The Origin of Satan

Rating:
Summary: Astonishing and enlightening
Review:
I read this book cover to cover in just a few days. What an astounding exploration of the apparent paradox between "Love thy neighbor" and some of the things that have been done to neighbors in the name of Christianity over the course of the centuries. This book is not only an illuminating look at an aspect of the development of Christianity as a religion, but also an examination of how the teachings of an enlightened individual are subject to the interpretations of his listeners -- and how thoroughly circumstance plays a part in the development of a movement. Fascinating

Rating:
Summary: Digests a lot of arcane material and presents it well
Review: Ms Pagels writes about a very important issue -- western ideas about the origin and nature of evil. For anyone interested in the history of western religions or western culture in general, this book is essential. After reading this book I tried to read some of the source material and found it impenetrable. We owe Professor Pagels a great debt for all the work she's done here

Rating:
Summary: The Satan Myth
Review: The title could plausibly be rephrased: 'The Origin of the Satan Myth'. For those predisposed to find Satan emerging from human psychology, the book delivers. The scholarship is crisp and well documented. The prose is clear and measured. The outcome is never in doubt.

As Pagels sees it, there is nothing 'satanic' with independent existence in the world. The notion of Satan is merely a misunderstanding that was amplified by human frailty. Thus, Pagels focuses on human paranoia, and the tendency of the paranoid to blame someone for their internal fears.

Specifically, Pagels argues the early Christians invoked fear of cosmic evil to demonize Jews and cozy up with Romans. Satan is later turned to personify evil in pagan form and finally explain the motives of the threatening non-Roman (or non-Roman Catholic).
Fundamental to Pagels argument is dating 'publication' of the gospels. These dates are presented as 'facts' when they are still topics of intense debate. Pagels never lets us know her reasons for selecting the dates she uses. The issue is treated as too technical for the reader. Additionally, Pagels invokes the notion of literary evolution, as if 'books' evolve. 'Mark' was rewritten as 'Matthew' and 'Luke.' 'Matthew' and 'Luke' were rewritten as 'John'. All this presupposes a sort of 20th century publication system, with an elite cabal controlling the printing press (the scriptorium?), honing the party (papal) 'line' year by year. It is too simple an answer for me. Maybe 'John' is a revision of 'Luke', but there isn't any academic consensus for this conclusion. It is just a conspiracy theory, and ignores what should be the book's focus: what is the nature of evil and do the Christian traditions offer us any insights on the subject.

While reading, I was reminded of the international literati's vilification of Mel Gibson's 'The Passion of the Christ'. Pagels' arguments are the same curious arguments.

Rating:
Summary: Very good, but lost in the middle
Review: The primary flaw with this book is that it is an attempt to reach two audiences, and as a result fails fully to satisfy either. Fundamentally, I bought Pagels' thesis of the "intimate enemy" and the use of the character Satan as a polemical device, and I enjoyed the same combination of scholarship and clear, concise writing that characterize Pagels' earlier books. The book itself clearly synthesizes both technical scholarship with a general overview of the characters involved in early Christianity (Tertullian, Origen, etc.) to give a good introductory picture of how texts written for a variety of purposes many centuries ago still reverberate in the modern Christian mind.

However, this is also the weakness of the book, in that is both too litle scholarship and too little an introduction to this immensely important era. To fully understand Pagels' argument, the reader needs some previous knowledge of the early Church and some understanding of the modern scholarly approach to texts--or else the book comes acoss (as is evident from some of the reviews below) as a nit-picking polemic itself. Likewise, the book inspires many technical questions, specifically about specific Greek terms, which are outside of the popular focus of the book.

Simply, this book doesn't stand by itself. This is far from a fatal flaw, but it is a weakness. Anyone who reads this book should be aware that to fully appreciate it, they will need to delve into the books suggsted in Pagels' chapter notes.

Rating:
Summary: socio-political origin of religious meanings
Review: This book explains the socio-political origins of the Christian Satan. The early Christian movement struggled with corruption and politics, the duality of man, and identity. In terms of literature, this book explains the complexities behind that character known as the Satan in the New Testament, and tries to understand how a literary character as evolved into a dualistic figure in the human mind.

