CHAPTER 22 - Is Peter Satan?
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But Jesus turned, and said unto Peter, Get behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
Peter Is Satan If We Take The Words Of The Messiah Literally
We now come to what is seen as the clearest and most comprehensive definition of what the “satan” is by Yeshua. Yeshua had just asked Peter who he perceived Yeshua to be. Peter answered well and called Messiah the Son of the Living God. Peter’s statement was answered by Yeshua affirming Peter in saying that he was hearing the Father in this issue and that Peter was able to conclude this not by mere intellectual ascent. In the next moment, the apostles were told the whole church of God would be built upon the rock. The Rock here was not referring to Peter as an infallible predecessor of vice-regents with ecclesiastical authority, as is interpreted by Catholicism. Rather, The Rock here is a two-fold concept seen within the words of Peter. Christ calls Peter petros, which refers at best to a small rock in comparison to the rock of truth. The meaning may be that Peter would be part of a strong foundation for the burgeoning group of followers that would develop from this point on. Or that the church is to be built on the petra, which is a large rock and used here to identify Christ is The Rock. The church of Christ is to be built on the truth that Christ is the Messiah not on the unchallengeable authority of Peter as the supposed first Pope.
Yeshua is then confronted by Peter. This most loyal of friends rebukes Jesus for saying it will not be so that He should suffer and die at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and scribes. At that, Yeshua frankly calls Peter “Satan.” This was discussed briefly in chapters 2 and 8 of Satan Christianity’s Other God – Volume 1. Either Peter is Satan and then is the cosmic being responsible for all evil in the human race, or Yeshua is telling a bold-faced lie. If neither of those are probable in this context then Yeshua means something different by His use of the term “satan.” Of course, Peter isn’t “Satan” nor is Yeshua a liar because He then does not qualify as the one who can take away the sins of the world. We are left to conclude Yeshua meant something different.
Thankfully, Yeshua Himself explains what is meant by the term “Satan.” Clearly and succinctly, Yeshua says “… you are not embracing the things of God but are for the things of man.” There we have it, “satan” is anyone who offends Yeshua and prefers the things of man in deference to the things of God the Creator of the Universe.
…“satan” is anyone who offends Yeshua and prefers the things of man in deference to the things of God the Creator of the Universe…
I know in our English Bibles the word Satan is capitalized, which leads us to conclude that a proper noun is being used. If that is the correct translation of the Greek word in the text then we are back to the place where Yeshua has just called one of his most passionate disciples Satan. If the case plays out as the English renders it, then Peter is the cosmic archenemy of God and man. The word used is the Greek word satanasand comes from the Hebrew word sawtawn, which simply means “the adversary.” Yeshua was probably not speaking Greek here and would have used the Aramaic sataor possibly the Hebrew word for adversary, which is sawtawn. Intending it to be heard in the Hebraic context and understanding as both Peter and Yeshua would have been privileged to, Yeshua was only telling Peter that he was acting as an adversary and was not in line with the Father’s will. Is it not fair to ask that we try to see and use the Messiah’s definition of the word sawtawn/satanas/satan when this term is present in the Apostolic Testimony instead of choosing to use a definition brought into existence through a variety of pagan thought mixed with Greek philosophy? Yeshua wasn’t speaking in an unknown colloquialism or a secret vernacular to Peter and this is even further clarified when Yeshua adds His definition of “satan” to His statement.
According to Yeshua, “satan” is anyone who offends Him as the Messiah and prefers man’s things to Yahweh’s things. If we are going to take the words of the Messiah seriously and apply His understanding to other uses of similar terms then we could almost close our discussion and move on to applying a “there is no satan” theme to our lives. If you are able to do that with the information you have digested so far on this topic then feel free to close this book and enjoy the freedom so many have begun to walk in knowing their existence is not one which can be affected by a mythological being that was created in a person’s mind. Yahweh is God and there is none else, acknowledge this fact and you will receive the liberation from any influence you think “satan” and his supposed “demons” used to have on your life.
Now for a sneak peek at . . .
CHAPTER 23 - The Devil Is A Lunatick (A Sneak Peek)
14 And when they were come to the multitude, there came to him a certain man, kneeling down to him, and saying,
15 Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.
16 And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him.
17 Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him hither to me.
18 And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour.
Finding this clear indication of what a devil is, is the best way to understand that a devil is not a supernatural spirit with a force and energy of its own to oppose the Kingdom of God. Nor is a “devil” an entity that can put an illness on a person. In this account of the epileptic child, we are told this child is “moonized”, which is the Greek word for lunatic. We see Yeshua cures the child but the big clue is that this condition is referred to as a “devil” in the text of Matthew. The English calls the child a lunatic, which is a translation of the word selēniazomai. Noting the Greek word used here is important, as the last part of the word has been seen before. In the term “possessed with a demon”, we see the similar second part of this compound word being used. Compare the two . . .
(To read more of this chapter, request your copy of Who's the Devil Jesus Knew?)
Be sure not to miss Jim's
Imagine There's No Satan Blog!
Articles Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3 Volume 4