From "The Anchor Bible Dictionary"
-------------------------------------

_DEMONS._ ...

_B. Proposed Demons_

...

_4. Other Proposed Evil Demons._

...

_D. Relation to Satan_

Finally, it should be recognized that there is no connection in
the OT between the figure of Satan and the demons referred to
above. While one late text (1 Chr 21:1) has Satan as a proper
name for an independent being who acts in what could be seen as
a demonic manner, "The Satan" in the OT serves primarily as a
judicial "adversary" acting at God's request (Job 1; Zech 3:1).

...


_DEVIL_ {Gk *diabolos}. The LXX and NT translation of the OT
*satan*. *Satan* is a judicial term referring to an "accuser,"
"slanderer," "calumniator," or "adversary" in court (cf. Ps 109:6).
The NT also uses the transliteration *satanos*, which is synonymous
with *diabolos* (cf. Rev 12:9). *Diabolos* is rare outside the
LXX and the NT. It is found in Wis 2:23-24, which identifies the
serpent of Genesis 3 with the Devil....

SATAN as a supernatural accuser of humankind in the heavenly court
and working for God occurs three times in the OT. In Zech 3:1-10
Satan stands at God's right hand to accuse Joshua the High Priest,
only to have his accusation spurned. In Job 1-2 Satan questions
the sincerety of Job's righteousness before God in the midst of
the heavenly council. Here his office is expanded beyond accuser,
for he is given control over sickness, death, and nature in the
testing of Job. In 1 Chr 21:1 Satan incites David to sin by 
taking a census. Here the anarthrous form of *Satan* becomes a
proper name. Also apparent here is the tendency to divorce
temptation from God and assign it to Satan, for in the earlier
version of the census of David, God, not Satan, is the agent of
the temptation (2 Sam 24:1; cf. Jas 1:13).

The notion of the Devil as an independent evil power no longer
in heaven but ruling a demonic kingdom and headed for judgement
is absent in the OT. This move from a subordinate accuser to
an independent tempter was a development of the intertestamental
period and has been attributed to a number of factors. In 
limited favor in current scholarship is the proposal that the
Hebrew notion of Satan was borrowed or heavily influenced by the
dualism of Persian Avestan Zoroastrianism, in which Angra Mainyu,
the evil god, opposes Ahura Mazda, the good god. However, in
Hebrew thought, Satan is always subordinate to God and Angra
Mainyu does not function as an accuser in Zoroastrianism. Still,
a development of Zoroastrian concepts cannot be ruled out.

The shift in the role of the Devil may have arisen in
apocalyptic literature as a way to explain the subjugation of
Israel by foreign nations, that is, the rule of evil over the
righteous covenant people. This would help to solve the
theological tension between the presence of evil in the world
and God's absolute sovereignty.

All the features of the Devil in Judaism, including names,
functions, and the semi-dualism, are present in the NT. The
Devil is a supernatural adversary of God and a tempter of
humankind. He goes by a number of names, including "BEELZEBUL,
prince of demons" (Matt 12:24 par.), "BELIAL" (2 Cor 6:15),
"dragon, ancient serpent" (Rev 12:9; 20:2), "enemy" 
(Matt 13:39; Luke 10:19), "evil one" (Matt 13:19; Eph 6:16;
1 John 2:13-14; 5:18), "god of this world" (2 Cor 4:4), 
"prince of the power of the air" (Eph 2:2), "ruler of this
world" (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), and "the tempter" 
(Matt 4:3; 1 Thess 3:5).

[note: in the 2 paragraphs below ellipses indicate extracted biblical refs]

The Devil brought sin into the world ... and is
the ruler of this world.... In this capacity he tried to tempt
Jesus... and tempted Judas to betray him.... He is a murderer
and a liar.... disguised as an angel of light.... He keeps the
gospel from unbelievers..., who are under his lordship...,
oppresses humankind..., causes illness..., and those under his
control are his children.... He is working to lure Christians
to him and trap them in sin..., to hinder their work..., and to
accuse them.... The Church must be on guard against his 
wiles.... He has the power of death over those outside the
Church..., but not the Christian....

