Satan

In a recent conversation with friends, the question was raised, “”Who here believes in the Devil?” To which the overwhelmingly unanimous reply was, “Not I.” However one intrepid soul did venture to add that while he didn’t believe in the Devil, he wanted to believe that wrong doers somehow got theirs in the end. He wasn’t sure if that meant that there was a Hell or if there was some other means of punishing those that deserved it, but that the wicked needed to be punished in the afterlife. Not surprisingly there were more than a few voices that murmured in consent.

I have been thinking about this for the past few days and have come to the conclusion that people want justice, and that there are some crimes, some transgressions, that are so egregious that our mortal system for punishment will not do. I have tried to imagine what these crimes are. Rape? Murder? Genocide? Each word evokes an image of crimes so horrible that that are difficult to comprehend let alone punish. I mean, how do you give a rape victim back their dignity? How do you give a life back to the family that has lost one? How do you atone for wholesale slaughter and destruction? They very nature of these crimes suggests that, as mortals, it is impossible to find an answer to these crimes.

I tried to compile a short list of people whose crimes were so heinous that everyone would agree that person needed to suffer eternally. The list included Hitler, Judas, and Cain. But the list is problematic because even these people have their supporters, that is, not everyone would consign them to the ranks of the damned. Even though some might argue that the supporters of someone like Hitler themselves are wicked people, I suspect that the truth is far more complex. Again, it is not situation for which an immediate answer is apparent.

In my youth I was a huge fan of the German author Herman Hesse. Among the many books that Hesse wrote was a slim novel called Demian. It is the story of a young man, Sinclair, struggling with, among other things, an understanding of spiritual truth. Sinclair tries to understand his own inward feelings, some good and some evil. One of the major themes is the existence of opposing forces and the idea that both are necessary. At one point Sinclair’s friend Max Demian, compares Sinclair to the figure of Cain. Demian explains that throughout history there have been people who have exalted Cain, not because he killed his brother, but because of his dual nature, one that sacrifices and give praise to god, and the other that falls into darkness. Like Cain, Sinclair is conflicted by feelings of good and evil, a dualistic interpretation of the world split between our carnal instincts and the morals of society.

In another part of the book, Demian argues that the Christian God is an insufficient god; it rules over all that is wholesome, but there is another half of the world. Hesse's Demian evokes the Gnostic god diety Abraxas, symbolized as a bird breaking free from an egg or a globe, to talk about a God of Heaven. This is a common theme in Gnosticism, namely that the old testament god s a deciever and the the true god, the god of love abides in some heavenly domain. We as mortals are unaware of this division, this deception, except through the spiritual purification given to use by Jesus. One Gnostic text, based upon the life of one of my short list evil doers, Judas, repeats this same theme.

The Gospel of Judas is a Gnostic text which depicts Judas not as one who betrays Jesus, rather as a follower of Jesus who, on Jesus own command delivers Jesus up to the authorities in order to set the events of the crucifixion into motion. The Gospel of Judas portrays Jesus as having planned his own death in order to free him from a prison of flesh and return to Heaven.

While Hesse’s Demian and the Gospel of Judas are resoundingly dualistic documents and not part of the New Testament, the problem of a dualistic universe lies at the core of Christian Dogma. In her book, the Origin of Satan, Elaine Pagels discusses how the author of the Gospel of Mark radically transforms the understanding of Satan. There, Satan is portrayed not as a kind of attorney for the prosecution, as he is in the Book of Job, rather, in Mark, Satan is depicted as the leader of a band of demons engaged in constant spiritual warfare with the forces of Heaven, good verses evil, us verses them.

Pagels expertly concludes her book by suggestion that while one can read the gospels and walk away with the religious vision of opposition to powers that are regarded as evil, there is an alternate trend seen in Christian works from the first century through St. Francis of Assisi to Martin Luther King Jr. who have practiced praying for reconciliation rather than damnation in response to the dualistic forces of the world.

This is the more difficult path. But as is commonly asked in the Gospel, how does one love his enemies? How does we turn the other cheek? The gospels tell us there is but one way, and it is a religion based on love, tolerance and forgiveness. I think this is a profound message, and one that doesn't necessarily require a faith in Christianity to appreciate. As in my conversation with friends, while most people may not agree that there is a Devil or Satan, many acknowledge the presence of evil in the world. The question then is how do we confront this evil? By outright opposition? Or though a spirit of reconciliation that seeks to bring all parties back into the fold?