Did the Concept of Satan Evolve?

The Old Testament mentions Satan far less than the New Testament. Indeed, some critics claim that the OT doesn’t mention Satan at all, and the concept of Satan only appears in Israel as a post-exilic invention. Later, they argue, the NT authors further embellished the concept of Satan. Is this true? What is the evidence for and against the theory that the concept of Satan evolved over the course of biblical history?

What is the evidence FOR the evolutionary view of Satan?

ARGUMENT #1. Satan appears far less in the OT than in the NT. This is certainly true, but what does it prove? After all, this is true of all theology, because the Bible is a book of progressive revelation.

The concept of progressive revelation is fundamentally different from the evolutionary view espoused by critics of the Bible. Progressive revelation is like the turning letters in the game show The Wheel of Fortune. The message was there from the beginning, and it was slowly revealed over time. The evolutionary view is quite different. It holds that the concept itself changed over time. To put this in philosophical terms, progressive revelation refers to epistemology, while evolutionary theology refers to ontology.

Since progressive revelation occurs throughout virtually all theological subjects, the revelation regarding Satan is no different. Furthermore, the revelation of Satan in the OT fits well with what we read in the NT. Thus, Williams writes, “Altering the Old Testament understanding of Satan in light of the New Testament picture of Satan is less like replacing Aristotle’s astronomical theories with those of Copernicus than it is like replacing Newton’s theory of gravity with Einstein’s.”^[1]

ARGUMENT #2. Post-exilic Jews invented Satan to explain the problem of evil. Critical scholars argue that post-exilic Jews invented Satan as a way of addressing the problem of evil. Under this view, later Jewish authors attributed the origin of evil to Satan to blame the problem of evil on Satan—not God. As a case in point, in the earlier account of Israel’s history, God moved David to take the census (2 Sam. 24:1), but later, Satan was the one held responsible in the retelling of the story (1 Chron. 21:1). For instance, Harvard scholar G. Earnest Wright argues,

In the Old Testament clear references to demons are rare… The world of Satan with his powers and principalities of darkness is a development in later Judaism… so definite is the Old Testament in its exaltation of God that all things good and bad were ascribed to him. The doctrine of Satan only gradually came into being to alleviate the difficulties inherent in this view.^[2]

The problem with this claim is that we would need to believe that it took centuries for the Jewish people to recognize the problem of evil. Moreover, the “answer” of having Satan explain away the problem of evil is absurd. After all, as modern critics are apt to ask, “Who created Satan?” This would only push the question back a step.

ARGUMENT #3. Satan is not mentioned in Genesis 3. Critics argue that the “serpent” in Genesis 3 is never identified as Satan. However, we disagree for a number of reasons. This is no ordinary Serpent. For one, the word “Serpent” has the definite article (“the serpent”).^[3] Second, he can talk! Third, he’s a theologian who knows about God’s words (Gen. 2:17; 3:4). Fourth, he will be crushed by one of Eve’s descendants. The text doesn’t say that his seed will be crushed by her seed. Rather, one of Eve’s descendants will crush the Serpent himself. This implies that he will live for a long time. Fifth, God addresses him as a personal being, describing “all the days of your life” (Gen. 3:15). Sixth, the word “serpent” (nāchash) is similar to the word for “divination” or “omens” (Num. 23:22; 24:1).^[4] The verbal form “divined” (nāḥaš) is also similar (Gen. 30:27, 44:5, 44:15, Lev. 19:26, Deut. 18:10). This could be a literary connection with occult practice. In the ancient Near East, snakes “were symbolic of life, wisdom, and chaos.”^[5] Seventh, extrabiblical sources held that this figure was Satan himself: “Through the devil’s envy death entered the world, and those who belong to his company experience it” (Wisdom of Solomon 2:24).

In the NT, we see that the “Serpent” is none other than Satan himself. John writes, “The great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world” (Rev. 12:9; cf. 20:2). Jesus said, “[The devil] was a murderer from the beginning” (Jn. 8:44; cf. Mt. 23:33). This reference to the “beginning” seems to point to Genesis 3. Other NT references assume that this narrative was historical as well (Rom. 16:20, 2 Cor. 11:3-4, 1 Tim. 2:14).

ARGUMENT #4. The name “Satan” (śāṭān) simply means “adversary.” The word doesn’t explicitly refer to God’s enemy, and in fact, sometimes good angels are identified with the title “adversary” (śāṭān). For instance, Numbers states, “God was angry because he was going, and the angel of the LORD took his stand in the way as an adversary [śāṭān] against him. Now he was riding on his donkey and his two servants were with him” (Num. 22:22). Here “Satan” appears to be on God’s side. He is even called “the angel of the Lord.”

