Derek Brown (a friend who works at Faithlife/Logos with me) recently had his dissertation published through Mohr-Siebeck. The dissertation itself (done at Edinburgh) is available for free online. It’s entitled: “God of this age: Satan in the churches and Letters of the Apostle Paul.” Here is the abstract:
This thesis aims to elucidate the nature of the references to Satan in the undisputed Pauline corpus. Although scholarship has frequently devoted attention to the various “powers of evil” in Paul’s letters—including principalities, rulers, demons, etc.—insufficient consideration has been given to the figure of Satan as an isolated subject matter. Moreover, scholarship on the individual references to Satan has often neglected Paul’s depiction of Satan’s activity vis-à-vis his apostolic calling. This raises the question, how and why does the Apostle Paul refer to the figure of Satan in his letters? In order to address this question, the thesis commences by examining two key areas of background material. First, Chapter Two investigates the various “images” of Satan in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Jewish texts. Instead of delineating a historical sketch of the development of Satan in Jewish thought, emphasis is placed on the various roles in which Satan functions within these writings. Second, Chapters Two and Three investigate two aspects of Paul’s theology which relate to his references to Satan. First, Satan’s place within Paul’s apocalyptic theology is explicated (Chapter Three). Second, the thesis considers Paul’s self-understanding as the Apostle to the Gentiles and, critically, the importance of Paul’s churches for his apostleship (Chapter Four). Chapters Five and Six then utilize the findings of the previous chapters in their examination of the ten clear references to Satan in the undisputed Pauline letters. Chapter Five focuses on the sole reference to Satan in Romans (16:20) and the two references in 1 Thessalonians (2:18; 3:5). Chapter Six then analyzes the several references to Satan in the Corinthian correspondence (1 Cor 5:5; 7:5; 2 Cor 2:11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:14; 12:7), including their collective significance. On the basis of the examination of the Pauline references to Satan, it is argued that Paul—while sharing the Jewish and early Christian understanding of Satan as an enemy and tempter of the people of God—fundamentally characterizes Satan in his letters as the apocalyptic adversary who opposes his apostolic labor (kopos). Paul does so, it is argued, because he believed that his apostleship was pivotal in spreading the gospel at a crucial point in salvation history. The final chapter then anticipates the implications of the study for further research.
How does Satan fit in your overall theology now? Does he fit the typical “commander of all evil spirits” view I was raised on?
Reason I ask is what we know of the beney elohim revolt, it doesn’t seem likely any of them would just be “good evil soldiers” following the lead of anyone else.
Hey Mike, is this dissertation free? It is really cool to see some scholarly work on the figure of Satan as a singular. Even more exciting that it comes from a close friend of yours.
I will read it and get back with my thoughts.
Chris.
yep – free
Thanks!