Rating:
Summary: Origin of Satan Within The Judeo & Early Christian Movements
Review: This book presents an excellent analysis, yet I did find it somewhat disappointing. Not due to any lack on the writer's part, nor on the book itself, but rather to the title, The Origin of Satan, as it appeared to me to allude to more than just the Judeo-Christian scriptures and early formation of the Christian church, which is precisely what this book is about. There is an excellent history here of the early Christian Church, the gospels and Gnostic gospels pertaining and very small portions of the Hebrew scriptures, relating to the idea of Satan. And these are the boundaries this book is set in. This book supplies insight into the gospels, the Gnostic teachings and the early church that go beyond the subject of Satan.

I found most of the book itself one containing information I am already aware of and a short concise history of the gospels. It was the last chapter on the "enemy within", the Gnostics and fellow Christians who failed to adhere to the Orthodox hierarchy and prescribed canonical order that revealed additional points of the Gnostics that I had not read in Pagels other books; The Gnostic Gospels, and Beyond Belief, exposing the differentiations between the various groups and the Orthodox subsequent attacks and labeling of their opponents as heretics and agents of Satan.

The book brings out that the idea of Satan, which transformed, as in the angel of God who obstructed Balaam's donkey and in the case of Job, where Satan was a part of the hierarchical arrangement with Yahweh in heaven and not a rebel. Satan was additionally considered in the ideas of obstructions of justice, to other obstructing nations, to nations that simply differed, to all enemies, later taking on a more personal form, first part of a cosmic struggle to that of a personal being with legions of fallen angels, demons who resisted God and humans.

Satan was continually applied to the opposing parties, the gospel of Mark first defining the world scene as a cosmic war between the forces of good and evil. Mathew and Luke go further in defining the Jewish leaders as under the influence of demonic forces and John goes further in defining the entire collective Jewry as under such influence. The labeling of other groups as agents of Satan, can be seen over and again, which transmuted to various other parties. The Essences, for instance has defined the following of light over the darkness. Satan also became the perceived element behind the Pagans and Romans who were torturing and executing Christians, and yet the gospels, perhaps in order to prevent more harm to themselves, treaded lightly on Pontius Pilate and the Roman government, while venting their accusations towards what first became Judas Iscariot, then the Jewish authorities, and finally "the Jews" collectively, then transforming to other Christians that did not follow the Orthodox. In each case, the party in question identifies those with different ideologies, even within the group itself, as under the influence of Satan.

Pagels ends the book with the exception of the Gnostics, who unlike the Orthodox did not fall into the defining of enemies to Satan. While some were more radical in perceiving the God of the Hebrew scriptures as false, the more moderate generally agreed with many of the Orthodox moral and ethical teachings, while rejecting other teachings, such as the limited cannon and hierarchal conformity in the Orthodox as mislead in failing to comprehend the gnosis, but did so not under such the labeling attacks of heretic and Satanic influence.

One interesting point were some of the Gnostic interpretations of the Adam and Eve Story. One radical interpretation is that God did not tell the truth but the serpent did! The serpent was Christ! God the creator was not the highest and only, but was the demonic angel preventing Adam and Eve from the knowledge, telling them they would die, while the Serpent was speaking the truth, which can be seen by their realization of nakedness. So God, the demonic, then subjected humanity to a distracting life of sex, marriage, money, survival, the good and evil polarities, caught up in the game of life, apart from the real meaning of internal gnosis within. I'm sure there is much more on this in Pagels other book, Adam, Eve and the Serpent. It is also very interesting to see the attacks of Tertullian on any Christians who dare Socratic inquiry over scripture as in the above. All such would confuse and lead to further heresy, according to him.

It appears from the history that persons and groups of fundamentalism in their external searches for clarity, certainty and unity, limit their searches to mere acceptance without the paradox of true Socratic inquiry and the simultaneous depth of understanding without absolutes, resorting to the defining of Satan formulas for their perceived enemies. This can be seen later in Luther against the Catholics and Jews, other protestants, Jews and peasants who fought the aristocrats. And yet such confinement enemies being of Satan brought group security and solidarity.

Also were the counter points of loving one's enemies and forgiving others before offering your gift at the altar, along with St. Pauls adnomition to consign a man to Satan in order to help him repent and not be confined to hell or spiritual death.

In contrast it is those without absolutes with the willingness to expand their internal subjective journey, ceasing to force group conformity, were those who exhibited toleration and did not fall under the certain identification, nor reality of a literal Satan and demonic influences. Such can seen in St. Francis of Assisi and Martin Luther King, Jr. and in the Gnostics. While there are many variations in Gnostic teachings, in the sense are like many other mystics and universal groups throughout history. Pagels concludes her book: "I hope that this research may illuminate for others, as it has for me, the struggle within Christian tradition between the profoundly human view that "otherness" is evil and the words of Jesus that reconciliation is divine." p.184

The whole idea is that fundamentalists, biblical literalists and those that grasp on to formulas and absolutes, require literal beliefs and the adjoining accusations against their opponents, and any that think differently, labeling them as agents of Satan, heretics &etc., while the prophetic voices, those able to live in faith without humanly formulated structures, and live in degrees of insecurity and uncertainty, they can be tolerant and inclusive and cease the literal beliefs and the subsequent attacks of others, walking internally with courage and strength.

