Toward a Demonological Cosmology

The Inter-testamental period (roughly 420 BCE to 100 CE), bracketed by the closing of the Hebrew Bible and the emergence of the New Testament, marks a theological metamorphosis in Jewish thought, a shift from prophetic monotheism to apocalyptic dualism as has been noted by both Michael Stone in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period and Tae Whoe Chung in his The Development of Concept of Satan in Old Testament and Intertestamental Period. Central to this transformation is the development of the Satan figure. No longer merely a divine functionary who tests the righteous within a unified divine order as in Old Testament, Satan emerges in this period as a multifaceted and personified adversary: archtempter, rebel archangel, cosmic sovereign of darkness, and symbolic embodiment of moral, political, and eschatological evil.

This evolution, as Andrei A. Orlov argues in Dark Mirrors: Azazel and Satanael in Early Jewish Demonology, occurs across a network of interlinked identities, Azazel, Mastema, Satanael, Belial, Samael, each arising within distinct texts yet contributing to the same theological shift: the cosmologization and personalization of evil. Ida Fröhlich in Evil in Second Temple Texts has argued that these figures are shaped not only by theological speculation but by historical trauma: the Babylonian exile, Persian dualism, Hellenistic persecution, and Roman domination,provided the existential background for imagining evil as a structural and ontological force.

The Hebrew Bible presents ha-satan as a celestial agent, seen most clearly in Job 1-2 and Zechariah 3, whose function is to test the faithful, not to oppose GOD. This “divine prosecutor” operates under divine authority, without malice or autonomy. However, apocalyptic and pseudepigraphical literature of the Intertestamental period reshapes this figure into an archenemy of cosmic proportions.

This shift is not purely narrative but ontological. Satan becomes not merely a role but a being, one who personifies chaos, corruption, and rebellion as Caldwell notes in Satan in Extra Bibilical Apocalyptical Literature. In Jubilees Mastema tempts and accuses; in 2 Enoch, Satanael rebels and is cast down; in 1 Enoch, Azazel leads angels into forbidden unions; and in Apocalypse of Abraham, Azazel appears as a demonic deceiver with counterfeit glory (Karel van der Toorn, Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible).

This demonological expansion is mirrored in Rabbinic literature, where Satan becomes conflated with the evil inclination (yeser ha-raʿ), the Angel of Death, and the accuser at divine judgment (Gen. Rab. 17.6; B. Bat. 16a; Ber. 46a; Yoma 20a). While still subordinate to GOD, Satan is increasingly associated with temptation, seduction, and punishment, bridging the gap between divine function and demonic personhood.

As Caldwell notes the foundational myth of evil’s supernatural origin is elaborated in the Book of Watchers (1 Enoch 6–16). Building upon Genesis 6:1- 4, it tells of 200 angels, the Watchers, who descend to earth, led by Semihazah and Azazel .Their union with human women produces the Nephilim, violent hybrid giants, whose destruction by the Flood marks a turning point in the history of sin.

Orlov argues Azazel stands out. He teaches humanity warfare, metalwork, and occult knowledge. He is held singularly responsible: “the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel to him ascribe all sin” (1 Enoch 10:8). This externalization of evil into an angelic rebel introduces a metaphysical fissure into a cosmos previously unified under divine sovereignty.

The death of the Nephilim does not eliminate evil; rather, their disembodied spirits become demons, tormenting humanity. This is the birth of demonology- a model wherein Satan is no longer the only adversary, but the leader of many: a general of evil spirits, each with their own domain of affliction.

Azazel is later associated with the scapegoat ritual of Leviticus 16, reinterpreted in the Apocalypse of Abraham as a cosmic scapegoat, cast out for the sins of Israel and the world. His conflation with Satan underscores the theological shift: evil now has a name, a history, a descent, and an eschatological judgment.

