διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Angels & Demons
User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by darinhouston » Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:54 pm

I sent this to my greek teacher after class one night - he takes great rabbit trails on word origins and that sort of thing and he mentioned that διαβολος meant "cast down." I don't think that's so and he hasn't answered me yet, but if it is true, it caused me to have at least some doubts on my view of Satan as a created tempter, not a fallen angel. I thought it might interest folks here. I'll post his response (redacted as appropriate if necessary) when I receive it. But, those who know greek, I'd love to hear from you...
Your comment about διαβολος really intrigued me because it called into question my doctrine of Satan. Long story short, I haven’t shared the traditional view (big surprise) for some time (that Satan was a fallen angel before Creation). I believe he was created by God to tempt/test us. I came to this at a time of spiritual crisis (as I came out of a Calvinistic darkness) and (among other things) it really bothered me that an angel could “fall.” If an angel could fall before Adam, then there’s nothing to keep us from falling in eternity, repeating the cycle of sin and so forth. One of the greatest hopes I have is that we will be free of sin completely in the resurrection. A bible teacher I respect a great deal helped me understand that the traditional view wasn’t the only way to read those passages and that if he was created for that purpose and destroyed then there would be no temptation in eternity because the tempter would no longer serve a purpose and was to be destroyed. This gives me great comfort (and is consistent with my eschatology) and so I took a great pause when I heard you mention that the word διαβολος meant “cast down” because it would be more consistent with the traditional view and caused me to second guess my interpretation (and I think it’s kind of a "cosmic big deal”).

When I looked into it further, however, it strikes me that διαβολος doesn’t mean “cast down” but instead “cast through/cast across” δια- meaning through/across, of course, not "down"— perhaps conveying the notion of an accusing one by throwing thoughts through or across those he confronts. This is more consistent with my view of Satan than the “cast down” notion.

In any event, it leads me to a question on etymology and lexicons - how do we know when we use a lexicon, for example, whether a word has a range of meanings from antiquity or whether that range comes as a result of academic tradition and so forth? In other words, how do we prevent reinforcing bad theology with lexicons that are influenced by tradition instead of scholarship? I understand how a scholar might do this, but do lexicons have a way of conveying this in a generally honest/reliable manner for casual usage?

dizerner

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by dizerner » Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:32 am

Interesting ideas of inspiration—that you think God would guide and implant divine revelation in etymologies and compound words over current usage.

"Cast through" would be more idiomatically "thrown across," which kind of makes sense like "cast through the heavens" or "cast through dimensions" into this world. I have not found a good source for NT Greek etymologies of compound words and if you know one, let me know—and I checked considerable resources I have.

Again it is interesting you find the particular phrasing "cast down" very meaningful as proof for some negative sense. Couldn't Satan be created as a tempter and still be "cast down"? The simple idea of "casting down" does not entail within it the reason for the casting.

We can find other verses that support the idea that Satan was not created to be a tempter but rather a worshiper, and also some logical arguments from a good God not creating evil things.

What do you think of the chinese symbols that seem to carry spiritual meanings?

https://answersingenesis.org/genesis/ch ... d-genesis/

dizerner

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by dizerner » Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:13 pm

I've been thinking about this etymology.

Without exception every lexicon had slanderer as an essential meaning, and the devil is called the accuser.

Perhaps "thrown across" is referring to something like "throwing an accusation" in a metaphorical sense.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by darinhouston » Thu Feb 23, 2023 8:26 pm

dizerner wrote:
Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:13 pm
I've been thinking about this etymology.

Without exception every lexicon had slanderer as an essential meaning, and the devil is called the accuser.

