Sympathy for the Devil

[tabibito]

This might help you.

[box]But already the Satan of Zechariah's vision has taken on more color and character than the simple obstruction that waylaid Balaam's ass. The word ṥātān of the Balaam episode is merely in grammatical apposition with the mal’āḵ Yahweh, whereas in Zechariah the Satan is a separate being with his own official duties and is directly opposed to the mal’āḵ.[/FONT]

The angel of the lord stood in the donkey's path as an opposer to Balaam: THE opposer (Satan) is nowhere to be found in that story.

[box]22 Then God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the LORD stood in the road to oppose (שָׂטָן - Satan) him. Now he was riding on his donkey and his two servants were with him.
23 And the donkey saw the angel of the LORD standing in the road ...[/quote]

"Satan," in that pericope, is used simply with its ordinary meaning.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

The angel of the lord stood in the donkey's path as an opposer to Balaam: THE opposer (Satan) is nowhere to be found in that story.

[box]22 Then God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the LORD stood in the road to oppose (שָׂטָן - Satan) him. Now he was riding on his donkey and his two servants were with him.
23 And the donkey saw the angel of the LORD standing in the road ...

"Satan," in that pericope, is used simply with its ordinary meaning.

Do you have a point?

[rogue06]

It’s a single rebuke for the sin of accusation. The double mention is for emphasis, not two separate rebukes.

I'm not saying that Satan was rebuked for two separate things but rather that he was rebuked twice^[1]. And yes, many cultures in the ANE tended to repeat something like a rebuke (or a blessing or curse) to emphasize it and make the intention crystal clear and not subject to misunderstanding.

So we have Satan being rebuked in no uncertain terms. This was more than "a mild tongue lashing" as you'd have us believe.

Centuries before you say this sort of treatment of Satan had "evolved."

I don’t see any development from Job to the scant verses of Zechariah.

You keep trying to hang your hat on it not getting into detail while ignoring what was plainly said and done.

In Job, he’s just as deserving of rebuke for his accusation of a blameless man and the bright idea to torture someone who God vouched for.

In Job he was following instructions. There is no indication that was what he was doing in Zechariah.

Moreover, I’ve been clear that the evolution that occurred was Satan’s characterization and story, which was being cooked through oral tradition to when it was finally recorded in Enoch.

And I've been clear that this "evolution" stretches back centuries before you want it to go.

Zechariah’s author is silent on Satan’s motivation and backstory.

And? You say that like you have a point, rather than an just an excuse to disregard what was plainly stated.

He’s the accuser who finally gets a mild tongue lashing…from a messenger in a vision.

Being rebuked by God. Nothing ever "mild" about that.

See tab's post regarding this

Not a messenger - YHVH himself said "YHVH rebuke you..."

וַ·יֹּ֨אמֶר said יְהוָ֜ה And the LORD אֶל־ to הַ·שָּׂטָ֗ן unto Satan יִגְעַ֨ר rebuke יְהוָ֤ה The LORD בְּ·ךָ֙

Right back into the Torah itself, THE angel of the lord is identified as YHVH.

1. I was in error when I earlier wrote he was rebuked thrice.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I'm not saying that Satan was rebuked for two separate things but rather that he was rebuked twice^[1]. And yes, many cultures in the ANE tended to repeat something like a rebuke (or a blessing or curse) to emphasize it and make the intention crystal clear and not subject to misunderstanding.

So we have Satan being rebuked in no uncertain terms. This was more than "a mild tongue lashing" as you'd have us believe.

Not in Zechariah chapter 3 verses 1-5.

Yahweh has rebuked the satan and we assume that it is the charge of defilement that has led to the ceremony of purification, clean clothes, turban etc.

Those charges resulted in a trial before a heavenly court with a prosecutor, the satan, standing as prosecutors did, at the right hand side of the defendant, and a defence advocate the mal’āḵ Yahweh. The verdict exonerates the high priest Joshua and cleanses him while promising that as long as he "will walk in my ways and keep my requirements, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you the right of access among those who are standing here."

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Do we dare move on and assess the book of Jubilees?

[whag]

I'm not saying that Satan was rebuked for two separate things but rather that he was rebuked twice^[1]. And yes, many cultures in the ANE tended to repeat something like a rebuke (or a blessing or curse) to emphasize it and make the intention crystal clear and not subject to misunderstanding.

Yea, that’s what I said, and you ignored it.

A single rebuke from the Living God would itself be crystal clear. They’re two spirits interacting in a vision, not human beings bound by language.

So we have Satan being rebuked in no uncertain terms. This was more than "a mild tongue lashing" as you'd have us believe.

Being rebuked by God. Nothing ever "mild" about that.

Make up your mind on whether a single rebuke from the Creator of the Universe has half the force of two rebukes.

1. I was in error when I earlier wrote he was rebuked thrice.

Yeah, I told you that a couple times. Learn to read and then learn to count.

[whag]

Do we dare move on and assess the book of Jubilees?

Rogue’s already overwhelmed enough by Enoch. Let him catch his breath.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Rogue’s already overwhelmed enough by Enoch. Let him catch his breath.

[tabibito]

Do you have a point?

Only the obvious one.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Only the obvious one.

Repetition purely for its own sake?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Rogue’s already overwhelmed enough by Enoch. Let him catch his breath.

ETA but surely he would find certain parallels between Enoch and Jubilees of some relevance?

[tabibito]

Not in Zechariah chapter 3 verses 1-5.

Yahweh has rebuked the satan and we assume that it is the charge of defilement that has led to the ceremony of purification, clean clothes, turban etc.

Those charges resulted in a trial before a heavenly court with a prosecutor, the satan, standing as prosecutors did, at the right hand side of the defendant, and a defence advocate the mal’āḵ Yahweh. The verdict exonerates the high priest Joshua and cleanses him while promising that as long as he "will walk in my ways and keep my requirements, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you the right of access among those who are standing here."

Joshua was pardoned, his iniquities done away with - explicitly stated in verse 4.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Joshua was pardoned, his iniquities done away with - explicitly stated in verse 4.

For, shall one say "political purposes", given the tension that existed. The writer of Zechariah evidently sided with the Zadokite priesthood hence his "visions" support his own ideas.

[tabibito]

For, shall one say "political purposes", given the tension that existed. The writer of Zechariah evidently sided with the Zadokite priesthood hence his "visions" support his own ideas.

Ah - more conspiracy theories.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Ah - more conspiracy theories.

Why conspiracy theories? Do you imagine the Israelites were apolitical? Of course at the time there was a belief in the validity of visions but such incidents could also be a useful medium by which to indicate the deity's wishes, as occurs in Zechariah chapter three. As noted, following the Babylonian exile there were distinct tensions between the various Israelite factions.