This argument assumes that a word can only be used in one way. Yet, in Numbers 22, the term “adversary” is being used in a generic sense—not as a title or a name. In fact, the author uses it in an indefinite sense (“an adversary”), rather than a definite sense (“the adversary”). The word can be used to refer to human adversaries (1 Kin. 11:14, 23, 25; 1 Sam. 29:4; 2 Sam. 19:22), but this doesn’t preclude it being used to refer to a singular and unique adversary.

ARGUMENT #5. Satan is one of God’s prosecuting attorneys in Job 1-2. In Job, Satan appears in heaven before God (Job 1-2). Critics, however, argue that this is merely another example of Satan being one of God’s prosecuting attorneys—not one of his fallen enemies. Yet, several problems confront this interpretation:

First, the definite article appears before Satan’s name (“the Satan”).^[6] This shows that this figure is unique among the angels (“sons of God”). This is similar to the use of the definite article in Genesis 3:1 (“the serpent”), who is identified as “the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world” (Rev. 12:9; cf. 20:2).

Second, Satan is in some sense separate from the other angels. The angels appear before God, and Satan appears “among them” (Job 1:6; 2:1). This implies that he is somehow distinct from the larger group of angels (Ezek. 28:14ff).

Third, Satan tried to “incite” God to “ruin [Job] without cause” (Job 2:3). Why would God want to commit senseless evil on a righteous man (Rom. 8:28)? The word “allure” can be translated as “attempting to persuade.”^[7]

Fourth, why would a good and innocent angel want to harm a righteous man and get him to “curse” God? (Job 1:11; 2:4) Satan is described as an accuser (Zech. 3:1; Rev. 12:10), who provoked David to do evil (1 Chron. 21:1).

Fifth, God doesn’t harm Job, but rather Satan does. God permits Satan’s evil, but he does not cause it (Job 1:12; 2:6). In the subsequent context, thousands of animals die, as well as Job’s servants and children. In context, this came from Satan—not God (Job 1:13-19). Moreover, the text explicitly states that “Satan… smote Job with sore boils” (Job 2:7). This aligns with Jesus’ statement that Satan was a murderer from the beginning and the father of lies (Jn. 8:44).

Sixth, the language of Satan “roaming about on the earth and walking around on it” (Job 1:6; 2:2) fits with Peter’s language of Satan who “prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour” (1 Pet. 5:8).

Seventh, the NT authors transliterate the Hebrew term “Satan” 36 times to refer to God’s angelic enemy. In other words, the NT authors clearly were identifying the title Satan with God’s accuser.

What is the evidence AGAINST the evolutionary view of Satan?

ARGUMENT #1. Satan needs no introduction in the NT. When Satan appears in the biblical account, the text feels no need to explain him. This supports the notion that the Jewish people understood who he was from the beginning.

ARGUMENT #2. The appearances of Satan in the OT are rare but notable. That is, when Satan appears, it occurs during key moments in the narrative of the OT. Cole writes, “The appearances of Satan in the OT may be few and far between, but they are highly significant when the objects of the attacks are considered. Adam and Eve were the fountainhead of the race according to the biblical plotline, Job was the outstanding exemplar of God-fearing piety, David the paragon of kingship, and Joshua, God’s high priest. By the time the OT draws to a close, Satan is revealed as tempter, adversary, slanderer, accuser, tormentor, and inciter to evil.”^[8]

ARGUMENT #3. Early references to the demonic are undeniable. We find these in our earliest books of the Bible. For instance, Leviticus commands the people to “no longer sacrifice their sacrifices to the goat demons” (Lev. 17:7), and Deuteronomy states, “They sacrificed to demons who were not God, to gods whom they have not known” (Deut. 32:17). The psalmist states that the people “even sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons” (Ps. 106:37). We shouldn’t preclude the existence of Satan when demons appear in our earliest sources.

Conclusion

God’s revelation of Satan fits well with the broader biblical theme of progressive revelation—where God gradually discloses truth throughout history. This concept is found across all major theological subjects, and Satan is no exception. By contrast, the evolutionary view of Satan lacks compelling support. The idea that later Jewish or Christian authors invented or reimagined Satan is speculative at best. The arguments for this view are weak, while the evidence for a consistent and developing revelation of Satan throughout Scripture is strong and coherent.

^[1] Peter S. Williams, The Case for Angels (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 2002), 59.

^[2] G. Ernest Wright, The Old Testament against Its Environment (Chicago: H. Regnery, 1950), 90-91.

[3] C. John Collins, Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2006), p.170.

^[4] R. Alden, 1347 נחשׁ. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 572.

^[5] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15, vol. 1, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1987), 72.

^[6] David J. A. Clines, Job 1–20, vol. 17, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1989), 20.

^[7] David J. A. Clines, Job 1–20, vol. 17, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1989), 20.

^[8] Graham A. Cole, Against the Darkness: The Doctrine of Angels, Satan, and Demons (John Feinberg, general editor, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019), 99-100.