Interestingly, today's American fundamenalist, traditionalist, convervative, conservative religionist and those that need their personal formulations, agendas and non-pragmatic lenses to view reality through, use the word "liberal" to define any opposition, small or large. Liberal is the new word replacing the older buzz words of Satan and heretic. The intolerance of the vulernability needed to grow in democratic unity is trashed and the same method of name calling remains.

Rating:
Summary: Critical Thinking
Review: Kelly Singleton Critical Thinking
I have always been fascinated with the notion of the Satan and how he came into existence. The way she illustrates his existence is pretty interesting. We all think that God created him in the beginning when he created Heaven and Earth. I am a stout believer that God sent his son to die on the cross for our sins because only through death we can attain life. In this book, she believes that Satan intervened and actually caused Jesus to be killed. This to me seems a little far fetched. This is goes to show you how powerful God really and how powerless Satan really is. It seems that she was writing about the Inquisition of the Christians but at a much earlier time.
This book calls for us to look at ourselves critically and question whether our tendencies and motives are driven by God or Satan. Did we create this being to place blame for our own actions? In creation everything must have balance and maybe Satan is the balance of power from God? It makes me wonder what would Satan have to gain in killing Christ knowing the power of his Creator. All we know of Satan is the accounts we have in the Bible. He is all the things the bible claims he is. I personally do not find the book persuasive enough to make me believe anything different from what I have been taught about Satan and the legacy he has.


Rating:
Summary: Interesting title and more interesting point
Review: Although I only skimmed this book and didn't really read it thoroughly, the most important points that I feel the author was trying to make are the following, and these two points are closely related:

1. Satan as a reflection of how we perceive ourselves and those we call "Others"--quote from book:

I invite you to consider Satan as a reflection of how we perceive ourselves and those we call "others." Satan has, after all, made a kind of profession out of being the "other";

2. Essential to gnosis is to "know" one's own potential for evil. According to Philip, recognizing evil within oneself is necessarily an individual process (p. 174)

"first, the gnostic Christian must temper with love the freedom gnosis conveys; second, the believer must remain continually aware of his or her potential for doing evil, for only such awareness can free the Christian-even the gnostic Christian-from involuntary enslavement to sin." p. 176

This point is actually consistent with that made in The Course in Miracles.

Another interesting quote re: The Holy Spirit as female (p. 175.)

Philip ridicules such belief. Some said, "Mary conceived by the holy spirit." They are in error. They do not know what they are saying; for when did a female ever conceive through a female?"

This is consistent with the gnositc belief that there is a Mother aspect of God.

Rating:
Summary: Pagels mis-identified a later political usage as the origin
Review: Ahriman, the spirit of darkness and evil in Zoroastrianism, is the antecedent of Satan. The Essenes picked it up from the Zoroastrians, and the Christians picked it up from the Essenes and used the concept to their own ends. Pagels is discussing a later political usage, not its mytho-religious origin.

Rating:
Summary: ANY WISEMAN OR MYSTIC WILL TELL YOU...
Review: Satan is just a metaphor. Human beings are made of light and darkness. The light is God or the creative energy of the universe. The darkness is Satan or the absence of light. This material world belongs to Satan or the darker side of man and his attachment to this material plane. This material world vibrates on the lowest level of existence or light. Hence this world is hell and belongs to Satan or man in his absence of light. The lowest level. When Jesus struggled with Satan he was only battling the darkness in himself. When man evolves his spirit or energy, he will vibrate on a higher level of light. Man will no longer be bound to this dimension. He will walk in light between all dimensions and become pure light or God. Then man's material existence will become the Kingdom of Heaven and he will become like the Christ. "...Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven." This is physics and metaphysics. Simple. God and Satan are just metaphors for the condition of our existence. We are still struggling to find God or light in ourselves. This WAS one of the great mysteries of the spirit. With the emergence of the New Physics and the study and use of Entheogens, man is at the verge of "storming the gates of heaven." The metaphor is no longer a great secret.

I don't know what she's talking about.