Satan’s not such a bad guy… we become who we are and ultimately that is to be like our
makers; to become gods ourselves
—David Childress, Ancient Aliens,
“The Satan Conspiracy” episode
Under consideration is Jason Colavito’s article Review of Ancient Aliens S06E05 “The Satan Conspiracy,” in Which TV Tells Us to Worship Satan (October 29, 2013 AD).
Let us begin with this statement:
…the character of Satan is an artificial construct composed from a range of ancient parts…This story [of Satan’s fall] is an old one, but almost certainly one that was assembled from various spare parts…this composite figure, the devil…
It is important to note that systematic theology means just that; we systematize concepts by composing a range of ancient parts assembled from various “spare” parts, etc.
In a manner of speaking, Satan is an artificial construct in the same way that the Big Bang theory is an artificial construct as it was composed from a range scientific datum from various disciplines and observations (mathematics, thermodynamics, etc.) that was assembled from various “spare” parts.
Add to this the concept of progressive revelation (that we receive certain information about certain topics dispersed through time) and that what was culturally known may be more than what was written (and remains intact) down at any given time.
One of those parts was the Hebrew figure of Satan, the adversary, who in the Hebrew Bible is God’s agent, satan, and is sometimes a supernatural figure (as in Job and Numbers 22) and other times a general term for any human God uses to block the actions of another (as in 1 Kings 5:4). In Job and Numbers, this figure is an angel. In Zecharia 3:1-2, the Satan (“the Accuser”) stands at the right hand of the presiding angel in the presence of God and the heavenly host.
This statement is somewhat accurate if properly understood and yet, somewhat confused as Colavito refers to the figure and also to the term. He first states that “the Hebrew figure of Satan” is “a general term for any human…” Well, the figure of Satan (or, Satan as a figure) and the term satan are different issues. The figure of Satan comes into play within the Bible’s context when we recognize a few grammatical facts.
Within the Bible there are many elohim but only one ultimate personification of Elohim. There are many Angels but one ultimate personification of the Angel of the LORD. Likewise, there are many satans but only one ultimate personification of Satan. For that matter, there are many devils but only one ultimate personification of the Devil.
Thus, indeed, any human or other being taking an adversarial action is a satan. Also, in “Job and Numbers” the term may be employed as applicable to an Angel, but that does not mean that the Angel is the “figure” as in the ultimate personification of Satan.
In fact, in Job there are “sons of God” which are, within a larger context, known to be Angels but Satan is not said to be one of them but to appear with them before YHVH.
Another part was the serpent in the Garden of Eden, who tempts Eve into sin. The Hebrew Bible does not identify the serpent as Satan; that occurs only much later, taking shape in last few centuries BCE and taking canonical form in Revelation (20:2), in the New Testament, whose authors were all familiar with the newish fallen angels story.
Again, however long it may take; this is doing systematic theology.
A third part was the material in Isaiah (14:12-15) about the Morning Star falling from heaven, referring poetically in context to a Babylonian king, but applied as early as the New Testament authors to the emerging idea of Satan.
Isaiah’s imagery is in turn likely derived from a Canaanite myth of a lesser god or hero who attempts to overthrow El, the supreme god, and is hurled back to earth, something on the order of the Greek Bellerophon attempting to conquer Olympus.
Since I have done a lot of work on the Isaiah 14 issue, as well as Ezekiel 28 for that matter, I will simply refer interested readers to the article Is lucifer a fallen angel? (contra Jim Brayshaw) which, as the title implies, also deals with the fact that Satan is not an Angel but a Cherub (and they are different categories of being who look different and have different job functions). Note that Colavito missed the fact that Ezekiel 28 states that the Cherub was in the Garden of Eden.
This composite figure, the devil, emerges largely thanks to Jewish apocalyptic literature. Satan does not appear in the apocalypse of Daniel nor is he a main character in the fall of the Watchers in the Book of Enoch (canonical only in Ethiopia), yet because Satan was among the heavenly host—one of the benay Elohim, the sons of God—he could therefore be interpolated into the apocalyptic narratives once the sons of God from Genesis 6:4 were firmly declared fallen angels around the time of the composition of the Book of Enoch.
Jason Colavito seems to be referring to the Coptic text The Apocalypse of Daniel. The Book of Enoch is an apocryphal elucidation of the Genesis 6 affair in which Satan was not involved. Again, Satan is not a “benay Elohim, the sons of God” and there may be a good reason for his lack of involvement.
Angels look like human males (without wings and without halos for that matter). However, Cherubim are quite different having four wings, hand-like prehensile appendages under their wings, cow-like hooves, four faces (human, lion, ox/bull and eagle/vulture) and while their bodies may be humanoid, we are simply not told.
The Sons of God Angels in Genesis 6 get married and reproduce with human females. It may be that Satan does not have the, shall we say, anatomical features with which to copulate with human women.
From Enoch’s chief naughty angels Samyaza and Azazel, our Satan gains his rebellious character and his punishment to be bound beneath the earth until the Last Judgment. The last chapters of Enoch, probably composed long after the first section on the Watchers, significantly replace Azazel with Satan, reflecting the transition and fixing it in time, around 100 BCE.
