Access

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
#42
I disagree. I don't find any certainty. First, as I understand it, Revelation is a writing of what came to the author in an inspired dream. Since the dragon he saw was clearly one opposed to God, of course he would label him as "Satan", a character that had developed because of society. Secondly, the verse says right in it "the one who is called Satan" (emphasis added). This supports Cleante's point of view more.

So, while I don't disagree that verses 9 and 10 are talking about the same being, I'm saying that it doesn't shed any light on Satan vs. Ha-Satan.
My point is that the accuser of verse ten is the Satan of verse nine.
Regarding the "inspired dream", there are not two classes of scripture. I Timothy says that all scripture is inspired. Anything that you consider scripture is to be treated with the same respect. The locus of inspiration is the original autograph, not just the thoughts in the human author's head.
The Koine Greek word "kaloumenos" mean the one called or named. In Greek, the word called is not used that way. They would say "falsely called".
The difference between Satanas and Satam is simply language, not meaning. Satam was a Hebrew word which when translated into Greek became Satanas. The "ha" is simply the equivilent of "the".
 
E

ExplodingBryan

Guest
#43
Yes, I am trying to understand what you meant by "Satan vs. Ha-Satan".
Cleante has been telling me about the history of the character "Satan". In Job, the "Satan" is Ha-Satan, which means "the accuser". My comment is related to our discussion about if there is a Satan or if it is simply "the accuser".

I hope that clarifies things for you. If not, ask me more questions.
 
E

ExplodingBryan

Guest
#44
My point is that the accuser of verse ten is the Satan of verse nine.
Regarding the "inspired dream", there are not two classes of scripture. I Timothy says that all scripture is inspired. Anything that you consider scripture is to be treated with the same respect. The locus of inspiration is the original autograph, not just the thoughts in the human author's head.
The Koine Greek word "kaloumenos" mean the one called or named. In Greek, the word called is not used that way. They would say "falsely called".
The difference between Satanas and Satam is simply language, not meaning. Satam was a Hebrew word which when translated into Greek became Satanas. The "ha" is simply the equivilent of "the".
As I pointed out in my last post to you, I get your point.

Inspired or not, a dream still requires interpretation. I'd say there are more than two classes of Scripture, but it depends on the kind of class we're talking about and I don't want to get into that. What you do need to know in regard to this is that I wasn't discrediting Revelation because it was a dream, but I do think it's relevant that the book was the result of a vision.

I can appreciate your knowledge of a Greek word, but it is entirely possible for a being to be "called" (read: not falsely called) a name that is not true, unbeknownst to the one calling the other that name.

Finally, I really don't wish to be rude, but I think we're all getting tired of you calling us Scripture-haters.
 
S

Shwagga

Guest
#45
Cleante has been telling me about the history of the character "Satan". In Job, the "Satan" is Ha-Satan, which means "the accuser". My comment is related to our discussion about if there is a Satan or if it is simply "the accuser".

I hope that clarifies things for you. If not, ask me more questions.
Satan means "accuser" in Hebrew, "ha" or ה in Hebrew in this particular case plays the definite article which is interchangeable for the English word "the". So you were saying "accuser vs the accuser", which is what I was trying to point out. In Hebrew nouns can also be given as names, so anywhere you find "Satan" in the Old Covenant it simply means accuser, but because it's a name they give you the transliteration - Satan. So "Satan" even though it's very commonly used in English and we wouldn't think it's a Hebrew word, it is.
 
S

Shwagga

Guest
#46
Perhaps you could make a case of the traditional Christian or Jewish view of Satan vs your views though.
 
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
#47
As I pointed out in my last post to you, I get your point.

Inspired or not, a dream still requires interpretation. I'd say there are more than two classes of Scripture, but it depends on the kind of class we're talking about and I don't want to get into that. What you do need to know in regard to this is that I wasn't discrediting Revelation because it was a dream, but I do think it's relevant that the book was the result of a vision.
Again, there is only one divine author. I believe in the inspiration of the words of scripture. God so moved upon men, using their own personalities, that the words that they wrote were the very words that He intended.

