[For the sake of my posting schedule and your time, I am posting segments of Chapter 2 as I write them. If you have any suggestions or comments, reach out through my contact form. To read everything released so far, visit the Satan and Spiritual Warfare page.]
Parents, friends, teachers, and pastors share a unique role in our lives. We invite the ones we trust to impact our beliefs significantly. God’s word gives both explicit and subtle teachings about that fact.
Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it. (Proverbs 22:6)
Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? (2 Corinthians 6:14)
Make no friendship with a man given to anger, nor go with a wrathful man, lest you learn his ways and entangle yourself in a snare. (Proverbs 22:24-25)
Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another. (Proverbs 27:17)
Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. (James 3:1)
We learn nothing in isolation. God has hard-coded us to live in a community where others shape us. Whether good or otherwise, we can attribute a great deal about who we are to what we learned from the words and actions of others. And the ones we’ve trusted most have left the most profound imprint on our beliefs.
That’s not bad, but understanding that aspect of human nature will help us recognize the source of our modern ideas about Satan. That’s because what we say about Satan is deeply influenced by those we trust. Consider what you hear from parents, friends, your local pastor, famous pastors, authors, YouTube personalities, and many other voices you rely on to help you learn and grow. We didn’t come up with what we believe about Satan but instead interpreted it through the direct and indirect influences of those around us.
But let’s extend this beyond ourselves. Imagine you’re at church and tell a friend you’ve felt like a terrible parent lately. That friend responds by assuring you that Satan is whispering those lies to you. Where did your friend gain their understanding of Satan’s powers? Perhaps from a pastor who taught that version of him from the Bible.
Where did that pastor learn to think of Satan like this? He spent years hearing it from his own pastor.
Where did that pastor learn to see Satan this way? From his mother.
Where did his mother learn to teach her children these particular things about Satan? It started with the friend who discipled her as a young Christian.
We could keep tracing this backward through the generations. At some point, viewing Satan as a being who is almost omniscient, almost omnipresent, and almost omnipotent began somewhere. However, we’re going to see that our modern understanding of Satan isn’t as simple as finding a single person who started it all. Instead, it has developed through many worldviews over thousands of years, some of which have nothing to do with the Bible.
Dualism: A Common Thread
At the risk of over-simplifying the complexities of human thought, tradition, and cultural influence, it will be helpful to distill the problem of how we view Satan into a single word: dualism. This single word will frequently show itself as we look at various religious and philosophical beliefs throughout history. Sometimes, it will be apparent, and sometimes slightly more subtle. But when we recognize its presence, we can see the unmistakable influence of dualism throughout thousands of years.
But what is dualism? That depends on who you ask. As time passes, the word has become harder to pin down and requires us to define what kind of dualism we mean. N.T. Wright wrote about ten types of dualism we see throughout history. I believe his fifth definition will be most helpful in this chapter:
5. Theological/moral duality. Expressed classically in Zoroastrianism and some forms of Gnosticism, this view postulates that there are two ultimate sources of all that is: a good god and a bad god. In ‘hard’ versions, the two are locked in struggle for ever; in ‘soft’ versions, the good one will eventually win.[1]
Is this not how we so often think of Satan? We may not view him as an evil version of God, but he’s pretty close. He is the source of most, if not all, evil in the world and our personal lives. We approach many areas of life with the classic cartoon image of God on one shoulder and Satan on the other, each pulling us in a different direction.
When I speak of dualism, I’m talking about theological/moral dualism. I mean the kind of dualism that paints the universe in a black-and-white struggle between two powerful beings – the good and all-powerful God of the universe fighting against the “almost” god of evil. We may not be comfortable admitting how much dualism guides our theology, but tracing the development of dualism will reveal its influence in our lives.
Dualism Through the Ages
I know only some people love history. However, our past offers insight into why we are the way we are. To that end, I want to briefly walk through several thousands of years of beliefs that have shaped the world as a whole and Christian thought in particular. We won’t look at everything that has impacted modern thought but rather the significant beliefs that contributed to our dualistic understanding of Satan.
Egypt and Mesopotamia (3500 BC – 400 AD)
Egyptian mythology is as vast as it is interesting. Although many are familiar with Ra, the chief god of the Egyptian pantheon, few may be familiar with his enemy Apophis:
[An] underworld snake god whose lethal powers are directed against the sun-god. Eternal and persistently hostile, Apophis symbolizes primeval forces of chaos.[2]
Apophis is a giant snake god who regularly attacks Ra’s boat as the good sun god traverses the underworld. Although Ra always defeats Apophis, the wicked god will always come back. This cycle will continue until the foretold day of Aphophis’s ultimate defeat when Ra cuts off his head.
It shouldn’t surprise us that this sounds familiar. After all, people in a post-Babel world would have taken familiar historical accounts and adapted them, often distorting them in a way that nods to history while removing God from them (see the adaptations of Noah and the Flood we find through many mythologies). God’s promise of a coming Messiah has clearly influenced the story of Ra and Apophis:
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. (Genesis 3:15)
Yet the Egyptians developed dualism early, elevating the serpent to a position of constant threat and hostility to the chief god. They believed in a god of chaos who was constantly at war with the god of order and his followers. Although their god would eventually conquer this evil being, Apophis had great and persistent power until that fateful day.