Christ came to destroy the works of the Devil... and to cast
him from heaven.... Christ's victory is yet to be 
consummated.... The Devil will intensify his work against
humankind and God in the last days..., only to be hindered by
Christ... and be thrown into eternal fire with his angels....

...

_SATAN._ The purpose of this article is to provide a summary of
the occurrences and an objective analysis of the various uses of
the term "Satan" throughout the Bible, as well as within deutero-
canonical, pseudepigraphical, and early rabbinic literature.

_________

...

_A. In the Old Testament_

_1. Meaning of Satan._ There is little doubt that the noun *satan*
is related to the verb *satan*. The verb occurs only six times
(Ps 38:21 -- Eng 38:20; 71:13; 109:4, 20, 29; Zech 3:1). The problem
arises when one attempts to select the best English equivalent for
Heb *satan* [n.], especially since *satan* [n.] lacks a cognate in
any of the semitic languages. The choice appears to be between
"accuse," "slander," and "be an adversary." Thus Ps 38:21 -- 
Eng v 20 may be rendered "those who repay me good with evil 
accuse/slander me when I seek what is good." (LXX's rendering of
*satan* [n.] by *endieballon* would suggest slander.) Ps 71:13
reads "may my accusers/adversaries/slanderers perish." Similarly,
in Ps 109:3, 20, 29 the writer speaks to God about his 
accusers/slanderers and the duress they have brought into this life.
And last of all, and the only occurrence of the verb outside of a
lament Psalm, is Zech 3:1, in which the prophet sees *satan* standing
at the right hand of Joshua the high priest to "slander/accuse" him.

There is a good deal of overlap in meaning between "accuse" and
"slander," but they are not synonyms. To accuse means to find fault
and bring charges, falsely or accurately, against another. Thus, an
accusation may be valid or inaccurate. By contrast, slander is 
always false, a statement of claim that is both inaccurate and
damaging to the character of the reputation of another.

It is clear from the six passages cited above, and from especially
the five from the Psalms, that the enemies of the writer are defaming
his character and thus are slanderers. What they are saying about
the writer is palpably false, and therefore their mouths must be shut,
one way or another. But does the fact that *satan* [n.] = "to 
slander" suggest that the noun *satan* should always be translated as
"slanderer"? Not necessarily so. There are some instances where a
*satan* engages in activities that are patently slanderous (for 
example, Job 1 and 2). However, there are other places where a 
*satan* engages, or is urged to engage himself, in activities that
are clearly non-slanderous (e.g. 2 Sam 19:23 -- Engl 19:22 {Abishai's
charge of blasphemy against Shimei is legitimate}; Ps 109:6). On
the basis of the actual uses of *satan* (see A.2 and A.3), we would
suggest that *satan* means "accuser," with the added nuance of either
"adversary" or "slanderer," depending on context.

_2. Terrestrial Satans._ The first human called a *satan* in the OT
is David. Philistines rulers, observing the presence of David and
his supporters in their camp as they prepared for war with Israel,
complained that David would in fact become their "adversary"
(1 Sam 29:4), and thus win the favor of his own king, Saul.

The second instance involves Shimei, a Benjamite who had earlier
cursed and humiliated David as the king fled Jerusalem 
(2 Sam 16:5-14). Subsequently a repentant Shimei sought David's
forgiveness (2 Sam 19:19b-21 -- Eng 19:18b-20). Abishai, a member
of David's court, pushed for Shimei's execution for blaspheming the
king. David, however, opted for leniency, and branded Abishai (and
his brothers) as an "adversary" for ever suggestig such a thing
(2 Sam 19:23 -- Eng 19:22). Killing Shimei, while legally permissible, 
would seriously diminish David's chance of effectively ingratiating 
himself with the Saulide Benjaminites. David will decide who, if 
anybody, shall die for any crime.