I can appreciate your knowledge of a Greek word, but it is entirely possible for a being to be "called" (read: not falsely called) a name that is not true, unbeknownst to the one calling the other that name.
"You shall call his name Jesus." "They shall call his name Emmanuel." "He shall be called a Nazarene." "They shall be called the children of God." "He shall be called the Son of God." "simon call Zealotes" "Mary called Magdalene." "City called Nain." Went through all of them. Not once is "called" used in that English sense of being something in name only, not in reality.

Finally, I really don't wish to be rude, but I think we're all getting tired of you calling us Scripture-haters.
I don't think that you are scriptures haters. I just think that trying to draw a linguistic distinction between Ha-Satem and Satanas is unsupportable.
 

Cleante

Senior Member
May 7, 2010
280
0
16
#48
I don't think that you are scriptures haters. I just think that trying to draw a linguistic distinction between Ha-Satem and Satanas is unsupportable.
1 Sam 29:4 " The Philistines send David away, lest "he become an adversary [Satan] to us in the battle."

2 Sam 19:22 "What have I done to do with you...that you should today become an adversary [Satan[ to me?

1 Kings 11:14 "Then the Lord raised up an adversary [Satan] against Solomon Hadad the Edomite; he was of the royal house in Edom."

God sends Adversaries [Satans] to punish Solomon for letting his wives lead him astray.

Numbers 22:32-33 "come forth as a satan [emphasis here] because Balaam's journey was undertaken hastily."

I'd like to see you explain those. The concept of the modern day Satan has evolved over the centuries. I am not discounting that demonic forces exist. I am merely saying the title Satan, accuser, may not necessarily reflect the "Prince of Evil" as some say.
 
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
#49
1 Sam 29:4 " The Philistines send David away, lest "he become an adversary [Satan] to us in the battle."

2 Sam 19:22 "What have I done to do with you...that you should today become an adversary [Satan[ to me?

1 Kings 11:14 "Then the Lord raised up an adversary [Satan] against Solomon Hadad the Edomite; he was of the royal house in Edom."

God sends Adversaries [Satans] to punish Solomon for letting his wives lead him astray.

Numbers 22:32-33 "come forth as a satan [emphasis here] because Balaam's journey was undertaken hastily."

I'd like to see you explain those. The concept of the modern day Satan has evolved over the centuries. I am not discounting that demonic forces exist. I am merely saying the title Satan, accuser, may not necessarily reflect the "Prince of Evil" as some say.
I agree. I think that the use of Satanas in the New Testament is more specific because it is a Hebrew word being brought into Greek rather than using the Greek word for adversary.
 
E

ExplodingBryan

Guest
#50
Perhaps you could make a case of the traditional Christian or Jewish view of Satan vs your views though.
I can't do this because my view prior to this discussion was that traditional view. Cleante pointed out the Ha-Satan concept to me, so I'm fleshing it out.

It makes perfect sense that society would want to put a face on evil. When we look back at the Holocaust, Hitler shoulders nearly all of the blame. Most aren't fans of the Nazis, but Hitler gets most of the attention for the wrong acts committed around and during WWII. Same kind of concept here, when the evil of another realm comes into discussion, Christians (and Jews as you pointed out) are pretty quick to blame Satan. Probably in part because it's a mouthful to say, "Some angel pointed out that I might do something evil and I did." :)

If anyone's capable of making the case you suggested, it's Cleante and I think she's been doing an amazing job of that already.
 
E

ExplodingBryan

Guest
#51
I agree. I think that the use of Satanas in the New Testament is more specific because it is a Hebrew word being brought into Greek rather than using the Greek word for adversary.
So, Satan (in the now-commonly-perceived sense) was created in time for the NT because it was going to be written in a new language? Because Greek as a language is incapable of giving someone a proper name? I'm confused. Satan (read: not Ha-Satan) can't just pop up; either it was always him, Eden to dragon, or it wasn't.
 