Perhaps "thrown across" is referring to something like "throwing an accusation" in a metaphorical sense.
That's sort of how I see it.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by Homer » Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:31 pm

For what its worth the understanding in Kittel seems to be "adversary", Volume II, p. 71-81.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by darinhouston » Thu Feb 23, 2023 11:11 pm

dizerner wrote:
Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:32 am
We can find other verses that support the idea that Satan was not created to be a tempter but rather a worshiper,
Such as?
dizerner wrote:
Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:32 am
and also some logical arguments from a good God not creating evil things.
I've heard those but the logic is usually based on a false premise - first, he created mankind who include "evil things." Second, that requires a presupposition that "testing" or "tempting" is itself evil.
dizerner wrote:
Thu Feb 23, 2023 3:32 am
What do you think of the chinese symbols that seem to carry spiritual meanings?

https://answersingenesis.org/genesis/ch ... d-genesis/
I have no idea

dizerner

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by dizerner » Fri Feb 24, 2023 2:11 am

To BE tempted is not "evil" but to TEMPT someone else is definitely evil!

for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. (Jas. 1:13 NKJ)

Nor find some Calvinistic "loophole" of using secondary means, which is still direct intention. Notice here:

and have killed him with the sword of the people of Ammon. (2 Sam. 12:9 NKJ)

Secondary means do not reduce intentional moral responsibility.


God said initial creation was "very good," not that man included "evil things."

Free will, or the ability to do something evil, is not in and of itself an "evil thing" unless used for evil.


And although some take the passages in Eze. and Isa. as talking about men, clearly it moves to the spiritual powers behind them:

You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, Till iniquity was found in you. (Ezek. 28:15 NKJ)

No man was created "perfect in all ways" because in our flesh is no good thing and the wicked turn aside from the womb.


It's odd to hear the argument of God creating evil things from someone other than a Calvinist, as they embrace divine determinism of all things.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3112
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by darinhouston » Fri Feb 24, 2023 9:45 am

dizerner wrote:
Fri Feb 24, 2023 2:11 am
To BE tempted is not "evil" but to TEMPT someone else is definitely evil!

for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. (Jas. 1:13 NKJ)
We can quibble on the difference between tempt/test but if you're testing folks because you were designed to do that, then you're not evil per-se because you haven't made a choice. If God uses the "adversary" not because he WANTS you to fail but because he WANTS you to pass, then it's not an evil act to test you, it's an act of goodness. To give you a measure and a choice and to cause growth and success.

I highly commend Steve's teaching on this to you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRzaTGV1yhw

dizerner

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by dizerner » Sat Feb 25, 2023 7:15 pm

Here's the entry of one of my go-to favorite lexicons highly recommend it:


1222. διάβολος diabolos adj

Slanderous, false accuser, the adversary, the devil.

Cross-Reference:

διαβάλλω diaballō (1219)

Septuagint:

צַר tsar (7141), Enemy (Est 7:4).
צָרַר tsārar (7173), Enemy (Est 8:1).
שָׂטָן sāṯān (7931), Satan (1 Chr 21:1; Jb 1:6, 7; Zec 3:1, 2).

Grammatical Forms:

1. διάβολος diabolos nom sing masc
2. διαβόλου diabolou gen sing masc
3. διαβόλῳ diabolō dat sing masc
4. διάβολον diabolon acc sing masc
5. διάβολοι diaboloi nom pl masc
6. διαβόλους diabolous acc pl fem

Concordance:

2 into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. Matt 4:1
1 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, Matt 4:5
1 the devil taketh him up into an … mountain, Matt 4:8
1 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, Matt 4:11
1 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; Matt 13:39
3 fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: Matt 25:41
2 Being forty days tempted of the devil. Luke 4:2
1 And the devil said unto him, Luke 4:3
1 the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, Luke 4:5
1 And the devil said unto him, Luke 4:6
1 And when the devil had ended all the temptation, Luke 4:13
1 then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word Luke 8:12
1 chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? John 6:70
2 Ye are of your father the devil, John 8:44
2 the devil having now put into the heart of Judas John 13:2
2 and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; Acts 10:38
2 thou child of the devil, Acts 13:10
3 Neither give place to the devil. Eph 4:27
2 be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. Eph 6:11
2 he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 1 Tm 3:6
2 lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 1 Tm 3:7
6 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, 1 Tm 3:11
2 recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, 2 Tm 2:26
5 trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, 2 Tm 3:3
6 not false accusers, not given to much wine, Tit 2:3
4 him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Heb 2:14
3 Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Jas 4:7
1 the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, 1 Pt 5:8
2 that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 Jn 3:8
1 for the devil sinneth from the beginning. 1 Jn 3:8
2 He that committeth sin is of the devil; 1 Jn 3:8
2 of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: 1 Jn 3:10
3 Yet Michael … when contending with the devil Jude 1:9
1 the devil shall cast some of you into prison, Rev 2:10
1 the devil shall cast some of you into prison, Rev 2:10
1 that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, Rev 12:9
1 for the devil is come down unto you, Rev 12:12
1 that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, Rev 20:2
1 the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake Rev 20:10