In Jubilees, Mastema occupies an intermediate space , neither wholly divine nor fully autonomous. As “chief of the spirits,” he requests that one-tenth of the disembodied spirits of the Nephilim remain under his authority to test humanity (Jub. 10:8–11). He tempts Abraham, hardens Pharaoh’s heart, and interferes with the covenantal history of Israel (Jub. 17:16–18). Mastema retains the legalistic function of the biblical satan but adds a degree of malevolent volition. He mirrors the Satan of Job yet also anticipates the Satan of Matthew 4. His ambiguous status -at once servant and enemy- marks a theological tension: how can evil be active in the world without compromising divine goodness?

This tension is resolved, not by eliminating Mastema’s link to GOD, but by eschatologizing it. Mastema, like Azazel and Belial, will ultimately be destroyed, judged, or banished. Thus, he is permitted to act now for the sake of divine testing but will be erased in the world to come. This is the essence of relative dualism: evil is real, powerful, and structured,but not eternal.

The text of 2 Enoch adds a unique dimension as James H. Charlesworth in , Old Testament Pseudepigrapha argues ,Satanael, once a high-ranking archangel, rebels and is expelled from heaven to the aerial realm, the space between heaven and earth. This cosmological placement becomes critical in later Christian literature, especially Paul’s references to “the powers of the air.” (Daniel Boyarin , Border Lines)

Here, Satan’s rebellion is not merely moral but spatial: the divine realm is pure; the terrestrial realm is human; the aerial realm is now demonic. Satanael’s temptation of Eve is a deliberate inversion of divine order. He becomes a counter-creator, a parody of divine sovereignty whose realm mirrors the structure of heaven but is animated by corruption.

The Qumran texts, particularly the War Scroll (1QM) and Community Rule (Serekh HaYachad), develop Belial as a full-scale eschatological antagonist. Armin Lange in his Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls notes Belial governs the lot of darkness, opposes the sons of light, and commands legions of demonic spirits that afflict the righteous. He is responsible for impurity, illness, and doctrinal error as is also reflected in Testament of Reuben.

What is novel here is not simply that evil is personified, but that it is structurally opposed to good in a dualistic schema. As G. Widengren argues, this model likely borrows from Iranian dualism but adapts it into a temporally constrained theology: evil has a kingdom, but it will be overthrown. Belial is also politically charged. In Qumran ideology, Roman imperial forces and Hellenistic oppressors are mapped onto the demonic: cosmic war is mirrored in sociopolitical struggle. Resistance to empire becomes part of apocalyptic faithfulness. Evil is not only a theological abstraction but a historical experience (Lester L. Grabbe , A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period)

In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the demonic is no longer merely external. Beliar causes lust (Reuben 4:7), anger (Dan 1:7), and spiritual blindness. Levi 18:12 describes him as the enemy of the Messiah. Evil is now internalized, psychologized, woven into the framework of human will. This anticipates New Testament language: “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak”; “I do not do the good I want.” Beliar is the reflection of human conflict, between desire and duty, virtue and vice. He functions not merely as a mythic being but as an explanatory metaphor for moral collapse.

In Life of Adam and Eve, Satan’s fall stems not from cosmic treason but jealousy, he refuses to bow before Adam. His temptation of them is driven by resentment, introducing emotion into the Satanic narrative: envy, spite, ambition.

The Apocalypse of Abraham portrays Azazel as a hybrid: part serpent, part man, part angel, part beast. He possesses “glory,” yet it is a counterfeit of the divine. He functions as a false messiah, a seducer through illusion rather than force. His scapegoat role echoes Yom Kippur, yet inverts it; he carries away sin not for reconciliation but for destruction.These texts mark the final pre-Christian stage: Satan is now fully dramatized, mythic, psychological, eschatological, and historical.

The Intertestamental Satan is not singular, but composite: a layered figure evolving across centuries and genres. He is at once: accuser and adversary; angel and rebel; tester and tempter; scapegoat and sovereign; political force and inner impulse.This evolution prepares the stage for Christian theology. The New Testament’s Satan, who tempts Jesus, possesses Judas, and accuses the saints, is not invented ex nihilo but drawn from this mosaic of images.

He is the shadow cast by covenantal crisis, the demonic face of empire, the internal logic of sin, and the eschatological enemy of God.

Shoaib Mohammad (KAS),

Chief Accounts Officer, Anti Corruption Bureau, J&K