Cleante

Senior Member
May 7, 2010
280
0
16
#52
I agree. I think that the use of Satanas in the New Testament is more specific because it is a Hebrew word being brought into Greek rather than using the Greek word for adversary.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Jesus said, "Have not I chosen you twelve (disciples), and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot..." who was an ordinary, mortal man. He was not speaking of a personal being with horns, or a so-called 'spirit being'. The word 'devil' here simply refers to a wicked man. 1 Tim.3:11 provides another example. The wives of church elders were not to be "slanderers"; the original Greek word here is 'diabolos', which is the same word translated 'devil' elsewhere. Thus Paul warns Titus that the aged women in the ecclesia should not be "false accusers" or 'devils' (Tit.2:3). And likewise he told Timothy (2 Tim.3:1,3) that "In the last days...men shall be...false accusers (devils)". This does not mean that human beings will turn into superhuman beings, but that they will be increasingly wicked. It ought to be quite clear from all this that the words 'devil' and 'satan' do not refer to a fallen Angel or a sinful being outside of us.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]However, you may reasonably reply: 'But it does talk as if the devil is a person!' That is quite correct; Heb.2:14 speaks of "him that hath the power of death, that is, the devil". Even a small amount of Bible reading shows that it often uses personification - speaking of an abstract idea as if it is a person. Thus Prov. 9:1 speaks of a woman called 'Wisdom' building a house, and Rom.6:23 likens sin to a paymaster giving wages of death. This feature is further discussed in Digression 5. Our devil, the 'diabolos', often represents our evil desires. Yet you cannot have abstract diabolism; the evil desires that are in a man's heart cannot exist separately from a man; therefore 'the devil' is personified. Sin is often personified as a master (e.g. Rom.5:21; 6:6,17; 7:3). It is understandable, therefore, that the 'devil' is also personified, seeing that 'the devil' also refers to sin. In the same way, Paul speaks of us having two beings, as it were, within our flesh (Rom.7:15-21): the man of the flesh, 'the devil', fights with the man of the Spirit. Yet it is evident that there are not two literal, personal beings fighting within us. This sinful part of our nature is personified as "the evil one" (Mt.6:13 R.V.) - the Biblical devil. The same Greek phrase translated "evil one" here is translated as "wicked person" in 1 Cor.5:13, showing that when a person gives way to sin, his "evil one" - he himself - becomes an "evil one", or a 'devil'.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
I'd like to see a reply to this too.
 

Cleante

Senior Member
May 7, 2010
280
0
16
#53
Also, for reference.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]These words 'devil' and 'satan' are also used to describe the wicked, sinful world order in which we live. The social, political and pseudo-religious hierarchies of mankind can be spoken of in terms of 'the devil'. The devil and satan in the New Testament often refer to the political and social power of the Jewish or Roman systems. Thus we read of the devil casting believers into prison (Rev.2:10), referring to the Roman authorities imprisoning believers. In this same context we read of the church in Pergamos being situated where Satan's seat, or throne, was - i.e. the place of governorship for a Roman colony in Pergamos, where there was also a group of believers. We cannot say that Satan himself, if he exists, personally had a throne in Pergamos. [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Individual sin is defined as a transgression against God's law (1 Jn.3:4). But sin expressed collectively as a political and social force opposed to God is a force more powerful than individuals; it is this collective power which is sometimes personified as a powerful being called the devil. In this sense Iran and other Islamic powers have called the United States, "the great Satan" - i.e. the great adversary to their cause, in political and religious terms. This is how the words 'devil' and 'satan' are often used in the Bible.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
 
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
#54
So, Satan (in the now-commonly-perceived sense) was created in time for the NT because it was going to be written in a new language? Because Greek as a language is incapable of giving someone a proper name? I'm confused. Satan (read: not Ha-Satan) can't just pop up; either it was always him, Eden to dragon, or it wasn't.
The New Testament writers were bringing a Jewish concept inot their writings. Sometimes they used the word "diabolos" (which comes into our language a devil) and sometimes they went to the Hebrew and used the word Satanas. The word "diabolos' is used 38 times. Three times (when it is in the plural) is refers to slanderers or accusers. When it is in the singular, with the definite article, it is a title, translated devil. (By the way, there is a separate word for demons.) In the New Testament, Satanas (35 times) is always used as a title.
 
