Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Is.45:7 God created evil?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Heard, Christopher" <Christopher.Heard AT pepperdine.edu>
  • To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Is.45:7 God created evil?
  • Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 21:11:11 -0700

Dear Harold,

Thank you for the bibliographic suggestion. I have read Evans' article and he does give food for thought. As far as I can tell, Evans' argument that _satan_ is an "angelic intermediary"--neither a fully-developed "devil" on the one hand nor a merely human adversary on the other--in 1 Chron 21 neither depends upon nor requires that the word _satan_ also be a proper noun. Indeed, interpreting the passage as Evans does, but treating _satan_ as a common noun, would be perfectly consonant with the passage from Numbers that I cited earlier. I cannot detect any stronger evidence in Evans' article for reading _satan_ as a proper noun than the fact that it is anarthrous, which I think is inconclusive. Personally, I think it is strange to take _one_ anarthrous use of _satan_ and argue that it is a proper noun _precisely because it is anarthrous_, ignoring the two dozen other occurrences of anarthrous _satan_ that _nobody_ takes as proper nouns. I find Evans's suggestions about the Chronicler's "angelology" interesting and worthy of attention, but I don't think he makes a strongly persuasive case that the _Chronicler_ understood _satan_ as a proper noun.

Best wishes,

Chris


On Aug 4, 2005, at 8:34 PM, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:

Dear Chris,


In the quotation below and the longer text of your post, you are
making theological claims, not exegetical or linguistic ones.


Here's something from Biblica on the topic of 1 Chronicles 21:1 and
&+N ("satan") that you might find interesting:

Paul EVANS
Biblica 85 (2004) 545-558

Divine Intermediaries in 1 Chronicles 21
An Overlooked Aspect of the Chronicler's Theology*
http://www.bsw.org/?l=71851&a=Comm17.html

The article's title has the word theology in it, but a good bit of
information is linguistic or exegetical. While Evans does think the
figure in 1 Chronicles is an angelic one, and a step towards the full
concept of Satan, he does not find the figure as fully developed as
the NT Satan. Evans gives some extra-biblical information, including
the Targum of 1 Chronicles 21:1, which took the figure to be Satan.
He discusses the implications of the definite article and the issue
of a proper name, while emphasizing the Chronicler's editorial
tendencies with regard to angels. He thinks the Book of Job may have
influenced the Chronicler. In his footnotes he mentions the use of
&+N in interestamental literature as a proper name. I tried to e-mail
the article, but it was too long for B-Hebrew.

But let me include a few relevant quotes:

Interestingly, the Targum of Chronicles purposefully indicates that
N+# here did not indicate an autonomous devil. In the Targum, 1 Chr
21,1 reads "The Lord raised up Satan against Israel"38. While this
appears to be a conflation between the Samuel and Chronicles texts,
it is obviously clarifying that Satan is not an independent being but
is controlled by Yahweh39. Once again the concerns of the Targum
translator seem to be analogous to those of Ch.
Although Ch did not see God as altogether separate from evil
he, being a product of his postexilic age, saw a more developed role
for divine intermediaries. As mentioned above, this could have been
the result of Ch's exposure to the book of Job where N+# was part of
the heavenly entourage and was used by Yahweh to test human beings.
Thus, Ch believed that in his Vorlage when God incited David to
number the people, this was done through a mediator - N+#. In this
way, Ch was not intending to contradict his Vorlage but to better
explain it40. This reinterpretation by Ch is consistent with
subsequent development of angelology in later intertestamental
literature. These later books which retold ot narratives, (e.g.,
Jubilees) tended to bringi n angels where there were none in the
original OT text. Often the writer would introduce intermediaries to
perform an act which God himself performs in the original story41. In
a similar manner, Ch replaces the original narrative's account of God
directly inciting David with a heavenly intermediary - N+#.

Although not representing a complete doctrine of Satan, as
developed in later Jewish writings, Ch's reworking of 2 Samuel 24 was
an important stage in its development. It is, in fact, the final
stage in the development of N+# in the ot. Drawing on the traditions
of Job and Zechariah Ch takes the concept one step further. In
Chronicles N+# not only brings charges against Yahweh's people but
incites his anointed king to bring "guilt upon Israel"49. Despite
this development, the term is still a long way from denoting the
archenemy of God. Instead, his appearance in Chronicles is evidence
of Ch's post-exilic theology which saw increased roles for divine
intermediaries. While not being the mainstay of his purpose, this
belief in divine mediation is evident in his work and has been
overlooked by recent commentators.


3 C. Breytenbach and P.L. Day write "The majority of scholars...
understand s8a4t[a4n to be the proper name Satan", ("Satan",
Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible [eds. K. VAN DE TOORN -
B. BECKING - P.W. VAN DER HORST] [Leiden 1995] 1375-1376). So H.G.M.
WILLIAMSON, 1 and 2 Chronicles (Grand Rapids 1982) 143; R. BRAUN, 1
Chronicles (Waco 1986) 216; G. VON RAD, Das Geschichtsbild des
chronistischen Werkes zur Geheimen Offenbarung (BWANT 54; Stuttgart
1939) 8-9; R. SHARF, Satan in the Old Testament (Evanston 1967) 155;
W. EICHRODT, Theology of the Old Testament (Philadelphia 1967) II,
206-207.


8 This concurs with E. Langton who argued that in Zechariah 'Satan'
became the title of a distinct personality, Essentials of Demonology.
A Study of Jewish and Christian Doctrine; Its Origin and Development
(London 1949) 53. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, which Japhet cites as the
source for her etymological argument, explains that N+# is one of the
instances where "original appellatives have completely assumed the
character of real proper names and are therefore used without the
article" (K. GESENIUS, Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar [Oxford 1988]
125-125, 402). JAPHET rejects Gesenius' conclusion as "yet another
case in which exegetical considerations influence objective
linguistic analysis" (Ideology, 147, n. 427).

9 So argues P.L. DAY, An Adversary in Heaven. s8a4t[a4n in the Hebrew
Bible (Atlanta 1988) 128. An example of another popular name for the
Devil is seen in the book of Jubilees where "Mastema" - not Satan -
is the favorite name for the chief demon (although this "Mastema" is
not a different character than Satan but is actually also called
Satan as well (see R.H. CHARLES, The Book of Jubilees: or the Little
Genesis [London 1902] 81). Similarly, at Qumran, a favorite name for
a similar character is Belial although the name Satan is also found
frequently (Cf. 11QPsa Plea 19,15; 4QDibHama 1-2, IV, 12; 4QBera,b.
Also 1QH fr.4, line 6 may have N+# as a name).


12 The names Dia/boloj, Beelzebou/l and Belia/r are also used of the
chief of the demons (Beelzebou/l is found in Matt 10,25; 12,27, Mark
3,22 and Luke 11,15; 2 Cor 6,15 mentions Belia/r). In the NT Satana=j
is used 34 times while Dia/boloj is used 36 times. Breytenbach and
Day argue that the use of Satana=j in the NT is simply "incidental"
and just a "Semitism" ("Satan", 1379). However, the use of Satana=j
is hardly what one would call "incidental"; it seems clear to this
writer that the usage in the NT demonstrates that Satan was seen as a
proper name and that it is only a Semitism as far as the name
'Ihsou=j or any other number of Hebrew names are.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew


--
R. Christopher Heard
Assistant Professor of Religion
Seaver Fellow in Religion
Pepperdine University
Malibu, California 90263-4352
http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/cheard
http://www.iTanakh.org
http://www.semioticsandexegesis.info





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page