Indeed, “Enoch’s chief naughty angels” are “Samyaza and Azazel.” By the way, within the context of Ancient Aliens, it may be of interest to note that Samyaza (which is transliterated 1,001 different ways in literature) plays a major part within the Billy Meier alien contact case, see:
Semjase in the Billy Meier case & the Book of Enoch – cosmic coincidences?
Who is Semjase? On the Billy Meier alien UFO case
Yet, Samyaza and Azazel are not Satan and there is no biblical text that claims that Satan is “bound beneath the earth until the Last Judgment” in fact, the exact opposite is the case. He is loose upon the Earth, will be bound during the millennia reign, will then be loosed again and finally thrown into the lake of fire which was created for him and his Angels.
“The last chapters of Enoch” could refer to Ethiopic Enoch aka 1 Enoch’s last chapter or to the last chapter of other versions of the Book(s) of Enoch. In any case, note that chapter LXIX, generally titled, “The Names and Functions of the (fallen Angels and) Satans: the secret Oath” notes:
…the names of those angels [and these are their names: the first of them is Samjaza…The name of the first Jeqon: that is, the one who led astray ⌈all⌉ the sons of God, and brought them down to the earth, and led them astray through the daughters of men. And the second was named Asbeel: he imparted to the holy sons of God evil counsel, and led them astray so that they defiled their bodies with the daughters of men. And the third was named Gadreel: he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve…
In this case, Gadreel is identified with the being that was eventually, biblically, identified as the ultimate personification of the Satan figure.
In any case, Jason Colavito’s point is to discern whether Ancient Aliens is being accurate or not—shocking, I know, but it turns out not! Also, see Chris White’s Debunking Ancient Aliens beginning with the article, Sources for re-researching the Ancient Alien issue of Vimana-UFOs.
Colavito notes:
I find it interesting that two weeks ago, in covering the Anunnaki, we were instructed that ancient texts had to be taken absolutely literally, particularly the Book of Enoch, yet here we are told we must take the Biblical texts symbolically and interpret the serpent as Satan and Satan as the victim of anti-satanic propaganda.
As elucidated in my video Ancient Aliens’ Luciferian Gnosticism, what Ancient Aliens is doing is merely promulgating Gnosticism which takes the text of the Bible, particularly Genesis, and turns it inside out, upside down and backwards. Gnostics and Ancient Aliens turn Satan into a heroic figure who enlightens humanity in conquering YHVH, the God who would keep us nice and ignorant-like.
Jason Colavito notes, “William Henry tells us that Satan is our benefactor, a Promethean figure giving us much-needed wisdom.” Indeed, the story of Prometheus is Gnostic-like with Prometheus literally and figuratively enlightening humanity, against Zeus’s will, by giving us fire, etc. See here for more info.
This Ancient Aliens episode identifies Satan as all sorts of things from a man to an Angels and from a Seraph to an alien.
However, this does not mean agreement with John Bathurst Deane’s book Worship of the Serpent wherein he claims that, as Colavito puts it, “all mentions of serpents in pagan myth were all mistaken worship of Satan from a corruption of the Genesis narrative” and as an example from the show, William Henry claims that Quetzalcoatl is Satan because he is depicted as a (winged) serpent.
Amongst other issue, Colavito covers William Henry’s claim that Satan is a Seraph which Colavito notes, “is not canonical but rather a later gloss.” Well, as aforementioned, even the “artificial construct…assembled…composite figure” is not identified in Christian theology as a Seraph but is generally, erroneously, referred to as an Angels but is actually a Cherub. Henry claims that Seraph means “giant serpent” which it does not. Colavito writes:
More literally it means “burning ones” and is usually used to mean actual serpents. Only once is it applied to angels (Isaiah 6:1-3), and there it’s likely reflecting the golden serpents of Near Eastern cult practice. It’s only with Enoch that we see these inflated into heavenly dragons.
True, Seraph refers to “burning” or “burning ones” and “is usually used to mean actual serpents” likely due to the burning of serpent’s bite. The correlation between serpents and Seraphim as heavenly beings is not serpentine in nature but burning. Indeed, in Isaiah 6:1-3 they appear to function as keepers of the heavenly temple’s altar upon which is fire (although the text does not apply Seraph to Angels as Seraphim, Angels and Cherubim are different categories of being, look different and have different job functions: Angels are messengers, Cherubim are throne guardians, etc.).
For more on this issue, see:
On Michael Heiser’s “Serpentine/Reptilian Divine Beings in the Bible”
Michael Heiser on Angels, Watchers, Cherubim and Seraphim
Michael Heiser on fiery flying serpent Watchers
Michael Heiser what do Angels, Watchers, Cherubim and Seraphim look like
Michael Heiser on Reptilians in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Book of Enoch
Nightmare on AskElm Street – are the “Sons of God” angels?
Is lucifer a fallen angel? (contra Jim Brayshaw)
Jason Colavito has done much to discern Ancient Aliens’ claims and has a lot more to say on this episode.
Let us close with his closing statement:
I can’t believe that I just sat through an hour of primetime major cable network television asking me to worship Satan. Where the hell is Pat Robertson when you need him? Seriously, Harry Potter novels get burned because religious extremists think they lead kids to Satan and network TV is routinely blasted for being satanically liberal, and nobody cares that the History Channel is all but advocating Satan worship?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page. You can also use the “Share / Save” button below this post.