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
#56
I'd like to see a reply to this too.
So here we switch from the uses of Satanas, to the use of diabolos. This ability to use diabolos (particularly in the plural) as accusers is one of the reason I believe that Satanas is used. The Judas reference isn't particularly problematic as diabolos is still being used as a title. As I said, when it is used in the New Testament in the plural, it is slanderers or accusers. When it used in the singular, it is used as a title. Probably the reference that might be most easily interpreted as refering to the world system or to the Caesar is Rev. 2:10.

My take on Satan is that he is not just a personification. I do not believe that he is as powerful as some do, nor do I believe that he can corrupt us against our will. I cannot see Jesus being tempted by the idea or personification of evil.

Your latest clip is interesting, but I might only see this as a tertiary usage. Jesus and the apostles never had a problem with pointing out the evils of the world system without needing to use personifications.
 
S

Shwagga

Guest
#57
I can't do this because my view prior to this discussion was that traditional view. Cleante pointed out the Ha-Satan concept to me, so I'm fleshing it out.

It makes perfect sense that society would want to put a face on evil. When we look back at the Holocaust, Hitler shoulders nearly all of the blame. Most aren't fans of the Nazis, but Hitler gets most of the attention for the wrong acts committed around and during WWII. Same kind of concept here, when the evil of another realm comes into discussion, Christians (and Jews as you pointed out) are pretty quick to blame Satan. Probably in part because it's a mouthful to say, "Some angel pointed out that I might do something evil and I did." :)

If anyone's capable of making the case you suggested, it's Cleante and I think she's been doing an amazing job of that already.
There is no difference between Satan and haSatan they are both the same exact words. Now, when investigating Satan you should be looking at the entire Bible (old and new Covenant) as a whole to make a doctrine. Not just getting pieces from Job, as a matter of fact the concept of taking anything from the old Covenant without using the light shed on it in the new, would not be a proper doctrine. IE: Afterlife is not mentioned much at all in the Tanakh but it is brought to light in the New Covenant.

In the same way, we have to understand who Satan is in light of all the Scriptures. First of all we have the testimony of the prophet Isaiah (or Yeshayahu, since you like Hebrew names) in the 14th chapter.

12 “ How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer (in Hebrew means "morning star"), son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!
13 For you have said in your heart:
‘ I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’
15 Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.
16 “ Those who see you will gaze at you,
And consider you, saying:
‘ Is this the man who made the earth tremble,
Who shook kingdoms,
17 Who made the world as a wilderness
And destroyed its cities,
Who did not open the house of his prisoners?’
18 “ All the kings of the nations,
All of them, sleep in glory,
Everyone in his own house;
19 But you are cast out of your grave
Like an abominable branch,
Like the garment of those who are slain,
Thrust through with a sword,
Who go down to the stones of the pit,
Like a corpse trodden underfoot.
20 You will not be joined with them in burial,
Because you have destroyed your land
And slain your people.
The brood of evildoers shall never be named.
21 Prepare slaughter for his children
Because of the iniquity of their fathers,
Lest they rise up and possess the land,
And fill the face of the world with cities.”

We also have passages like Luke chapter 4, where this same Satan tempts Yeshua. He begs for worship and obviously twits the words of haShem. This is not some friendly patner of God that is just used by God because first of all we have James telling us that God does not tempt us (so who does?). Look at the clear words of the apostle Peter.

1 Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.

First the concept of Satan (by the way in Hebrew names define character, so Satan means "adversary" in Hebrew and Satan literally is ha-Satan, the adversary) - the same adversary that Peter calls the "devil" that walks about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.

So, I'll let you draw the conclusion here, but I wouldn't want you to believe that Satan is really some friendly angel, rather Yeshua calls him the "father of lies" and a "murderer", the apostle Paul said never to give any room for the devil and always put on the armor of God to protect yourself literally "that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil." (Eph. 6:11)

One last comment, Paul also said in Ephesians 6:12:
For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

Once again, I'll let you draw the conclusion. I hope may have been of some help to you.