The third instance involves Solomon. He wrote to Hiram, king of Tyre
and friend of his late father, stating that David had been unable to
build a temple because he was so preoccupied with war in expanding
and defending his empire. Now, however, Solomon is free to pursue
that project, for his era is one of relative peace, one in which
Solomon is without any kind of an "adversary" (1 Kgs 5:18 -- Eng 5:4).
Clearly *satan* here designates military enemies, those who threaten
the well-being of others.

Perhaps Solomon, in speaking of the absence of satans on his borders,
spoke prematurely. Some years later Yahweh raised up two satans
aganist Solomon, whose relationship with Yahweh was in disarray. The
first was Hadad from Edom (1 Kgs 11:14), and the second was Rezon
from Syria (1 Kgs 11:23, 25). Here again, the meaning of *satan* is
military rival who lives outside one's empire.

The last reference to a human *satan* is Ps 109:6. The writer of this
Psalm has been on the receiving end of verbal and physical abuse. His
request to God is that God will, in response to such vilification,
"appoint a wicked man against him; let an 'accuser' bring him to trial"
(RSV) {understanding many enemies as one individual}. Only with the
help of such a prosecutor will the culprits be brought to justice. The
verb and preposition for "stand at" are *'amad 'al*, the same words
used to describe the activity of a celestial *satan* against Israel
(1 Chr 21:1) and against Joshua the high priest (Zech 3:1). In the
latter two *'amad 'al* conveys sinister work by a *satan* (inciting
one to do something illicit, or falsely condemning someone), while
the first example speaks of truthful accusation against one who is
clearly in the wrong.

We have included Ps 109:6 under the category of terrestrial satans.
Among the modern Psalm commentators only Dahood (*Psalms III* 
AB, 101-102) argues for a celestial *satan* in this passage. He
translates the verse "Appoint the Evil One (*rasa*) against him;
and let Satan stand at his right hand." So understood, vv 6-7
would refer to the psalmist's wish for judgement on his enemies
for death, while vv 8-19 would be his wish for their terrestrial
misfortunes. Dahood's translation, if supportable, would challenge
the idea, frequently advanced, that Satan as an Evil One is not an 
OT teaching, but rather a later development of the intertestamental
period.


_3. Celestial Satans._ There are four passages in the OT that talk
of a celestial *satan*.... The noun *satan* occurs 26 times in the
OT. Seven of these (discussed above) refer to terrestrial satans,
thus leaving 19 references to celestial satans. Three of these 19
use *satan* without the definite article (Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1).
The remaining occurrences in Job 1 and 2 (14 times) and Zech 3:1, 2
employ the noun with the article (*hassatan*), literally "the satan."
Leaving aside Num 22:22, 32 because there the Angel of Yahweh is a
*satan*, we note that 16 of 17 references to the celestial *satan*
use the expression "the" *satan*. The lone exception is 1 Chr 21:1.
This would seem to indicate that only in 1 Chr 21:1 is *satan*
possibly a proper name. In the remaining passages, with the definite
article, it is a common noun, to be translated something like "the
Accuser." GKC, |126e and Jouon 1923, |137m-o cite this as an instance
of the definite article prefixed to a noun when a term normally
applying to whole classes is restricted to particular individuals.
As such, the definite article could be translated "a certain one of."
It is not without significance that consistently the LXX does not 
transliterate *satan* in Job (or elsewhere) as *ho Satanas* (a term
used six times in the *Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs* as a
synonym for the diabolical Beliar), but translates with *ho diabolos*,
a term used in the LXX for both a celestial being (Zech 3:1-2) and a
human adversary (Esth 7:4; 8:1). Even as late as 1 Macc 1:36, around
100-50 B.C., Antiochus IV is referred to as a *diabolon poneron*, "an
evil foe." This shows that *diabolos* needed the adjective *poneros*
to make it clear that the *diabolos* was wicked. Gammie states (1985;
18-19), "Instead of having a clear demonic overtone, the choice of
translation *ho diabolos* on the contrary probably represents the
translators desire to utilize a term still relatively neutral and not
yet associated in the public mind with a leader of forces in opposition
to the divine intentions."

