Satan: A Cross-Textual Story Through Semitic Traditions
The figure of Satan has evolved significantly across the Semitic religious traditions, reflecting deeper shifts in cosmology, ethics, and theology. Satan becomes a symbol of metaphysical anxiety, a symbolic antithesis of “good” and theological innovation. These transformations go beyond terminology, signaling profound changes in how divine justice, human agency, and evil are conceived.
This five-part series takes an cross-textual approach to trace Satan’s development across: (1) the Old Testament (2) Inter-testamental literature, (3) the New Testament, (4) the Qur’an, and (5) Sufi mystical writings.
Satan in the Old Testament: A Functional Adversary
In the Hebrew Bible, the term Satan is not originally a proper name but a title or function denoting opposition. It emerges from the root stn, meaning “to obstruct,” “accuse,” or “oppose.” This adversarial term frequently designates a functionary or agent acting with ‘divine sanction’, and only in later texts does it begin to solidify into a personal entity. In Numbers 22:22, the Angel of the LORD is a satan to Balaam, showing that resistance can be virtuous or divinely ordained. Likewise, in 1 Kings 11:14, Hadad the Edomite becomes a satan, a political and divinely allowed adversary raised up by GOD to oppose Solomon, reinforcing that the term originally carried no moral opprobrium.
As Stuckenbruck in Demonic World of the Dead Sea Scrolls emphasizes in his analysis of demonology in Qumran texts, even later uses of adversarial language remain functionally embedded in divine plan and not in metaphysical rebellion. Hildegard Nagel, in Satan in the Old Testament, highlights the psychological and ethical function of this figure as an embodiment scrutiny, and opposition, a necessary dialectic within divine justice
The development of Satan’s role reflects a slow trajectory from impersonal opposition toward moral personalization. Wray, in The Manifestations and Metamorphosis of Satan, further shows that the earliest texts treat satan as an archetype of lawful obstruction,a necessary judicial role that maintains divine justice. In this light, the Hebrew Bible’s cosmology avoids dualism: all things, including opposition, are within the sovereignty of Yahweh (the GOD of Old Testament).
The Genesis 3 (Eden narrative) serpent is not explicitly named satan. In the original narrative, the serpent is a created beast, cunning and provocative, yet not described as metaphysical evil. As Caldwell notes in his Doctrine of Satan I, the serpent’s dialogue invites epistemological curiosity rather than outright heresy, suggesting its role as a catalyst rather than a corrupter .It is only in later Jewish apocalyptic texts and Christian interpretations that the serpent becomes Satan retroactively,as seen in Wisdom of Solomon 2:24 and Revelation 12:9, which name the serpent as the Devil as noted by Madison Estrada in Biblical Theodicy: The Evolution of the Problem of Evil.
C.H.Toy’s Evil Spirits in the Bible attempts to demonstrate that the identification of the serpent with Satan emerges from an evolving demonology that sought to unify disparate symbols of opposition under a singular figure .The serpent, in this schema, becomes not just a tempter, but a vessel of preternatural evil linked to cosmic rebellion.
Barton while tracing the etymological origins of angelic and demonic names in The Origin of the Names of Angels and Demons in the Extra-Canonical Apocalyptic Literature, confirms that the serpent’s later identification with Satan coincides with the rise of named demons and archons, such as Azazel and Mastema, in Second Temple Judaism. Caldwell furthers this by tracing how post-exilic interpretive traditions like the Targumim and Midrashim increasingly read the Genesis serpent as Satanic, a projection backward to reconcile early ambiguity with later theological developments .
The Eden narrative’s ambiguity, as has been argued by Stokes in Satan, Yhwh’s Executioner , underscores the theological caution of early Israelite religion, avoiding definitive attributions of ontological evil to any single figure. Yahweh’s curse on the serpent does not include moral judgment beyond deceit; thus, the narrative constructs an etiological myth of suffering and exile, not an origin story for supernatural evil
Job 1–2 introduces ha-satan as a court official within the heavenly council. His role is prosecutorial: he tests Job’s piety under divine authorization.Satan, in this legal framework, operates not as an antagonist but as Yahweh’s divinely authorized agent who carries out GOD’s judicial will, a role intended to uphold divine justice, not to thwart it. Estrada in Biblical Theodicy elaborates on how this satan is not simply punitive but serves theodical aims, probing the limits of human virtue and divine justice. Rivkah Kluger’s Jungian interpretation casts satan as a projection of the divine shadow,a force within the GODhead necessary for inner differentiation and self-reflection. Antti Laato, in The Devil in the Old Testament, stresses that the Old Testament presents satan as a dynamic but constrained figure, not an ontological evil. Laato draws attention to Zechariah 3:1–2, where satan functions as an accuser, but is ultimately rebuked by GOD. This tension between agency and subordination reveals a worldview resistant to metaphysical dualism.
This non-rebellious understanding is critical. As the Book of Job unfolds, it becomes evident that satan functions as a probe for moral integrity. According to The Development of the Concept of Satan by Tae Chung, his presence in the divine council represents a theology of permitted suffering, a pedagogical rather than punitive divine intent .Kluger adds a psychological dimension: Satan is the internal critic, mirroring Job’s crisis of faith and the archetypal shadow that confronts the soul in affliction.
The dialogues that follow Job’s trials highlight that satan fades after his task is complete. The Book does not conclude with his condemnation but with divine self-revelation and human humility. Satan here is an instrument, not an enemy, a theme that contrasts sharply with later Christian demonology.
Zechariah’s vision of Joshua the High Priest stnding before the Angel of the LORD with satan at his right hand (Zechariah 3)presents yet another functional role. Satan accuses; GOD rebukes. This divine rejection of accusation is a theological hinge between retributive justice and restorative grace. In Kluger’s reading, the scene symbolizes a shift in post-exilic theology from guilt to forgiveness, from impurity to sanctification .
Toy also argues that the rebuke of Satan in Zechariah represents a rupture in the Satan-accusation link, a declaration that divine election transcends ritual impurity.The idea here is that Satan can no longer impede divine mercy. This frames satan not as an eternal adversary, but a temporary interlocutor in a cosmic dialogue between sin, atonement, and divine favor.
Importantly, texts like 1 Chronicles 21:1, where satan provokes David to take a census, mark a conceptual turn. In the earlier parallel passage of 2 Samuel 24:1, GOD is said to incite David. The Chronicle’s author replaces GOD with satan, reflecting a theological discomfort with direct divine causation of evil.As Caldwell points out, this shift signals an embryonic moral bifurcation: evil deeds must come from elsewhere,even if still subordinate to divine will
This redaction reflects an increasing interest in moral theodicy, as Israelite theology moved toward post-exilic dualism.Satan becomes the necessary intermediary, separating GOD’s holiness from the implications of moral testing.This transitional period, reveals fluidity in cosmological roles. Satan is not yet a Devil but is becoming indispensable to the theology of moral causation. His presence explains affliction without compromising divine benevolence.
Thus, Satan in the Old Testament ,is not yet the metaphysical Evil One. He is GOD’s adversary in function, not in essence, a heavenly prosecutor, an accuser, a necessary antagonist in the divine administration of justice. The evolution of his character foreshadows deeper theological crises about suffering, free will, and moral responsibility. Later developments mythologize, personalize,and ultimately demonize this figure. But in the Old Testament, Satan is a mirror,a figure through whom Israel seems to come to terms with divine sovereignty, human weakness, and the complex moral logic of divine justice.
Shoaib Mohammad (KAS),
Chief Accounts Officer, Anti Corruption Bureau, J&K