Word Studies:

Classical Greek

Related to the noun diabolē (from diaballō [1219], “to set against”), “false accusation, slander,” this adjective occurs rather infrequently in classical Greek. Its use as a substantive (“slanderer”) is attested, but it lacks the precision common to the New Testament.

Septuagint Usage

For the Septuagint translators, diabolos served as an equivalent to two Hebrew words, most often sāṯān, from which comes the name “Satan.” Satan was also transliterated by the Septuagint translators. The Lord raised up a (literally) “satan” (Hadad the Edomite) against Solomon (1 Kings 11:14, 23 [LXX 3 Kings 11:14, 22]).
Where diabolos translates satan it usually refers to the adversary of God, Satan (most often in Job 1:6, 7, 9, 12 etc.; used with article; cf. Zechariah 3:1, 2, 3). On other occasions diabolos is less precise (e.g., Psalm 109:6 [LXX 108:6], “an evil man,” NIV). The presence of the article does not guarantee the more technical sense of “the devil” (e.g., Esther 7:4). The Angel of Yahweh is described as a satan when opposing Balaam (Numbers 22:22, 23).

Intertestamental Period

Later Jewish traditions viewed this figure as present in the Garden and responsible for the entrance of death into the world (Wisdom of Solomon 2:24; some also point to Ezekiel 28:12–16 and Isaiah 14:12–15). Satan was not yet seen as having been cast out of heaven (cf. 1 Enoch 86:1–6; Luke 10:18), otherwise he could not have been the “accuser” (cf. Zechariah 3:1ff.). The devil is a principal character in the sophisticated angelology created by later Judaism. Such figures as Belial in Qumran (who resembles Satan but who is distinct), Mastema, Azazel, and Beelzeboul (a chief demon in the hierarchy [cf., Mark 3:22]) developed during the intertestamental period (Bietenhard, “Satan,” Colin Brown, 3:468).

New Testament Usage

All of this comes together in the New Testament where Satan and his demons are seen as supernatural powers that control not only the world but the “present evil age” (Galatians 1:4, NIV; cf. Ephesians 6:10ff.). With the coming of Jesus, however, Satan’s reign was shattered and the new age of God’s Spirit began. Jesus demonstrated His absolute authority over Satan in the Temptation and in His ensuing ministry. He cast out demons and healed the sick, thus signifying the overthrow of Satan’s stronghold (cf. Mark 3:23ff.; Luke 10:17).
The Gospels also picture a present tension between these two ages—(1) when Satan’s forces rule, and (2) the age ushered in by Jesus. Thus the Church experiences both victory and momentary defeats during this present struggle (cf. Ladd, The Presence of the Future, pp.171–94). In Jesus, Satan has been tethered. In the Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Ascension he is defeated. Satan and his demons only await being put away forever (Revelation 20:1ff.). See the word study at satanas (4423).

Resource Tools:

Strong <G1228>
Bauer 182
Kittel 2:72–81
Liddell-Scott 390
Colin Brown 3:468–73

Thoralf Gilbrant, “Διάβολος,” The New Testament Greek-English Dictionary, The Complete Biblical Library (WORDsearch, 1991).

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: διαβολος (fallen angel?)

Post by Homer » Sat Feb 25, 2023 9:10 pm

Darin,

You wrote:
it caused me to have at least some doubts on my view of Satan as a created tempter, not a fallen angel.
Where would we find biblical evidence of the origin of the devil? It seems the biblical focus is on his activity/position/character and little else. I have considered him as an angel gone bad.

Post Reply

Return to “Angelology & Demonology”