatural beings. The primary idea connected with satan being “adversary”, the term may apply to adverse circumstances. In such sense the word occurs in the following passage: “And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write: These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive; I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty (but thou art rich), and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not [anything], but a synagogue of Satan.” Revelation 2:8-9.
Here the word satan is applied to an assembly of men, who spoke evil of (for this is the correct meaning of the word blaspheme, which is applied in Scripture to the evil speaking of men as well as of God) and were adverse to, the disciples; and, as an illustration of the adverseness of the state in which these men were to the disciples, it is recorded. “Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil (diabolos) shall cast some of you into prison, that you may be tried: and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life,” Revelation 2:10. The adversary is here referred to in the character of the false-accuser, causing them by this false accusation to be placed in prison, in adverse circumstances. The same view, namely, the application of the word satan to a state of adverse circumstances, is borne out in the address to the church in Pergamos: “And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things, saith he, which bath the sharp sword with two edges: I know thy works, and where thou dwellest where Satan’s seat [is]: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas [was] my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth,” Revelation 2:12; Revelation 2:13. The phrase is “Satan’s seat,” or “the throne of Satan,” as it ought to be. Now, all will acknowledge that “Satan” had not his literal throne there (people believe that it is id the “Nether Regions,” misnamed hell); and all will agree that “Satan” did not literally dwell there, although it says “where Satan dwelleth.” The figurative meaning must be sought; and the reader is taught that the influence of the adversary, or of those circumstances adverse to the cause of the truth and to the comforts and peace of believers, was there peculiarly strong: and the statement that “Satan’s throne was there” no more indicates that a being called “Satan” had a throne there than the remark of the historian, regarding the court of King Charles the Second, that “Vice sat enthroned in his court,” suggests that a being called “Vice” had a throne in Charles’s court! The historian conveys to the reader that vice was the prominent feature of the court of that profligate monarch. Similarly, as a proof of the great influence of those adverse circumstances in the part of the world referred to, a martyr, Antipas, there (in Pergamos) sealed with his blood his adherence to the truth in Christ. The same idea is, in part, conveyed in the use of the word “Satan,” in reference to the church at Thyatira: “But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden,” Revelation 2:24. A similar use of the word satan, as expressive of adverse circumstances, is presented in the following passage: “But we, brethren, being taken from you for a short time in presence, not in heart, endeavoured the more abundantly to see your face with great desire. Wherefore we would have come unto you, even I, Paul, once and again; but Satan hindered us,” 1 Thessalonians 2:17-18. Paul was prevented reaching his friends by a series of circumstances adverse to such journey. This is all Paul could mean, because he must have known that if God thought it good for him to see the Thessalonians, he would have so ordered it: and therefore that he did not go, he must have considered most beneficial to the cause in which he was engaged.
Revert again to the fundamental idea embodied in the word satan, namely, adversary, and it will be found that the term satan is applied to an adverse state of mind. The passages in which the word is used in this sense are numerous. Satan, as used in connection with Peter, has been already noticed. It is used, in connection with him and the other disciples, upon, a most peculiar occasion. It appears that, at the last supper, at a time when it might be imagined all feelings would have been swallowed up in the contemplation of the approaching betrayal of their Master, the disciples began disputing, yea, actually strove, respecting this: who should be accounted the greatest. Here was the manifestation of a spirit totally adverse to the spirit which Christ came to inculcate. This selfish state the Saviour condemns by remarking that though such desires for chiefdom were recognised in the existing order, nevertheless, in his kingdom the opposite state of mind was the only one recognised; and he then apostrophised Peter, who, from his natural impetuosity, was, it is likely, very prominent in putting forward claims to superiority, “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan bath desired [to have] you, that he may sift [you] as wheat,” Luke 22:31. The phrase is not “desired to have you;” in the original Greek there is no phrase “to have” at all; and the term rendered “desired” is eksetesato, which means inquired, pried into the passage, translated properly, is “the adversary has inquired respecting you.” And the “you” is not Peter: it is humas, the plural of “thou,” and refers to the contending disciples. The Saviour then adds, “But I have prayed for thee,” peri sou - “concerning thee” (sou, “thee”: being in the singular number), “that thy faith fail not.” The Saviour thus intimated that the adverse principle, satan, manifested by their desire for prominent position (and which, quite unfitted them for sitting on the thrones of the kingdom) had been prying narrowly into them, and had almost found a fixed resting-place; but for Peter, Jesus prayed that his faith might not fail; but, at the same time, to demonstrate to him his weakness, and his danger in supposing himself strong (as evidenced in his protestation: “Lord, I am ready to go with thee to prison and to death,” v. 33), Jesus said to him “I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day before thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me,” v. 34. Here would be a striking evidence of the power of this principle of love of self, which would “sift all of them as wheat.”
Here, then, satan represents the state of mind adverse to the state which Jesus requires in his followers: a meaning not in any way recognising the existence of an independent invisible being.