Some thoughts on the good section in here about the ” Kingdom now, but not yet ” understanding. Since one of your main things Mike, is wanting us to see things the way the writers of the bible would of saw them, I really wonder ,if what was in Paul’s mind when he wrote about what we actually have in Christ, if he wasn’t thinking more ” the Spirit is fulfillment” verses a ” Kingdom now, but not yet” idea ? When I see other passages in scripture like John saying ” I was in the Spirit on the Lords day” or Paul in his consistent speaking about ” The flesh” and ” The Spirit” and basically saying that ” The body without the Spirit, is an abomination” while saying that the body WITH the Spirit, can ascend to heaven, as much as we choose. I mean , when we are with a group of brothers, and we hear the whisperings and back bites, the difference between staying in the Spirit of love, or giving into sin and returning evil, is the difference between being in one realm or another, from dust passing by in the wind, to a solid realm of light, from just being ” a body” to being alive , glorious ! I mean we CHOOSE to be as much alive as we want. When I was born again, it was a highly contrastive event, like CS Lewis’ ant coming out of the crack in the sidewalk, like coming out of a slavery to many murky gods , to a Clear God. And that new life was meant to be forever ,after that Christ event that we made ours. And we are called to stay in That Spirit, in order to not have the effect of The flesh, and any backslide from that ,is decadence ,back into the other realm.Another way I can say it is, — Do we tell our wives we ” love them, but not yet ” ? LoL— I think of Paul as seeing the issue as a division between Spirit and body. I am wondering if Paul wasnt thinking the issue is the Spirit, not just the body , and not the ,”Kingdom, but not yet”. Victor Alexander, in His more ancient Aramaic translation ,translates 1 Cor 3 ; 1-3 this way. ” And I bretheren, do not find it advisable that we should converse as spirits, except as people in the flesh and as children in Christ. You were given milk to drink, and you wre not given food to eat. For neither were you ready then nor are you now. For you are still in the flesh, whetefore there is strife,destructive practices and divisions among you, ARE YOU NOT BODIES WALKING IN THE FLESH “– End quote–Saying that the body, without the Spirit, is nothing, and less than nothing, an abomination. And not in the sense of saying the Spirit is good, and the body is bad, but in the sense of saying that the body, WHITHOUT the Spirit, is bad. And therefore there are things said like ” The Spirit is the truth” or ” We live in the Spirit” etc, etc, etc.throughout scripture. And the flesh or body, is seen as something that is There, but has been made to be nothing more than a thing to keep us buffeted, and in The Spirit. I mean, could we maintain the fact of the Kenosis, and ourselves as being “seated in heavenly places” NOW, if we use the term ” Kingdom now, but not yet” ? To get to the point again, I am just making and observation , and don’t know if it is a useful one, or Not.- But isnt the issue just–How MUCH do we want to walk in The Spirit, and Not, ” The Kingdom now, but not yet” ?? I realize that I may be just getting into symantics here, or even that it s a non- issue, but , just wanted to give some observations, and mabe that we could use a better phrase like ” Are Ascended with Christ, or NOT ” ? When we ask a brother how is he doing. Instead of asking ” Are you in the Kingdom NOW, or noooooooot yet ? LoL
I don’t see anything in Scripture that has all other divine rebels in total allegiance to the original rebel. I think he gets spoken of in elevated terms because he was the first rebel, not because of any ontological superiority, or because other rebels consider him superior. Given their own free will, I think it entirely possible that other evil powers have their own agendas. They hate the same person(s) but that’s different than being in lock step.
I think that’s a useful / meaningful trajectory because the Spirit is linked clearly to the kingdom in so many ways.
Speaking as an unaffiliated pawn in all of this, I have a few thoughts/question regarding Satan: if it knows what we know about the bible and stuff, how come it continues to march to the tune of what it is written? Surely it knows the score. The endgame doesn’t look good for it. Was this being given free-choice over its actions? Wouldn’t it be better for it to attempt to thwart the plan of God by doing nothing? – OK, so everyone is expecting me do this and that, well, I’m not going to do it. How about that?
Suppose it decided, for example, not to raise an antichrist and such. Wouldn’t certain prophesies be voided by that action? I mean what is point of continuing with a plan doomed to failure? I just don’t understand it, Dr. Heiser. And please bear in mind that I’m not siding with Satan or anything, given that it has no reason to like humans whatsoever, specially when we are a remainder of God’s favoritism. I mean, I suppose if I were Satan I would drag as many people to hell as I could, simply because.. why do they get to repent and I don’t? But, who knows? Maybe all of this is just a construct of our mind to help us explain why bad things happen.
The point of disconnect for me here is the notion of Satan “raising up” an antichrist – what is the basis for that idea? As opposed to someone making that choice and Satan choosing to help out?
It’s worth noting that many misconceptions re the more liminal things in Scripture today got shaped via mystery plays, Milton’s Paradise Lost, and Dante’s Inferno. E.g., the idea of an apple being the Forbidden Fruit.
Lotta funny teachings out there that creep into your head, you have to carve them away from your head and leave only the supportable ones.