Shalom!
 
Last edited:
E

ExplodingBryan

Guest
#58
There is no difference between Satan and haSatan they are both the same exact words. Now, when investigating Satan you should be looking at the entire Bible (old and new Covenant) as a whole to make a doctrine. Not just getting pieces from Job, as a matter of fact the concept of taking anything from the old Covenant without using the light shed on it in the new, would not be a proper doctrine. IE: Afterlife is not mentioned much at all in the Tanakh but it is brought to light in the New Covenant.

In the same way, we have to understand who Satan is in light of all the Scriptures. First of all we have the testimony of the prophet Isaiah (or Yeshayahu, since you like Hebrew names) in the 14th chapter.

12 “ How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer (in Hebrew means "morning star"), son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!
13 For you have said in your heart:
‘ I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’
15 Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.
16 “ Those who see you will gaze at you,
And consider you, saying:
‘ Is this the man who made the earth tremble,
Who shook kingdoms,
17 Who made the world as a wilderness
And destroyed its cities,
Who did not open the house of his prisoners?’
18 “ All the kings of the nations,
All of them, sleep in glory,
Everyone in his own house;
19 But you are cast out of your grave
Like an abominable branch,
Like the garment of those who are slain,
Thrust through with a sword,
Who go down to the stones of the pit,
Like a corpse trodden underfoot.
20 You will not be joined with them in burial,
Because you have destroyed your land
And slain your people.
The brood of evildoers shall never be named.
21 Prepare slaughter for his children
Because of the iniquity of their fathers,
Lest they rise up and possess the land,
And fill the face of the world with cities.”

We also have passages like Luke chapter 4, where this same Satan tempts Yeshua. He begs for worship and obviously twits the words of haShem. This is not some friendly patner of God that is just used by God because first of all we have James telling us that God does not tempt us (so who does?). Look at the clear words of the apostle Peter.

1 Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.

First the concept of Satan (by the way in Hebrew names define character, so Satan means "adversary" in Hebrew and Satan literally is ha-Satan, the adversary) - the same adversary that Peter calls the "devil" that walks about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.

So, I'll let you draw the conclusion here, but I wouldn't want you to believe that Satan is really some friendly angel, rather Yeshua calls him the "father of lies" and a "murderer", the apostle Paul said never to give any room for the devil and always put on the armor of God to protect yourself literally "that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil." (Eph. 6:11)

One last comment, Paul also said in Ephesians 6:12:
For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

Once again, I'll let you draw the conclusion. I hope may have been of some help to you.

Shalom!
I feel like the victim of a bait-and-switch. :) This was helpful though.

We pulled verses from many more books than Job on this topic. It seems to be one of those things that can be well-argued either way. It's also something that does not matter much in regards to our walk with the Lord. It doesn't make much difference, if any, whether it is one specific demon tempting me or one of many.

I certainly don't believe Satan is friendly. He is definitely opposed to God and working his hardest to keep us from Him.

What is the Tanakh?
 
S

Shwagga

Guest
#59
I feel like the victim of a bait-and-switch. :) This was helpful though.

We pulled verses from many more books than Job on this topic. It seems to be one of those things that can be well-argued either way. It's also something that does not matter much in regards to our walk with the Lord. It doesn't make much difference, if any, whether it is one specific demon tempting me or one of many.

I certainly don't believe Satan is friendly. He is definitely opposed to God and working his hardest to keep us from Him.

What is the Tanakh?
I agree for the most part with what you said, however we should know our enemy. Still not anything to be dogmatic about though.

The Tanakh is the Hebrew bible (old Covenant/Testament).

TaNaKh (תנייך)

T- Torah (Teaching, ie: the Law) (תורה)
N- Nevi'im (Prophets) (נביאים)
K - Ketuvim (Writings) (כתובים)

Theres different variations of spelling because English and Hebrew do not have equivalent letters so it's Tanakh Tanach Tenak etc..

Shalom!