Q&R: What is Satan? Who tempted Jesus? Brian Zahnd & Bradley Jersak

Question:

How are we to understand “Satan” or “the satan”?

Brian Zahnd:

I don’t know that we fully can, but I understand the satan to be a cosmic spiritual-psychic phenomenon arising from idolatry and accusation, reaching its ultimate form in anti-human empire.

Thus, for Isaiah, Lucifer is the King of Babylon who falls with the fall of Babylon. The satan is more than a metaphor, but less than a person; by that I mean the satan, though a very real and dangerous phenomenon, does not actually possess ontological being. The satan, like evil itself, is parasitic in nature. It cannot exist independently because it is not created by God. The satan can only exist by colonizing a host. If there is no host for the satan, the satan ceases to exist at all. Indeed, the devil is presented in Revelation as having “great wrath, because he knows that his time is short.”

Though the satanic is properly a phenomenon and not a person, the satanic phenomenon is so real, so powerful, so deadly, so destructive, that we cannot help but personify the satanic as Satan. This is probably a necessary and helpful move.

And if we associate the satanic with a fallen angel, surely it arises from an instinctual understanding that the very worst is nothing but the diabolical corruption of the very best. 

Question:

If the satan is not a person, who or what tempted Jesus in the wilderness?
What are Matthew 4:1-11, Mark 1:12, Luke 4:1-13 all about then?

Bradley Jersak:

That is a great question and—full disclosure—involves theological speculation. Nothing we can dogmatize. But let's start with a few aspects of the story of Jesus’s temptation in the wilderness, seven points about which we have some confidence:

• We know that Jesus faced and overcame a three-fold temptation in the wilderness.
• Oddly, all three Synoptic Evangelists describe the Spirit leading Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by "the devil" or “the satan.”
• When Jesus resists the devil, Matt. 4 quotes Jesus as saying, "Get away from me, Satan."
• We are confident that Jesus was there alone without other human witnesses.
• Therefore, we know that Jesus himself reported the temptations to his disciples, whose testimony the Gospels later record for us to read.
• In his account, Jesus personifies the devil or Satan. He believed this was the best way to tell us the story.
• We know that sometimes when addressing Satan, Jesus was not literally talking to a being called Satan, but specifically to any person or idea that tries to tempt him to bypass the Cross. E.g., He says to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan" (Mark 8:33, Matthew 16:23).

Again, Jesus is not at all averse to describing the works of the devil using personification... and this is why the claim that Satan is less than a person is still speculation, even if well-founded theologically. We don't make a dogma of it. We are, rather, challenging whether the assertion that the devil IS a literally a person, a fallen angel, or a sentient being should be taught as doctrine.

But now to your question. IF Satan is less than a person, what was Jesus dealing with? Michael Hardin, who wrote a booklet called "The Satan" (https://www.clarion-journal.com/files/fb-posts-on-the-satan-e-book1.pdf) suggested to me that we might think of the Satan in Matthew 4/Luke 4 as "Jesus' potential shadow side." What does that mean?

Romans 8 tells us that Jesus came "in the likeness of sinful human flesh," and Hebrews 2 and 4 insists that in the Incarnation, Jesus’s humanity was in every way like ours, tempted in every way as we are, yet without sin. Similarly, Gregory the Theologian said that Christ assumed every aspect of human nature in order to heal every aspect of human nature.

SO, if the temptations of Jesus were real (they were), we might speak of his temptations as approaching him externally (as the devil or satan). Jesus talked that way. But we might also think about temptation as an authentic part of the human condition—suggestions from the flesh or passions calling us to grasp our destiny autonomously (as with Adam and Eve). As part of the human condition, Jesus had to face and overcome those impulses personally and on behalf of us all. Why? (1) For him to be fully human and (2) for salvation to extend to every aspect of our humanity.

Hardin’s description then needs to be read VERY carefully. Did Jesus have a 'shadow side'? Michael doesn’t say that. He says *potential* shadow side... meaning (1) the temptation was authentic, (2) temptation is intrinsic to human nature, (3) but Christ faced it fully and overcame it entirely.

IF Satan is not a person, Jesus nevertheless felt personifying his struggle was the best way to describe it, exactly like my alcoholic friends describe "wrestling with their demons." They aren’t claiming to be “possessed,” but recognize how externalizing the temptations can be helpful in resisting them.  

Again, if Jesus used personification, he recognized it was as a good way to describe our battle with temptation. Why? From contemporary counseling practice and addition recovery, we have learned ways to resist temptation by externalizing destructive impulses and disowning as a false self, rather than wrongly over-identifying with it and assuming the shame of the temptation (e.g., “I am evil”).

On the other hand, the main reason to proceed to demythologizing the devil's personhood is when people skirt their agency and responsibility, saying, "The devil made me do it," as if giving in to temptation is not something they need to own. So says Paul, “By one man, sin entered the world, and death through sin” (Romans 5:12). 

For more on the temptations of Jesus in the wilderness: https://brianzahnd.com/tag/satan/

Comments

[Brad Jersak]

First, remember that the story is not written as history but as a parable of the human condition, describing what we all experience. This is the question of genre. We read poetry as poetry, parables as parables, letters as letters, legends as legends, history as history.

When we read inspired myth (which is an important way of conveying truth) as if it were history, then we miss the truth the myth was revealing. In this case, we have the story of a man called (literally) 'man' or 'human,' a woman called (literally) 'life', a tree called 'life' and another tree called 'knowledge of good and evil' and then a talking serpent with legs (at first, like the ones on the gates of Babylon that Daniel would have seen... and are now in the Pergamum Museum in Berlin).

Now to the tree. The tree itself was not evil. The tree was about knowledge or discernment of good and evil. That's actually good. And the early Christian teachers suggest that they would have partaken of the fruit at some point as they matured through their walk with God (they were moral toddlers at this point). The actual problem was that they wanted to eat the fruit (determine good and evil) for themselves without consulting God or submitting to God's standards. They disobeyed. And that was what poisoned them.

Now how is this story about all of us? We were all born innocent but immature, and yet at some point, we are confronted with choices about what is right. It's not only a question of whether we'll do the right thing or not, but first, will we seek God as to what is right or will we act out of our own self-will and decide to choose for ourselves what is right and what is wrong without God? We so often think we know what's best for ourselves and therefore act as if we are gods without God. And then what happens? Things don't go well and we stumble into shame and alienation.

The good news is that the story continues. Even leaving the Garden, God goes with us and has promised to make it right through the Seed of Eve (Jesus). In his death, he restores life and makes the Cross the Tree of Life so we can eat of it and experience the eternal kind of life that Jesus describes as knowing God and his Son.

[diana]

Thank you for these discussions on evil and sin. I just finished Bradley Jersak's June 4, 2023 article: "The Devil...from the Arche." My wrestling with this is then how was the tree in Eden the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, if there was no sin yet? If sin originates evil in humankind, what was the serpent in the garden? Both the tree and the serpent were not "created" by humankind as the text seems to say.
I am just an un-scholared follower of Jesus, who loves how rentlessly our triune God loves all of his creation. He's been deepening my awareness of His loving character daily as I wrestle and am humbled daily by my hip being left out of joint.