The one instance where *satan* describes a celestial figure who is not
in any way hostile to God is Num 22:22, 32. The Angel of Yahweh is
sent to be a satan to sinning Balaam. The angel performs his task
first by blocking the path so that Balaam's ass may not proceed, then
by rebuking Balaam. Only when Balaam's eyes are opened does the angel
*satan* become visible to Balaam. The angel is both adversary to and
accuser of Balaam, and is dispatched on his mission by Yahweh.

It is in the first two chapters of Job that "the satan" (*hassatan*)
is most prominent (but that name is not mentioned again after 2:7).
The sons of God, i.e., the divine council, present themselves before
Yahweh, and the satan is among them. The question arises whether he
is with the assembly as a legitimate member or whether he is an intruder.
In favor of the latter interpretation is the fact tthat the satan alone 
is asked "from where have you come?" But possibly he is a heavenly
agent whose responsibilities have taken him to earth, and the question
comes not from surprise to the deity at an outsider's presence, but
rather from the deity's questioning of the agent's faithful expediting
of his chore.

Job 1 and 2 provide the only instance in the OT where God and the 
*satan* converse with each other, and twice God initiates the dialogue
by asking the *satan* a question about his whereabouts (1:7; 2:2).
The question answered, God proceeds to bring Job and his impeccable
spiritual credentials to the satan's attention (1:8; 2:3). The satan
is not impressed. On the contrary, he suggests that Job's motives
for serving God are selfish ones; i.e., Job serves God to get what he
really wants, which is prosperity. Thus the satan directly impugns
Job's motives for service to God and indirectly accuses God of divine
patronage (Day 1988: 76). The satan's question to God is a thoughtful,
legitimate, and profound one: "Does Job fear God for nothing?" To
disprove or substantiate that question, God grants to the satan
carefully circumscribed destructive powers (1:12; 2:6). The satan may
not act independently, but only with divine permission.

The second reference to an antagonistic celestial *satan* is found in
Zech 3:1-2. In the fourth of eight visions the prophet observes
Joshua, the high priest, in front of the Angel of Yahweh, and the
*satan* standing by his right side to accuse him. It is not clear
exactly what the nature of the accusation against Joshua is. Unlike
Job's *satan*, Zechariah's *satan* does not talk. But he is rebuked,
not by the Angel of Yahweh, but by Yahweh himself. In his rebuke,
Yahweh reminds the satan that he has chosen Jerusalem. That Yahweh
draws attention to his choice of Jerusalem, and not to Joshua, would
seem to indicate that Joshua not only represents himself, but in some
way also represents the restored postexilic community. Neither the
iniquity of Joshua nor the sins of the Judeans are such that they bar
the way to the investiture of the high priest or the forgiveness of
the community, much to the dismay of the prosecuting satan.

The third and final appearance of a malevolent celestial *satan* is
in the Chronicler's account of David's census of Israel. That version
informs the reader that it was *satan* who rose up against Israel and
incited David to number his people (1 Chr 21:1). Two items are of
special import here. First, this is the only place in the OT where
the Hebrew word *satan*, when referring to a celestial diabolical
being, is used without the definite article. This has suggested to
most commentators that *satan* is here a personal name. GKC |125f.
refers to this instance of *satan* (as opposed to *hassatan*) as an
illustration of an original appellative that has assumed the character
of a real proper name and is therefore used without the article. The
passage, however, might as justifiably be translated "and a *satan*
stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel."