Another passage in which “Satan” occurs in the New Testament expresses the state of mind adverse to the universal love principle that had taken possession of the heart of Judas. The passage is this, “Then entered Satan into Judas, surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains how he might betray him unto them,” Luke 22:3-4. It has been already noticed that, in a parallel passage, “the devil” is asserted to have entered the heart of Judas; here “Satan,” or “the Satan,” is said to enter. The “Devil” and the “Satan” must therefore be the same agent: and it is true that the “Devil” and the “Satan” represent the same general condition of mind; but they differ in this, that “Satan” is the general term for “adversary,” and the “Devil” represents the particular form under which the adversary operates, namely, in falsely accusing, in calumniating. This passage, therefore, conveys a simple fact, that the principle of selfishness, “the adversary” had gained full possession of the mind of Judas, and that therefore it would manifest itself speedily in the calumniation and betrayal of his Master. That satan is expressive, not of an individual, but of a state of mind adverse to the highest, the near-to-God state, in which man, when he attains the image of his Creator, will be, is proved by the following passage: “For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that bath so done this deed; In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus,” 1 Corinthians 5:3-5. To what does this refer? To a fact disgraceful to the church at Corinth, namely, that they allowed one of their principal members to possess his father’s wife. Paul condemns the disciples for this, and commands them to deliver him to “satan:” that is, to the state of mind adverse to the higher principles of duty. It is certain the church could not deliver this man over to “satan” literally, which they ought to have done, if “satan” is a being: they were to deliver him to his selfish love; that is, as this man preferred violating (under the influence of a principle or state of mind adverse to the law of love to God and to man, adverse to the law of nature) that law or nature and that higher law of love, the brethren of Christ could no longer sanction such conduct, by extending towards the violator all the sympathies of Christian love, but said to him, “If you persist in gratifying your selfish passion, adverse to your higher good, adverse to the state of mind in which alone you can be a follower of Christ, we must no longer recognise you, we must leave you to your adversary-al, selfish state, to your Satan; and this, be it remembered, not from any ill-will to you, not from any holier-than-thou conceit, but simply that you, having a full experience of your self-love, evil state, it may end by the punishment it will thus directly or indirectly bring, ‘in the destruction’ of the rule ‘of the flesh:’ that is, you will find your course so inconvenient, so pain-producing, as soon to discover the yoke of the higher love to be a more pleasing one; and thus you will be driven to give up the lower love, the degrading love, the more selfish love: and so ‘the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus.’”
Taking this view of satan, all the trouble and perplexity connected with this “delivering over to Satan,” which has puzzled so many, disappears. This view is justified in the following passage: “This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare; holding faith and a good conscience: which some, having put away, concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander, whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme,” 1 Timothy 1:18-20. Paul could not deliver these to “Satan” literally, any more than the church of Corinth could deliver over the incestuous person: but he could separate them from the enjoyment of the active and delightful offices of association in the truth, which, being withheld, might place their conduct before them in the way most likely, if possessing any remnants of noble feeling, to affect them beneficially and reformatively; and thus they might learn not to speak evil or blaspheme: that is, deliver them to their own selfish, complaining state of mind, and let them be punished by it; and thus they will see that the adverse state is one unsuited to happiness and to peace. This “delivering to Satan” is a metaphorical and beautiful way of expressing that which a parent is sometimes obliged to do towards a rebellious child: he tries every plan to deliver him from error and from vice, but all his efforts are ineffectual; at last, necessity obliges him to let the child pursue, unrestrained by him, the state of his disposition adverse to the duties he owes to his parent and to society: he delivers him to his adverse state of mind, that his adverse state of mind may punish him by troubles, which it will bring upon him. Thus, many a child has been taught and recovered: the rule of his flesh has been made subject to the higher rule, impulse giving way to principle, and he returns home like the prodigal son, and cries, “Father I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called thy son.”
Another illustration of the word satan being representative of a state of mind adverse to the higher state is afforded by the interesting but fearful account of the death of Ananias and Sapphira. “But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession and kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles’ feet. But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whilst it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God,” Acts 5:1-4. “Why hath “satan,” properly “THE Satan,” more properly-“the adversary,” “filled thine heart”? What is this “Satan”? What but this? Ananias and Sapphira professed to be influenced by the love of truth; they professed to give a possession to the cause connected with that truth. They sold it and kept back part of the price. In this they did nothing wrong; but a selfish state of mind had influenced them to try and obtain the character of being so extremely generous as to give their whole estate, whereas they intended to keep back a part of the price. Here, then, a state adverse to that of freedom of guilt, a feature of the genuine believer, filled their hearts, and the consequence was indeed sad.