We continue to see dualism’s influence in that region when looking at Mesopotamian mythology. Recall the early moments of creation:
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. (Genesis 1:2)
The word “deep” is translated from the Hebrew “tehom.” God created a formless mass of water, but this water was ultimately just that: water. However, Mesopotamian mythology distorted that deep (tehom) into an actual deity of chaos named Tiamat.[3]
Ancient texts depict Tiamat as a serpent or dragon who is present in the chaotic waters when the gods begin to shape the world. Tiamat retaliates, summoning monsters to help her fight against these other deities. Marduk, the chief god of the Babylonians, captures and slays the chaotic dragon, then rests and orders humanity to subdue the earth.
Again, the similarities to biblical history are difficult to ignore while still seeing how these ancient peoples needed to personify chaos. We can see early rumblings of ancient people personifying evil and chaos in otherwise complex characters. Even in these mythologies, deities like Apophis and Tiamat don’t merely exist as chaotic beings. However, as time advances, we’ll see dualism become more pronounced in how people explain the source of evil.
Zoroastrianism (1500 BC – Present)
Few may know its name, but Zoroastrianism has affected all of us in some way. This 3,500-year-old religion started in Persia (modern-day Iran) and left a profound mark on how people understand why evil exists in the world. While Ancient Near Eastern religions had a complex cast of deities with their own merits and weaknesses, Zoroastrianism narrowed the source of evil to a single entity.
As with any religion, it is impossible to sum up the fullness of its beliefs in this small section of a single chapter. But to understand how the dualism of this religion has impacted how we interpret God’s word, we can narrow our focus to the religion’s two gods. First, let us see how the religion’s sacred text describes these two gods at the beginning of the universe:
Thus are the primeval spirits who as a pair (combining their opposite strivings), and (yet each) independent in his action, have been famed (of old). (They are) a better thing, they two, and a worse, as to thought, as to word, and as to deed. And between these two let the wisely acting choose aright. (Choose ye) not (as) the evil-doers! (Yasna 30.3)[4]
The Circle of Iranian Studies modernizes the translation this way:
In the beginning there were two primal spirits,
Twins spontaneously active,
These are the Good and the Evil, in thought,
and in word, and in deed.
Between these two, let the wise choose aright.
Be good, not base![5]
These two spirits are better known as the gods Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu.
Ahura Mazda draws heavy influence from God as He reveals Himself in the Old Testament. He is the all-good, omnipotent, and omniscient creator of the universe. Ahura Mazda has no wickedness in himself; thus, Zoroastrianism calls its followers to reject evil.
In contrast to their god of righteousness, Angra Mainyu wields evil and suffering to oppose every good thing. In the most classic form of dualism, this god is the complete opposite of Ahura Mazda. He is the source of all moral evil and every single physical ailment that humanity experiences.[6] Angra Mainyu is equal to his good counterpart in every single way, and the only way he will be cast down is through the obedience of Ahura Mazda’s faithful followers.[7]
These two equal gods stand for absolute good and evil. Thus, the creator is at constant war with this spirit of destruction until Ahura Mazda’s followers can usher in eternal bliss. Until then, we must resist Angra Mainyu’s draw toward wickedness and suffer under his power over disease and deformity.
Although space doesn’t allow a deeper dive into how Zoroastrianism has impacted modern thought, I strongly encourage readers to pause and reflect on the similarities between a pagan religion and how we interpret Satan in the Bible. Remember that much of what we say isn’t clearly stated in God’s word but is instead an assumption we assign to the text based on our traditions and assumptions. If the previous chapter showed that our understanding of Satan may be incompatible with reality, where did this idea of an evil version of God come from?
Zoroastrianism is likely the first link in a chain built over the last several millennia, connecting to some of today’s Christian traditions. We’ll see the concept of a powerful being of absolute evil return over and over again in different forms as we trace the modern tradition of Satan throughout history. And although we downgrade the Devil to an “almost” god of evil, let us be honest and ask if what we say about him has more in common with the evil god of an Iranian religion than the angelic being mentioned in the pages of God’s word.
[1] Wright, NT. The New Testament and the People of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992, 252-256.
[2] Hart, George. The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses. Routledge, 2005, pp31-32.
[3] B. Alster, “Tiamat,” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst (Leiden; Boston; Köln; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 867.
[4] Mills, L.H., trans. “The Zend Avesta, Part III (SBE31).” Sacred Texts, accessed at sacred-texts.com. Accessed February 20, 2024.
[5] “Ahunuvaiti Gatha.” CAIS (Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies). https://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Religions/iranian/Zarathushtrian/gathas_Ahunuvaiti_gatha.htm. Accessed February 20, 2024.
[6] Darmesteter, James, trans. “Fargard 2: Myths of Yima [Jamshed], section II verse 37.” In The Zend Avesta, Part II (SBE23), edited by Max Müller, 1880. Oxford University Press. Volume 23 of Sacred Books of the East. http://www.avesta.org/vendidad/vd2sbe.htm. Accessed February 20, 2024.
[7] Winfried Corduan, “Zoroastrianism,” in The Lexham Bible Dictionary, ed. John D. Barry et al. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