The second issue focuses on the question of why the account in
2 Samuel 24 attributes the stimulus for David's census to Yahweh
(2 Sam 24:1), while the Chronicler attaches blame to a *satan*/Satan.
There are three possible explanations for this shift. The first is
that the Chronicler was bothered by the attribution of morally
questionable activities to Yahweh; i.e., he incited David to take a
census, then punished David for doing so. To that end the Chronicler
deleted Yahweh's part in the story as a stimulating factor and 
replaced him with *satan* (Kluger 1967: 159). But if he was
concerned with saving Yahweh's image from tarnish, why did he leave
unmolested other stories in which Yahweh was responsible for
Rehoboam turning his back on the wise counsel of his advisers
(2 Chr 10:15), or in which Yahweh sends a deceiving spirit into the
mouths of Ahab's prophets? Closely related to this explanation is
the suggestion that the Chronicler downplayed Yahweh's complicity
in this event with his substitution of *satan*, primarily because
he was concerned to paint as beautiful a picture as possible of the
relationship between Yahweh and David, Yahweh's chosen servant
(Day 1988: 136-37). Accordingly, the Chronicler omitted any 
reference to Yahweh's arbitrary anger with his people during David's
reign and told the story simply as a temptation episode. A third
possible explanation is that the contrast between 2 Sam 24:1 and
1 Chr 21:1 (Yahweh/*satan*) illustrates a development in how OT
thought explains evil. Most of the earlier literature of the OT
explained evil in terms of a primary cause (Yahweh). Later OT
literature, such as Chronicles, expanded on this by introducing
the concept of a secondary cause in its explanation of evil (*satan*).

To summarize, so far as we have seen that (the) *satan* is a maligner
of character (Job 1 and 2), an accuser of God's servant (Zech 3:1),
and a seducer of Israel's royal leader (1 Chr 21:1). Clearly in the
OT *satan* (and other demons) is not connected with some primordial
realm, but with sin. As Kaufmann (KRI, p. 65) has stated, 

	Biblical religion was unable to reconcile itself with the
	idea that there was a power in the universe that defied
	the authority of God and that could serve as an antigod,
	the symbol and source of evil. Hence, it strove to
	transfer evil from the metaphysical realm to the moral
	realm, to the realm of sin.


_B. In the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha_

Setting aside 1 Chr 21:1 and Ps 109:6, one observes that the earliest
evidence for *satan* as a personal name appears in *Jub.* 23:29 and 
*Assum. Mos.* 10:1, both of which date to the period of the pogroms
of Antiochus IV against Jews in Palestine (ca. 168 B.C.). Actually,
however, the majority of these deuterocanonical texts refer to other
demons by name, but seldom use the name *satan*. For example, in
Tobit, one called Asmodeus is the archdemon. He has already slain
the seven bridegrooms of Sarah even before any of those marriages is
consummated (Tob 3:8), and only when Asmodeus is exorcized from Sarah
by Raphael, the protecting angel, will Sarah be happily married to
Tobias (Tob 3:17). Asmodeus may be connected with the Hebrew verb
*samad*, "to destroy," or possibly even with Aeshma, a demon of
violence and wrath in Persian religion. The possible connection of
Asmodeus with Hebrew *samad* is heightened by the reference to the
demon Shimadon in the midrash, *Gen. Rab.* 36. Shimadon is
explicable as deriving from *samad*, but not from Iranian Aeshma.
Additionally there are major philological problems in connecting
Asmodeus and Aeshma, as Barr (1985: 214-6) has shown. Again, in
1 *En.* 6-11 (3d century B.C.), the ringleader of the angels who
were punished because of their sexual activity with the daughters
of men is called Shemihazah (chap. 6) or Azazel (8:1-2).

In the book of *Jubilees* the name of the devil is primarily Mastema,
a Hebrew word (*mastema*) that occurs in Hos 9:7, 8 with the meaning
"hatred, hostility, enmity." Scattered references to Mastema
throughout *Jubilees* (10:1-14; 11:1-5; 19:28) identify him as the
chief of evil spirits, who, after the flood, received permission
from God for one-tenth of his spirits to expedite his will on
humanity. *Jubilees* also tends to attribute to Mastema certain
actions of a questionable nature which the OT attributed to Yahweh.
For example, *Jub.* 17:16 says it was Mastema who caused Abraham's
testing (Gen 22:1), and *Jub.* 4:2 states that it was Mastema who
attacked Moses on his way to Egypt (Exod 4:24).