Another illustration of the word satan being representative of a state of mind adverse to the higher love principle is presented in the following delicately expressed and importantly - practical direction: “Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband bath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to tasting and prayer: and come together again, that Satan tempt ye not for your incontinency,” 1 Corinthians 7:3-5. Here Paul recognises the existence of the amative feeling: he points out with a delicacy truly beautiful the well-regulated activity of such a disposition of mind: he shows that, if such disposition is to be suppressed in its activity, such suppression should only, be for a time, lest, out of such suppression, an adverse state of mind may rise, in which the faculty will seek outlets inconsistent with the love owed to the neighbour, and the obedience owed to God; lest, in other words the “satan” (the state of mind adverse) tempt you for your incontinency. The state of mind represented by satan, namely, the state adverse to the love to God and to man, is one which causes its possessor to do strange things. It makes him, in order to gain his purposes, adopt all imaginable expedients, and hence of the man of sin it is said, “Whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders; and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved,” 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10. How wonderfully does this working bring its own punishment! The attempt to carry out the plans of this adverse state of mind causes such a blinding of the mind, that it acts directly as “A strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness,” 5:11-12. This adverse state of mind, in the endeavour to realise its purpose, will assume even the form of excellence. Such existed in Paul’s days: speaking of those who vilified him and blasphemed him, “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ, And no marvel: for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works,” 2 Corinthians 11:13-15. The adversary assumes the form of a messenger of light (false apostles): such is the height of deception that a mind, having an adverse state against another, will have recourse to so as to gain its ends. The believer, however, has this consolation, that the state of mind represented by “the adversary” shall be conquered; that the selfish nature shall be brought under the dominion of the higher nature. And Paul, in pointing out this glorious truth, that “the God of peace shall bruise Satan (the adversary) under your feet shortly,” Romans 16:20 (which could not be done literally, for how could an invisible and immaterial being be trodden by visible and material feet), details the great preventive to the realisation of this glorious state: “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple,” v. 17-18. The men who serve their own belly are the great obstacles, and such men are those who make a trade of religion, the monkish hordes of ancient times, with “reverends” of our modern era; men who have plenty of “good words and fair speeches” but who, as a class, are great adversaries to the progress of the truth.*
Paul, for the believers’ consolation, points out the way to get rid of these obstacles, “these black bodies that form an eclipse between God and men’s souls,”c namely, obedience to the laws laid down by Christ: “For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil,” Romans 16:19. When the nature of the truth is considered, with the glorious character and the miraculous performances of Christ, and the power given from him to his disciples, well might Jesus exclaim, “I beheld Satan, as lightning, fall front heaven,” Luke 10:18. That is, Jesus hurled down, not the literal “Satan” from heaven, but by the introduction of the truth into the mind he is driving, and will in time completely drive, selfishness out of the higher faculties, out of the heaven in man’s nature.
Paul understood well the nature of this deliverance, for he was told it by the Saviour himself, when, overpowered by the vision which he saw on the road to Damascus, and. hearing a voice call, he said, “Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet; for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to, open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me,” Acts 26:15-18.
Yes, Jesus came to deliver man from the power of the state of mind which is adverse to those activities whose legitimate exercise is essential to big own happiness, and the happiness of his fellow-men.
Thus all these “Satans” of the New Testament have been examined, except three in the Book of Revelations. They have been seen, it is hoped, to have nothing of that invisible, unknown and intangible nature, but are really, in many cases, matters of flesh and blood, of human nature in its unenlightened condition: in some cases, hard counteracting circumstances opposing good and useful progress; and in numerous other cases selfish mental states opposed to man’s progress towards the divine state.
“Satan,” in connection with other names, occurs in the Revelations three times. The first is in reference to “a battle fought in heaven” - that is, in the mental and moral state of man, so that it may be determined whether “flesh” or “spirit” is to rule the individual. “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not: neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him,” Revelation 12:7-9. Here “Satan” is described as a dragon; he is described as an old serpent, as the devil, so that there are three additional features under which “Satan” is presented. The same four-fold character or personification is presented in another passage in the same book, “And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should receive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.” Revelation 20:1-3. From these passages it is perfectly clear that “Satan” is not an individual being; because, how could he be a dragon, a serpent, a devil, and a satan? How could one distinct being be four distinct beings? It will not do to assert, as some dogmatically do, that he assumed, all these forms. This is merely begging the question. It cannot be literally that “Satan” can be a dragon and an old serpent too. He must he one or the other, not both. As he is said to be all, the meaning in which he is all must be sought. How “satan” can be and is the devil has been already explained: “Satan”, an adversary, manifests himself in that character as a false-accuser, diabolos. Satan, as an adversary, has his strength in the sensual part of a man’s nature, which “the old serpent” represents. “The dragon”, too, is a wasteful, destroying agent, so is the sensual principle in man: hence the application of these terms to the selfish principle in man’s nature personified. The great embodiment of truth, represented by Michael, and the messengers of truth represented by Michael’s messengers, fight with the sensual principle in man, and victory is at last obtained. But in the third of these occurrences a striking and most interesting fact is brought into prominence, viz., that it is for a time only that Satan is imprisoned: “And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison; and shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle; the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved loved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured theme And the devil (diabolos), that deceived them, was cast in the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever,” (Revelation 20:7-10). Thus it is revealed that the self-love of man will be brought under rule for a given time: diabolos, and satan will be imprisoned. Later, will the imprisoned gain his freedom: he will deceive the nations; and, at length, after the system of Self has been again tried and found wanting, Christ and his truth will triumph, and the adversary, the Diabolos, and his works be destroyed (Hebrews 2:14; 1 John 3:8; 1 Corinthians 15:54).