In the Qumran literature *satan* occurs only three times (1QH 4:6;
45:3; 1QSb 1:8), and never as a proper name. Rather, in this
literature the leader of the forces of darkness was Belial, i.e.,
"the Worthless One." This word is also used in the OT in apposition
with son (Deut 13:14 -- Engl. 13:13; 1 Sam 2:12), daughter 
(1 Sam 1:16), man (1 Sam 30:22), witness (Prov 19:28), and counselor
(Nah 1:11). In time Belial becomes a proper name in Qumran and in
some other pseudepigraphical writings. In these sources, and even 
in the NT the name appears mostly as Beliar (2 Cor 6:15). He is the
spirit of darkness (*T. Levi* 19:1; 1QM 13:12), who exercises 
control over the world (1QS 1:18, 24; 2:5, 19; 1QM 14:9; 
*Mart. Is.* 2:4). He controls evil people (*T. Levi* 3:3; 
*T. Jos.* 7:4; *T. Dan.* 1:7; *T. Benj.* 6:1). Ultimately he will
be chained by God's Holy Spirit (*T. Levi* 18:12), and cast into
a consuming fire (*T. Jud.* 25:3).

To summarize, it is clear that references to *satan*, either by
that name or by a surrogate, are much more extensive in
apocryphal/pseudepigraphical literature than in the OT. More than
likely, exposure to Persian religion and its Zoroastrian-based
dualism provided some of the stimulus for the more pervasive
demonology in these Jewish writings. Rather than viewing the
world as the canvas on which one God sketched his unique will for
his world, the world was now viewed as a battleground fought over
by both benevolent and malevolent deities. It is difficult, of
course, to trace exactly how this borrowing or influencing worked,
or even why such a concept would have appealed to exiled Jews in
Mesopotamia. Are there, for example, other Persian religious
emphases to which the exiles were attracted besides Iranian dualism,
and if so, what were they? The evidence is slim to nonexistent
Books of the OT that woudl be expected to show most awareness of
Persian religion -- Nehemiah, for example -- are conspicuously
silent about it. It is also debatable whether or not the prolifer-
ation of demons and the demonizing of the world represents post-
biblical Judaism's attempt to come to grips with a world so grim
and hostile that not all phenomena could no [sic] longer be placed
under the umbrella of divine sovereignty. Rather, it may be that
the demonizing of the cosmos, as reflected in the Apocrypha and
Pseudepigrapha, represents the emergence of Israel's quasi-mythology
that was widely embraced throughout the OT period. Such ideas,
inimical as they were to orthodox monotheism, would have been
repressed by the prophets.


_C. In Rabbinic Sources_

Although *satan* does not appear in Genesis 3, later rabbinic sources
identified satan with the serpent in Eden (*Soia.* 9b; *Sanh.* 29a).
He is identified in a more impersonal way with the evil inclination
which infects humanity (*B. Bat. 16a). In a more personal way, he
is the source behind God's testing of Abraham (*Sanh.* 89b).
Additionally, *satan* is responsible for many of the sins mentioned
in the OT. For example, it is *satan* who was responsible for the
Israelites worshipping the golden calf because of his lie that Moses
would not return from Mount Sinai (*Sabb.* 89a). He is the driving
force behind David's sin with Bathsheba (*Sanh.* 107a), and it is he
who provokes the gentiles to ridicule Jewish laws, thus weaking the
religious loyalties of the Jews (*Yoma* 67b). The sounding of the
horn on the New Year is to confuse *satan* (*Ros. Has.* 166).  Only
on the Day of Atonement is *satan* without power. This is suggested
by the numeral value of *satan*, 364; i.e., there is one day in the
year he is powerless (*Yoma* 20a).


_D. In the New Testament_

The NT also makes frequent references to Satan. He is mentioned by
name 35 times. The breakdown of these references is: (a) the Synoptics,
14 times; (b) gospel of John, once; (c) Acts, twice; (d) Epistles (all
Pauline and half of which are in the correspondence with Corinth), 10
times; and Revelation, 8 times (5 of which {2:9; 2:13; 2:24; 3:9} are
in the letters to the churches and not in the prophetic portions 
{chaps. 4-22}). As popular as the designation Satan is, the name
*ho diabolos* appears 32 times.

There are additionally a number of titles given to him. For example,
while John uses Satan only once (13:27), the preferred Johannine term
for Satan is the "prince of this world" (12:31; 14:30; 16:11). This
phrase parallels Matthew's "the prince of the demons" and Paul's "the
god of this world" (2 Cor 4:4), "the prince of the power of air"
(Eph 2:2), and "rulers of the darkness of this age" (Eph 6:12)(but not
"rulers of this age" in 1 Cor 2:6-8, which refers to human rulers
{Carr 1976}). A Johannine parallel appears in 1 John 5:19 where the
claim is made that the whole world is in the power of the Evil One.
These references teach at least a modified dualism which is close to
the Qumran picture of a titanic struggle between the Angel of Darkness
and the Prince of Light.

John can claim, on the one hand, that Satan has already been judged
(John 16:11), and that the prince of this world will be cast out when
Jesus is crucified (John 12:31, 32), and on the other hand, that the
world is in the power of the Evil One (1 John 5:19). These are not
self-contradictory ideas. Rather, they suggest that for John, Jesus'
death and resurrection constitute a victory over Satan in principle;
yet the implementation of this victory will be gradual, and yet awaits
a climactic conclusion.

If there are titles describing Satan's power, there are also a number
of titles that describe him pejoratively. He is an enemy (Matt 4:3;
1 Thess 3:5); an adversary (1 Pet 5:8); the fahter of lies (John 8:44);
a murderer (John 8:44); a liar (John 8:44); a deceiver (Rev 10:9); an
accuser (Rev 10:10); and one disguised as an angel of light 
(2 Cor 11:14).

Both John 13:27 and Luke 22:3 speak of Satan entering (*eiselthen ho
satanas*) Judas. The same vocabulary is used for the "entering in"
of evil spirits in Mark 5:12, 13 and Luke 8:30-32. Compare with this
concept the reference in *Man. Is.* 3:11:

	Beliar dwelt in the heart of Manasseh and in the
	heart of the princes of Judah and Benjamin, and
	of the eunuchs, and of the king's counselors.

Luke speaks not only of Satan entering Judas, but also of Satan's
desire to have Peter, that he may sift him as wheat (Luke 22:31).
(Satan's asking permission to "have" Peter is reminiscent of the
satan's request to God to remove the protecting hedge around Job.)
Jesus, however, is Peter's advocate (Luke 22:32) pleading against
Satan the accuser. It is of interest that apart from John 13:27,
Satan occurs in the passion narrative only in the Lukian account.
Luke speaks of Satan the "enterer" and Satan the "sifter" in his
gospel, and speaks of Satan "filling the heart" of Ananias and
thus fomenting deception by Ananias in Acts (5:3).

In several ways the NT makes it clear that Satan is not without
limitations. First, the intercession of Jesus stalls his designs
on Peter (Luke 22:32). Second, he is a fallen being (Luke 10:18).
Third, he is judged (John 16:11). Fourth, his power over a person's
life may be broken (Acts 26:18). Fifth, God may use Satan to chasten
an apostate believer (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tim 1:20). Sixth, his temptations,
however potent, may be overcome and his ruses exposed (Matt 4:1-11,
and the only incident in the NT in which any of Satan's words are
recorded). Seventh, he may be resisted, just as Jesus resisted him
(Eph 4:27; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8, 9). Eighth, the NT never refers to
Satan as simply the prince/ruler (*ho archon*), but as "prince of
devils" (Matt 9:34) or "prince of the world" (John 12:31). Ninth,
at God's discretion he is bound (Rev 20:2), released (Rev 20:7),
and incinerated (Rev 20:10).


"The Anchor Bible Dictionary", ed. David Freeman, Bantom Doubleday
 Dell Publishing Group, Inc., 1992; pp. 183-4; 985-9.
__________________________________________________________________

EOF